fUR

with special articles

by
Mrs. Anne Purdy and John Hanks

previously compiled and edited as

CJS. Purdy
His Life, His Games, and His Writings
by
John Hammond & Robertjamieson

recompiling editors
Ralph Tykodi & Bob Long

Thinkers' Press, Inc.

Davenport Iowa
1997
Copyright© 1997 by Thinkers' Press, Inc.

All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted

in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photo­
copying and recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system,
except as may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in
writing from the publisher.

First Printing
July 1997

ISBN: 0-938650-78-5

Originally titled "CJ.S. Purdy His Life, Bis Games

and His Writings" with two new sections added.
This edition is in algebraic notation. n;:;:::=::==r;;iiJ
Typos and omissions have been cor­
rected, and clarifications have been
added in places to further increase the
value to the reader on what is arguably
the best "How To" chess book ever
written in English. Previous© 1982 by
John Hammond and Mrs. Nancy (Anne) Purdy.
Reproduced and edited with permission.

Requests for permissions and republication rights should be addressed in writing to:

Thinkers' Press Inc.

Editor, Bob Long
P.O. Box 8
Davenport lA 52805-0008 USA
 CJSO Purdy-His Writings

CONTENTS

Foreword oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo v
Acknowledgments ooooo oo 00000000 0000 000 00 00 00000000 iv
Biographical Details O
00 000 000 o ooooooo 00 00 ooooooo 0 viii
Tournament and Match Record 0 oo000000 viii

1 CJ S Purdy - His Life

. o ooooooooooooooo 00 oo 00 000000 0 1
2 CJ S Purdy - The Writer
. o oooooooooooooooooooo 28
Purdy Library of Chess 0 00000000 0000 000 Ill
3 CJ S Purdy - The Player
. o 0ooooooooo oo ooooooo 2 17

Colophon 0 000000 00 oo 000000000 000000 00 ooooooo 00 ooooooooo 306

Index of Games ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 307
Index of Openings 000ooooo00000ooooooo 000000000 00 308
Index of Articles 00000000000000 00ooo00 00 00 00ooo00 00 309
Catalog 0 00 ooooooooooooooooo 00000000000000 back of book

-iii-
 The Search for Chess Perfection

Acknowledgments

The publisher would like to thank Mrs. Anne

Purdy for permission to republish CJ.S. Purdy's
writings, and also Mr. John Hammond for his
permission to reproduce and modify his 1 982
work CJS. Purdy: His Life, His Games and His
Writings, acclaimed by many to be the best chess
improvement book ever written.
Thanks are also due to Prof. Ralph Tykodi
for initiating the Purdy Library Project as well as
for his superb job in co-editing this book.

This book is in algebraic notation. The

previous edition has been corrected; we regret
any remaining errors.
Ten thousand copies ofthe previous edition
in descriptive notation were sold to lovers of
good chess writing the world over. Even world
champion Bobby Fischer said no chess library
should be without this book.
Two new articles have been added to the
previous edition.

-iv-
 Cj.S. Purdy-His Writings

FOREWORD
CJ.S. Purdy was an unforgettable character to all who knew him. For many
years he was, together with Garry Koshnitsky, Australian chess, and through his
writing, a world figure as well.
From his teens onwards, to his death at the age of 73, he was an inveterate
writer. His journalistic activity covered 40 years, during which he wrote 12 issues
each year of Australasian Chess Review, Check, and later Chess World from cover to
cover. Besides this, he wrote books of importance. In Cec's case, writing was a
chosen profession in which he was allowed to involve himself from an early age
through the generosity of his father. Capital for his first venture was provided by
Purdy senior, and the world of chess must be grateful for this.
Purdy took his writing very seriously. His humorous articles are very funny
to this day, as any reader will be able to testify. Cec had a sense ofhumor, but this
is not enough to make a writer ofhumor. I once lent him a satirical novel, Margaret
and the Devil, translated from the Russian. He took great pains to analyze how the
author obtained his effects. His teaching articles are superb.
Whenever I open an old volume of his journals, I never fail to find it
completely fresh and worth readingwith great attention. As an analyst he was on
his own until about 1 950, when other chess writers started to catch up with him.
His analysis is notable for accuracy, insight, and readability. About a year before
his death I sent to him a position from an obscure opening and another in which
White was supposed to have an advantage, though I could not even after lengthy
analysis see this.
I paid his fee, which was always very low. I received the answer to one of the
queries in a few days, but the other one took him a month. He showed that White
did have an advantage, as was proven by an extremely difficult analysis. Truly a
labor of love.
Cecil was also the first after Lasker to classify various types of combinational
and positional motifs, thereby continuing and extending what Lasker started. He
was very proud of this achievement but never received recognition for it. This is
not hard to understand, as very few of his predecessors in chess history fared any
better in this respect.
Purdy's 40 years of activity produced superb writing of very even quality and
of lasting value. A selection of his writings is contained in this volume. These
articles are timeless in their appeal, and it is hoped that the younger generation
of players will read this book and their interest will be aroused in the rest of the
Purdy output. In addition to these articles, CJ.S. Purdy's output comprises Among
These Mates, How Euwe Won, How Fischer Won, The Return ofA lekhine, Chess Made
Easy, and Guide to Good Chess, all of which are out of print except the last one.

- V-
 The Search for Chess Perfection

He also planned a further book on
Fischer's games and a teaching book
comprising most of his correspondence
games.
The compiler ofthis book feels sure
that the readers will derive as much
enjoyment from it as he did from its
compilation.
Organization of the Material
have been easy enough to select several
times the number eventually decided
on, but prudence prevailed. The choice
is his. The games cannot fail to enter­
tain, and also show the varied facets of
Cec's chess style. John Hanks has pro­
vided an appreciation of Cec's playing
skills as an introduction to the games
section. The notes to the games are by
Purdy, unless otherwise indicated.

One of the difficulties of this com­ Articles are from

pilation appeared soon after the first Australasian Chess Review, Check,
steps were taken, namely the enormous and Chess World
output oflasting value ofPurdy's nearly
60 years of chess. Ruthless culling was Maurice N ewman is the fortunate
necessary, and it was achieved in the owner of copies of all ofCec's published
following manner. writings and intended to select the best.
He struck immediate difficulties. The
Tournament Results total would have occupied well over a
thousand pages on varied subjects of
John van Manen, who assembled equal quality and interest. There was
statistics relating to all of Cec's appear­ nothing in this output unworthy of re­
ances and results in tournaments, ad­ printing. After some consultation it was
vised me that he was making alternative decided that we should include one
arrangements for their publication. It article only for each year from 1929 to
was therefore necessary to include only 1967. This at least introduced some
the most important of these in this vol­ method into the selection and possibly
ume. will show development of his writing
style and of his chess ideas.
Correspondence Games It is said that no one who can read
should undertake to clean up an attic.
Frank Hutchings undertook the task Yet I am not sorry that I undertook to
of assembly. When looking through look through this treasure trove, and the
Cec's papers he found that Cec had reader who will look at the samples
practically completed a projected book presented here without pretense of se­
containing all of his correspondence lection will agree. Cec was a born writer.
games. It was therefore decided that Everything he wrote was interesting,
this posthumous work of Cec's be pub­ and once one starts reading any of the
lished separately. articles it is hard to put it down. His
writing is plain and straightforward, free
Collection of His Best Games from any artificiality of style whatso­
ever, yet beguiling. Reading, I felt his
Robertjamieson undertook to as­ presence at my elbow and I relived the
semble Purdy's best games. It would enchantingmoments ofpast encounters.

- vi -
 CJ.S. Purdy-His Writings
His good-natured natural wit, always
inoffensive, is ever-present and comes
through as the essence of his personal­
ity, a quality one encounters in the great
letter writers of literature.
Purdy, though extremely modest,
was nevertheless completely self-confi­
dent and always certain that what he
had to say was important and of interest
to all and sundry. And so itis. Few other
chess writers had actual teaching expe­
rience with moderately talented play­
ers. Accordingly, their books were
written above the heads of their in­
tended public. Where else but in Aus­
tralia, a chess backwater, would a great
chess intellect be constrained to actual
teaching ofbeginners through economic
necessity. However, Purdy was vitally
interested in expressing and also sys­
tematizing his chess thought, a great
deal. of which was new or at least not
expressed before. Previous attempts,
- vii
such as the works of Nimzovich and
other chess writers', were quite in­
comprehensible to an ordinary club
player.
Even books after Purdy's pioneer­
ing effort, such as those of Euwe or
Pachman, fell far short in value as teach­
ing manuals. There are two personali­
ties only who, in this writer's opinion,
were equal to Cec as teachers; they are
Philidor and Dr. Tarrasch. There are
marvelous teaching books, such as for
instance Renaud and Kahn, The Art of
Checkmate and Theory ofRook Endgames,
but each of those deals only with one
particular aspect of the game, whereas
Purdy's writings encompass the whole
spectrum of chess.
In addition to the contributors men­
tioned under the various headings, our
thanks are due to Mrs. Anne Purdy for
the biography as well as the assembler
and printer, Mr. W.Jamieson.
1982
J. Hammond
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection

BIOGRAPHICAL DETAILS

CecilJohn Seddon Purdy

Born ______ March 27, 1906
Began playing chess 1922
Editor of A.C.R.!Check/Chess World 1929-67
Australian Champion 1935-38, 1949-52
Australian Correspondence Champion 1940, 1948
Australasian Co-Champion 1952
International Master 1953
World Correspondence Champion 1953-58
Awarded "Order of Australia" 1976
Died November 6, 1979

TOURNAMENT & MATCH RECORD

Mr. John van Manen, to whom chess lovers in Australia are greatly indebted for his
patient and diligent research, has collected details of CJ .S. Purdy's chess career, and with
his permission I give the following statistics from his work.

Summary

CJ.S. Purdy's chess career as recorded above includes:

o
1 39 tournaments (including three team tournaments);
o
1 4 matches (not including nine play-off matches) ; and
o
43 games played in telegraphic matches.

In these events, spanning a period of 57 years ( 1923-79) , he played 1 ,586 games,

scoring 1099- 1 12 points, i.e., 69%.
In the 136 tournaments proper, he won 3 7 first prizes (or sharedfirst prizes), 26 second
prizes, and 1 9 third prizes. Of the 14 matches recorded, he won eight and drew one.
In title contests he became:

o
Correspondence Chess Champion of the World (in first event);
o
Champion of Australia four times;
o
Correspondence Chess Champion of Australia twice;
o
Champion of New Zealand twice;

- viii -
 Cj.S. Purdy-His Writings
•
Champion of New South Wales eight times;
•
City of Sydney Champion twice; and
•
Champion of the Pacific and South East Asia.

Of Australian chess players he was the greatest, and it is to be regretted that during
his most successful period he had no opportunities to play in international tournaments.
His international fame now rests mainly on his publications and his success in the first
international correspondence chess championship.

State Championships

Purdy played in 36 N.S.W. Championships from 1923 to 1979, finishing first on eight
occasions ( 1929, 1934, 1935, 1936, 1939, 1960, 1962, and 1968) and second seven times.
He also won the South Australian Championship in 1937.

Australian Championships

1926 Sydney 7- 112 I 10 3

1928129 Perth 7-1/2 I 10 3
1930131 Melbourne 10 I 12 2
1932133 Sydney 8 / 13
1934135 Melbourne 12 I 13 1
1936137 Perth 7-1/2 I 1 1 2-5*
Play-off:G. Koshnitsky 8-1/2 I 1 4
M. Goldstein 416 1
1938139 Sydney 10 I 13 2-3
1945 Sydney 10-112 I 15 2-3
1946147 Adelaide 1 1 I 13 2
1948149 Melbourne 1 1- 1/2 I 1 3
195 1 Brisbane 12 I 1 5
1956157 Melbourne 7-1/2 I 1 4
1958159 Sydney 8-1/2 I 1 6
1960 Adelaide 9 1 15
1962163 Perth 8 I 13
1964165 Hobart 1 1 I IS 1-2
Play-off:D. Hamilton 1- 1/2 I 8 2
1967 Brisbane 9-112 1 15
1973/74 Cooma 8 / 15
68%

* Steiner won the tournament but was ineligible for the title.

-ix-
 The Search for Chess Perfection

Asian and Australasian Championship

In 1952 Purdy and Sarapu tied a match for the Australasian Championship. In 1960
Purdy won the Pacific and South East Asian Zonal Championship held in Sydney;
however, the following year he lost a play-off match 0-3 against M. Aaron {India) for the
All-Asian Zonal Championship.

New Zealand Championships

Purdy played in six New Zealand Championships between 1924 and 1970, winning
the 1924/25 and 1935/36 tournaments.

Correspondence Chess

Purdy only competed in three correspondence championships, winning the first two
Australian Correspondence Championships and the World Correspondence Champion­
ship in 1953.

- x -
All this was a long
And I would do it again,
But set down this -
Set down this ... "

- Thejourney ofthe Magi, T.S. Eliot

 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
T
he Magus in Eliot's poem
followed the Star unquestion­
ingly because it was ordained, but
at the end of his life he wondered sadly
whether the journey, which to others would
seem so great and adventurous, had really
been worth the sacrifices involved. Cecil
Purdy, the subject of this biography, fol­
lowed his own particular star with equal
devotion, and I have sometimes wondered
whether, at the end of his life, the same
doubts troubled him.
Looking into the past is like holding up
the wrong elld of a telescope-everything
seems very small and far away, but incred­
ibly clear and sharp. One of the earliest
pictures I can see is of a small girl in a pink
frock swinging on a gate, and a youth, re­
splendent in a gray suit and a felt hat with
the Cranbrook badge (my uncle, much the
same age, was still wearing knickerbockers
and cap) coming slowly along the road. He
was looking for "Newbiggin," my grand­
father's home, where I was staying for the
holidays. It was a big, rambling house set in
several acres ofbushland - my grandfather
did not believe in wasting his time on gar­
dening-near the cliffs at Manly, opposite
St. Patrick's Seminary. It had an uninter­
rupted view of the coastline-there were
very few houses then so far from Manly
Wharf-and was an ideal holiday place for a
child whose home was in the less attractive
suburb of Balmain. It was during one of
these holidays that I first met "the Cranbrook
schoolboy," as Cecil was known to his dis­
gust many years after he had left school.
It would be nice to be able to report that
it was love at first sight. However, he opened
the conversation by advising me not to fall
off the gate. I had not intended to do this
-2-
anyway, and immediately placed him as
one of the officious and illogical race of
grown-ups. He was nine and a half years
older than I was. He told me later that I had
not made much of a hit with him either. I
started to have a gloomy foreboding that
this would be a fine weekend wasted - no
pony rides, no surfing, no scrambling around
the rocks with my grandfather, listening to
his marvelous stories. In this newcomer I
already saw a real menace.
Earlier in the day I had heard my grand­
father complaining that "some young pup
who thought he wanted to play chess" had
been "wished on to him" by a certain Dr.
Purdy, whose wishes could not be ignored.
Like me, he deplored the waste of a beauti­
ful, sunny weekend. I had already learned
how this insidious game could keep two
otherwise reasonable adults chained indoors
for hours, rebuffing all attempts to organize
a decent game of ball or hopscotch with
cries of"Sh-h!!" or "Do go away!" Like most
only children, I was very dependent on
adults for company, and I early decided
that I would have to learn to play their
game. My father, Spencer Crakanthorp,
taught me the moves when I was four. He
was champion of New South Wales, and
was soon to become Australian champion.
He had been a child prodigy, playing in an
interstate match at the age of ten-his dis­
gruntled victim, at the end of the game, sent
a message "Take that child home and put
him to bed." Fortunately, my father never
seemed disappointed that I did not reach
this standard, as long as I was willing to join
in the four-handed games and other light­
hearted types of chess which he enjoyed.
Why had my grandfather been chosen
to nurse along the budding chess genius?
 CJ.S. Purdy-His Writings
Col. (Dr.) John Purdy
Cecil tells the story in the Australasian Chess
Review for January 1930. It goes back to
1916, when Cecil was ten and had never
even thought of chess. My grandfather, a
man with courage, enterprise, and an insa­
tiable thirst for adventure, had enlisted in
the army at the outbreak of war, giving his
age as 40. He was in fact 59. He was on
active service in France for two years. Just
after the battle of Messines he was resting
with his pack beside him when he was
spotted by Colonel Purdy, who was being
driven past in a staff car. The Colonel was
well known as a martinet, but being also
kind-hearted he offered the weary Corporal
a lift. My grandfather politely demurred.
"Get in, man," barked the Colonel, "that's
an order." Corporal Crakanthorp obedi­
ently climbed in and was driven to the next
village, where he gravely thanked his bene­
factor and watched the car out of sight. He
then picked up his pack and set out to walk
back five miles. He had been going in the
opposite direction.
Some five or six years later, the two met
again-this time at a Health Conference. Dr.
- 3
Purdy was now City Health Officer for
Sydney, and my grandfather was Health
Inspector at Manly. My grandfather re­
minded Dr. Purdy of their earlier meeting
and, the chronicler assures us, "they both
laughed heartily." I imagine my grandfa­
ther laughed the more heartily of the two,
but he soon had the smile wiped from his
face when Dr. Purdy brought up the matter
of his elder son, who had just learned the
moves of chess and would be grateful for a
little practice and perhaps a few hints. My
grandfather, as Dr. Purdy had apparently
found out, had been for many years the
unofficial country champion, and was now
a leading figure in Sydney chess. Grandfa­
ther, who didn't suffer fools gladly and felt
that he was about to be lumbered with one,
was unenthusiastic but hardly in a position
to refuse; later it was Dr. Purdy who regret­
ted the suggestion.
Cecil's family was not one which seemed
likely to produce a great chess figure. Cecil
was born in 1906 in Port Said, where his
father was the British port doctor. When he
was a year old the family moved to New
Zealand, then to Tasmania, then to New
South Wales-back to Tasmania during the
war years, when both Dr. and Mrs. Purdy
were overseas, finally settling in Sydney
when Cecil was about 12. In Hobart he had
been for a while a pupil at the famous Old
Hutchins School. Here he had as a class­
mate the future film star Errol Flynn, whom
Cecil remembered as a sad little boy, the
neglected and unwanted child of two bril­
liant, handsome, and erratic parents. In
Sydney he was enrolled at Edgecliff Prepa­
ratory School, and later at Cranbrook, in its
first year of existence. It was here that he
met Wilfred Wallace, son of A.E.N. Wallace,
then New South Wales champion and an
ex-Australian champion, who was later to
have a great influence on his chess career.
Strangely, Cecil (according to his own ac-
-
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
count) does not seem to have realized what
a treasure trove of chess knowledge was
buried in his own backyard until he was
already quite an advanced player. Had he
done so, I don't suppose that bright day in
March 1922 would have found him toiling
up the hill at Manly after the long trip from
Bellevue Hill, and this story would never
have been written-or at any rate not by me.
Spencer Crakanthorp
As it was, my worst fears for the week­
end were realized. The visitor, so far from
being like W.S. Gilbert's lady "who doesn't
think she dances, but would rather like to
try," showed himselfjust the kind of protege
my grandfather could welcome. Cecil had
taught himself the moves, as he tells us, by
copying them from the Encyclopedia Britan­
nica during a rainy holiday down the South
Coast, and as a reward for his industry had
been given a set of chessmen.
He tells the story himself in a "Game
Book" which he started in October 1922,
about seven months after the first visit to
Manly.
The first game I record was played against
- 4
Mr. L.S. Crakanthorp in October 1922
on which I played four even games, win­
ning 2 and drawing 2. A month before we
played at pawn and two. I had then been
playing chess eight months, having be­
gun the game in the Christmas holidays
of that year. My uncle sent me a chess
board and men from the Malay States,
which started me on the game. In 2 months
I was a rook, pawn and move player. I
improved by leaps and bounds ["more or
less," he adds with an uncharacteristic
burst of modesty], my chief leap being
after reading Ed. Lasker's Chess Strategy.
There is even a record of these interven­
ing eight months. Cecil, so undisciplined
and ill-organized in so many ways, brought
from the very beginning a single-minded
dedication to the study of chess which Dr.
Purdy later came to feel would have been
much better expended in training for some
paying profession. With it went a keen ana­
lytical mind and a tremendous amount of
industry and enthusiasm, to an extent which,
in its youthful earnestness, seems strangely
touching all these years later. To quote once
again from the "Game Book":
"Details of Wyncrest Sports Club
Chess Tournament {American System)
held at Hillcrest, Bellevue Hill, Sydney.
Commenced April 2nd 1922."
Then follow, carefully recorded and an­
notated, the moves of some of the most
execrable games ever to have disgraced a
chessboard, which would lead the reader to
believe the Tournament should have started
a day earlier-on April 1st.
Round 1: Game 1 - C. Purdy v. R.
Simpson {odds ¥11, l"\, 4:), ft and move).
Won by C. Purdy after a short game.
Opened by Fianchetto de Re. At finish of
-
 CJ.S. Purdy-His Writings
game pieces knocked off with broom by
Dr.J.S. Purdy.
Anyone playing through the games would
entirely sympathize with Dr. Purdy, but
apparently he later gave Brilliancy prizes of
sixpence each to four contestants, thereby
indicating his forgiveness and a just appre­
ciation of the merits of the play. An epic
struggle between the club secretary and his
11-year-old sister is reported:
lsabel v. C. Purdy-C. Purdy gives �,
)':'!, �. 2 moves and wins. C. Purdy lost a
rook early. His opponent was playing
well until after the adjournment. C. Purdy
changed his tactics of waiting for a mis­
take that never came and advanced boldly,
sacrificing pawns right and left. If the
pawns had been refused, C. Purdy's posi­
tion would have been hopeless. His com­
bination, of course, was unsound ...
"1. Purdy's relentless accuracy before
the adjournment certainly contrasts mys­
teriously with her indiscreet pawn-grab­
bing subsequently," he later added.
Cecil early showed the administrative
acumen which later made him a respected
figure in the chess world:
As examination of his score sheet will
show, the preliminary tournament elimi­
nated all but Wallace [who had a clean
score], Addison and the secretary [Cecil
himself], who managed to get third. In­
stead of considering this placing final, a
final match (triangular) was played. Each
played each of the others three games.
This time Cecil managed to win. As he was
"generously" (as he himself put it) donating
the first prize of five shillings, I have a feeling
that the tournament would have gone on
-5 -
until the right person won.
By this time Cecil was firmly committed
to the love affair with chess which was to
last the rest of his life, and it was clear that
he needed something a little more challeng­
ing than the opposition offered by the "W yn­
crest" Sports Club. I don't think that his
father-a practical and successful man who
naturally desired his own kind of success
for his sons-would have encouraged Cecil
by sending him to Manly if he had realized
how strong his obsession was becoming.
He could hardly have chosen a better way
to confirm it. My grandfather, then 65, was
still a very impressive man, dashing, witty,
and cultured, and Cecil immediately be­
came, as most people did, his devoted ad­
mirer. As he himself said in his touching
obituary of L.S. Crakanthorp (A.C.R.Jan.
1930),
"He loved chess, and one felt that if he
loved chess, then chess was a game worth
playing."
Their constant attraction was mutual. L.S.,
as he was usually known, and as Cecil al­
ways called him, found the new pupil mod­
est, intelligent, and eager to learn-what
more can a teacher ask? He gave him Rook,
pawn, and move and a trouncing, but also
encouragement and advice. Cecil went away
thoughtful and determined. Mter that he
spent many weekends and sometimes a
week or a fortnight in Manly-I suppose
when L.S. had holidays. The presence nearby
of a charming family, the Cornfords, with
several pretty daughters, was also an attrac­
tion-Millie, the eldest daughter, became
the first woman champion of New South
Wales. They were friends of my grandfather's
and had a tennis court; Cecil was a keen and
skillful tennis player, and had already devel­
oped an appreciation of pretty girls, so the
holidays must have gone quite nicely. But
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
youthful frivolities were never allowed to
crowd out the real purpose of the visits. He
studied chess assiduously (his school studies
had to take second place, much to his fami­
ly's dissatisfaction), wrote down each game
he played, and annotated it painstakingly.
Within a year he was regularly playing L.S.
on even terms and winning a majority of
games. By the time he met A.E.N. Wallace
over the board (December 1922), he was
able to score a win, a draw, and a loss out of
three games-a remarkable achievement
even if, as the games seem to show, Wallace
was not taking his young opponent too
seriously.
By 1923, when he was 17, he seems
already to have decided on his career as a
chess writer, though he probably had not
yet confided this ambition to his family. In
careful schoolboy handwriting and with
spelling which in later years would have
made him blush, he drew up a plan for a
book of instruction on chess. And a very
sensible, logical plan it is too. Many of the
ideas, in fact the general system, he used
later in his books and articles. There is also
a dauntingly long list of "titles for book(s) or
articles, etc." I wonder what he had in mind
for the "etc."? One of the titles is "How To
Win Chess Tournaments," which as he had
never played in one (except the Wyncrest
Sports Club) seems rather presumptuous.
However, he was looking to the future with
a confidence which was not misplaced.
Some of the titles he listed were used
afterwards-"Chess Made Easy" and "Se­
crets of the Chessboard," for example. There
is also "Purdy's Way," with the note "Only
suitable if happen to become very well­
known player." When he did become a
very well-known player he had also be­
come more modest. There is a page of
"Chess Notes- Positions for Book," in which
"Purdy-Wallace (off-hand) 1923" rubs
shoulders incongruously with "Lasker-Ca-
-6-
pablanca, St. Petersburg 1914." There are
also pages on "Method of Thinking in
Chess" (substantially the basis for his book
Guide to Good Chess), "Method of Studying,"
and "Method of Teaching." I suppose this
was the method he used to teach the mem­
bers of the Wyncrest Sports Club, and it
could hardly be improved upon. That it
should have been devised by a 16-year-old
who had only just learned the moves him­
self is incredible; it shows his extraordinary
gift for getting to the heart of the problem,
and for orderly and logical analysis-a gift
which unfortunately he rarely exercised in
practical affairs. But in his world these did
not really matter, and so were not worth
wasting much time on; it was chess that
mattered, and on that he was to spend the
rest of his life.
Before this, he had privately determined
that his career must be journalism of some
kind-partly because of his love of writing,
but partly also because of the handicap,
from which all the children in the family
suffered, of a noticeable stammer. As adults
they had all practically overcome this
through therapy and speech exercises, and
also through the confidence engendered by
success in their chosen fields (High became
a civil engineer with the Water Board), and
many people who only met Cecil in later
life would be unaware that such a problem
ever existed. It is only worth mentioning
insofar as it influenced his choice of profes­
sion, and perhaps was a factor in his enor­
mously powerful will to win. He liked his
sports to be competitive-grade tennis, tour­
nament chess, duplicate bridge. If he played
family bridge, absurdly small sums of money
had to change hands just to prove that one
pair had either won or lost by a certain
margin. (I think he got this point of view
from my father, who stoutly maintained
that the only immoral thing about cards was
to play for nothing.) On the other hand, no
 CJ.S. Purdy-His Writings
L.S. Crakanthorp
one could have accepted defeat more grace­
fully. He accepted philosophically the idea
that there would be another time, and he
was prepared to wait for it.
I don't think his stammer ever caused
him embarrassment, and it certainly didn't
stop him making friends, but he found it
frustrating and limiting, and was thoroughly
relieved when he got rid of it. Today, with
his mathematical and analytical ability, he
would seek a career in C.S.I.R.O. or in
private industry; in those days there were
no such opportunities. Teaching or Univer­
sity lecturing were the only careers open to
those whose abilities were solely academic,
and these were plainly barred to him. Even
when he was very young he had a gift for
writing, and a great humorist was lost to
Australia when he decided to channel his
talents into chess journalism.
Meanwhile, however, he was still at
Cranbrook, which he had attended from
the year of its inception, and schoolwork
and chess were in sore competition. While
most of the games in his score book are still
with L.S.C. or Wallace, his horizons were
-7-
broadening. He was a member of the Manly
A-grade team, and also occasionally played
the Mocha stalwarts-Amadio, Crane, and
Tonkin, for example. Also, at about this
time he started to visit regularly at my father's
home. I was surprised to find from his games
record book that he had met my father as
far back as September 1922, at Manly, and
had played a game with him: "Played 1
game with Spencer Crakanthorp, who came
3rd in Aust. Champ. and 4th in British
Champ., obtained drawn position in end­
ing"-here follows a carefully drawn dia­
gram, and beneath it the not uncommon
hard luck story-"Actually Black sleepily
moved K-B2 and lost." Black, of course,
was Cecil, and presumably he learned at
least not to play while sleepy.
They did not meet again for a couple of
years. Like L.S., my father did not like
being bothered with learners, but L.S. per­
suaded him that the young man was worth
encouraging, and that there was no more he
could learn at Manly. I remember my
mother being rather indignant and pointing
out that my father was being asked to train
a rival who would eventually topple him
from his throne. Of course, in a sense this
was true; but, as she should have known,
real lovers of chess are never troubled by
these petty jealousies. Cecil in later years
was delighted to give encouragement and
support to promising juniors, some at least
of whom he knew were destined to replace
him. So Cecil became a regular visitor at
my parents' home at Balmain, where there
was open house every Sunday, and where
any interstate players who happened to be
in Sydney and most of the strong local
players would drop in. J.A. Erskine, the
New Zealand player and problemist, was
my father's closest friend, Gundersen and
Watson were often up from Melbourne,
and Wallace, Crane, Harrison, Spedding,
Tonkin, and Bignold were all regular visi-
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
CJ.S. Purdy, age 17
tors. The chess was not usually very seri­
ous-mostly kriegspiel, blindfold chess,
three-dimensional chess, and two-handed
or team games. I was often brought in for
this kind of chess-as a handicap for the
strongest player, as I now realize. I am sure
I was very efficient in this role.
Cecil first started to visit with Wallace,
who was one of my favorites. It was a rule of
the house that if I had been a good girl until
tea-time (which meant if I had been reading
quietly and not worrying anyone), the com­
pany would then play any game I chose. It
was remarkable with what good humor these
often portly middle-aged men would dis­
port themselves for an hour at marbles,
chasings, handball, and French cricket. I
think Cecil was taken aback by the frivo­
lous nature of the chess, and although he
got on so well with his seniors he certainly
had no knack with children; however, he
did enjoy the "literary chess," in which each
move had to be accompanied by a suitable
quotation, sometimes from Shakespeare or
sometimes of one's own choice. I think this
may be the origin of his habit of accompa-
- 8
nying his annotations with quotations.
Maurice Goldstein, a few years later, had a
great liking for this diversion, and was eru­
dite and witty. I think Cecil was still rather
intense about his chess and preferred the
hard slogging at Manly, where he still fre­
quently visited.
In 1924, when he was 18, his father
financed a trip to New Zealand which en­
abled him to play in the championship at
Nelson. This was his first real experience of
travel, and he loved every minute of it.
After chess, it became his second passion.
He was an excellent sailor and he loved
ships, he enjoyed the romantic friendships
so easily made at sea; he gloried in the
tension and excitement of the tournament,
the sense of importance, and above all the
adulation and lionizing which followed suc­
cess. He was realizing the delights of being
a big fish, and very sensibly he did not
allow the smallness of the pool to diminish
his satisfaction. His victory in New Zealand
was hailed with a degree of publicity which
seems quite absurd today, when schoolboy
chess is encouraged and we see younger
champions, such as Murray Chandler, win­
ning against much stronger fields. The mere
fact that a young man could succeed against
veterans aroused the astonishment of the
newspapers-now it is far more surprising if
the veteran ever wins. One reason for this,
of course, is that in those days there was
very little chess literature, so that skill could
to a fair extent be equated with experience.
Wallace and my father had both won state
championships at 19, but these had been
isolated cases and had been quite a long
time earlier. Chess news in the Twenties
received a coverage which would make any
modem chess journalist green with envy,
and columns appeared in Sydney and New
Zealand papers extolling the "boy prodigy"
(Cecil was almost 19). An interview with Dr.
Purdy on the subject of his son's success
-
 C.j.S. Purdy-His Writings
concluded with unconscious irony: "There's
a £30 prize goes with the N.Z. Champion­
ship, and Dr. Purdy seems a bit alarmed for
fear Cecil will want to make chess his pro­
fession!"
It must have been a let-down to go back
to school, and Cecil did not intend to let it
interfere with the important things of life.
His "Chess Record Book" (a kind of chess
diary) shows that he played many friendly
games against L.S., Wallace, Amadio, and
Tonkin, as well as representing Manly in
the grade matches and coming third in the
State Championship. All the games are care­
fully copied out and annotated. His father
was sufficiently impressed with his chess
results to finance another trip to New
Zealand to play in the championship, which
was being held in Dunedin concurrently
with the Great Exhibition of 1925-26.
A party of us went from Sydney- Cecil,
my grandfather and his second wife, my
father and mother, and myself. We had four
days on the "Maunganui" and it was great
fun. We had not been long at sea when my
father, who was easily recognized as "the
chess player" because of his unusual name,
was approached by the usual ship's bore
and challenged to a game. My father hastily
found some excuse for not playing at the
moment, but felt sure that his young friend
would like a game, and perhaps some ad­
vice, as he was only a beginner. Cecil looked
much younger than his age, and had a
beguiling air of innocence and candor. He
bumbled his way through several games,
getting frightful openings, giving pieces
away, and at one crucial stage apparently
forgetting how to castle. I was watching and
wanted to remind him, but my father
wouldn't let me, which I thought was very
unkind. Somehow at the end, though­
greatly to his astonishment-he always ended
by mating his opponent. The newcomer
was bemused but undaunted. "Never mind,"
- 9-
said my father encouragingly, "you've had
bad luck. Have a game with my wife." My
mother was one of the strongest woman
players in New South Wales (though in
those days that was not saying much), and
she had no difficulty in winning. "Well, how
about playing my daughter?" Father then
suggested. But when the would-be giant
killer saw a small, curly-haired girl beaming
at him agreeably and preparing to seat her­
self at the chessboard, he fled and was not
seen again. I think my father was disap­
pointed, as he had several more tricks up
his sleeve for occasions such as this. He was
a great prankster, and Cecil was a willing
stooge.
Cecil did not do well in this tournament,
which my father won, but once again he
had a marvelous time, and the Exhibition
was spectacular-splendidly organized and
presented, and quite a new idea at that time.
I loved prowling round the gardens and the
splendid granite buildings of the University
of Otago, where the games were being
played. I did not see much of Cecil, though
we were staying in the same house. To me
he still belonged to a different generation,
and I always called him "Mr. Purdy."
Unfortunately, shortly after this my
mother became very ill and remained so for
more than two years. We moved to Banks­
town, which was a country district and very
isolated, and I lost all contact with the chess
world. For a while I missed my old friends
and playmates, but I was at High School
and I put chess right out of my mind for the
next five years. My father continued to play
in chess events, in spite of the difficulties of
traveling, and he met Cecil frequently at
Manly, where he went once a month to visit
L.S.
At the end of the year Cecil sat for the
Leaving Certificate for the second time. He
had always been a brilliant student, but no
one could have served two masters to quite
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
the extent he had attempted over the last
two years, and his first attempt had resulted
in a pass which his family did not consider
satisfactory. The second time he obtained
the outstanding results his parents and the
school expected of him, and, with his career
still officially undecided, he started his course
at the University in the Faculty of Arts, with
the possibility of eventually doing Law.
In April 1926 the Chess Championship
of Australia was played in Sydney. Cecil
naturally put in an entry, but greatly to his
surprise and indignation the N.S.W.C.A.,
who were running the tournament, were
reluctant to accept it on the grounds that it
would mean excluding older players. Cecil
did not endear himself by remarking pub­
licly that he understood their sympathy for
the veterans, because "they had been old
men themselves once, and knew what it felt
like." Both my grandfather and my father
espoused his cause warmly-my father, as a
young man, had just the same difficulty
being accepted. Cecil justified their support
by taking third place, behind my father and
Severin Woinarski. In fact, Cecil secured
first place for my father by defeating
Woinarski, then the leader, in a crucial game.
Woinarski was the same age as Cecil and
was a player of remarkable talent who un­
doubtedly would have reached the very top
rank had he continued to play; but he came
of a well-known legal family who persuaded
him to give up chess in favor of the study of
law. He did well at his profession and later
became a Supreme Court Judge. He did not
lose his interest in chess, though he never
competed again. Cecil always kept in touch
with him and visited him when he was in
Melbourne.
The newspapers continued to be dazzled
by Cecil's youth and featured headlines like
"Boy Chess Genius" (Daily Guardian) and
"Chess Prodigy" (Daily Telegraph). He was
referred to as "the Cranbrook schoolboy,"
- 10-
and the cricketer-cartoonist Arthur Mailey,
who always covered the chess tournaments
in Sydney, drew him as "the Purdy infant,"
in a pram! He was then 20.
During his first year at the University he
formed the University Chess Club, with
himself as Secretary. Professor Vonwiller
(Professor of Mathematics) was President.
Cecil had started an Honors course in Math­
ematics and became very friendly with the
professor, who was a strong player and
sympathetic to Cecil's ambitions, though, I
suspect, not as sympathetic as Cecil imag­
ined he was. On one occasion when Cecil
was late with an assignment he commented
sweetly, "Of course, we mustn't let Math­
ematics interfere with your chess." Cecil
was fond of quoting this as an example of
his tolerance and goodwill, but I often won­
dered.
THE AUSTRALASIAN CHESS
REVIEW IS BORN
In his final year at the University (1929), the
chance came which he had been waiting for.
In 1928-29 he had competed in the fourth
Australian Chess Championship at Perth.
Once again my father won, and Cecil came
third. He had had a good press contract and
had made most of his expenses through
journalism, at which he now had consider­
able experience. So when Mr.James Prowse,
who had run the chess magazine The Austral
for many years, decided that he could no
longer afford the burden of constant losses,
Cecil persuaded his father to put up the
money to get it started again. My grandfa­
ther had said that if Prowse ever gave up, he
himself would take the magazine on -but he
was now dying. I often wondered whether
Cecil's decision was made partly because
L.S. desired it. Everyone felt that if The
Australwere allowed to go, chess in Australia
would go with it, but no one except Cecil
was prepared to risk the money and energy
 CJ.S. Purdy-His Writings
to save it. It needed a young man's courage
and enthusiasm, and Cecil had plenty of
both. He ran the magazine from the back
room of the family home at Bellevue Hill
and everything had to be done by hand,
including the addressing of the envelopes.
There were, unfortunately, not many needed.
The magazine was printed at Parramatta,
which was fairly inaccessible in those days
of steam trains and infrequent services, and
Cecil keeping a fatherly eye on
his younger brother and sisters.
for a long time the magazine meant a lot of
work for little return. If Cecil had not been
living at home, very inexpensively, he could
never have kept it going. In the hope of
creating a new circle of readers (The Austral
had been rather dreary), the name was
changed to The Australasian Chess Review.
However, whatever else went short,
money was always found for chess trips,
and in December 1929 he played in the
New Zealand Championship at Wanganui,
tying for second and third behind Gun­
dersen. Then in 1930 a merry company
took off once again from Sydney, this time
to Melbourne for the fifth Australian Chess
- 11
Congress.
The group consisted of Cecil, my father
and mother and myself, and two very wel­
come additions to the chess scene, Maurice
Goldstein and Garry Koshnitsky. We drove
down to Melbourne in Maurice's car, with
Maurice and Garry alternating as drivers. It
was a leisurely trip (as far as Garry's driving
could ever be considered leisurely), and we
stopped everywhere that might be of inter­
est, including at Canberra, a very new town­
ship of marked-out but nonexistent roads
and quantities of tiny trees with large labels
flapping from them. My father and mother
looked on indulgently, and we four younger
people found laughter in everything. I had
just finished school, and it was wonderful to
be free and grown-up at last! I was 15, and it
was evident that Cecil now found me a
great deal more interesting than he had in
Dunedin. When we got to Melbourne he
found it a pleasant duty to show me the city,
which I thought the most beautiful and
glamorous place in the world. I had fin­
ished with school uniforms and acquired
some becoming clothes, and I was being
squired by a young man who, it appeared,
was going to be the next Australian cham­
pion.
But some unkind Fate seemed deter­
mined to keep this particular prize-so much
longed for!-out of Cecil's reach. By the last
round he had met every one of his strongest
opponents, and had the impressive score of
10 points out of 11. His only loss had been
to my father in the first round. He had to
play Coultas, who was not one of the highly
ranked players; Watson was half a point
behind. Coultas chose this round to play
the game of his life. Cecil struggled desper­
ately for a draw, while officials waiting to
organize the prize-giving chewed their fin­
gernails, and spectators standing on chairs
and tables fell off in their excitement. At 10
PM he had to resign and see Watson take the
-
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection

coveted title. I never admired Cecil so much. able; and as Cecil pointed out, by that time
I realized how bitterly disappointed he must he would have been 35, which to us seemed
have been, especially as a huge crowd had positively middle-aged. My parents were
gathered to cheer and congratulate him, but both very fond of him, and had always
he preserved perfect good hurnor-on the encouraged our friendship-hoping, I sup­
surface at any rate-and shook hands with pose, that it would remain friendship until
his opponent with hearty goodwill. He ad­ they had decided the time was ripe for
mired and liked Watson, and no one could marriage-and they valued his qualities of
have been a more worthy victor. honesty, sincerity, and kindness ahead of
From this time on, Cecil's life and mine wealth. Our engagement was announced in
became interwoven. I was studying at the March 1931, on the same day the Sydney
University and had started to play chess Harbor Bridge was opened. The latter event,
again. I was very sympathetic to Cecil's in my view, paled into insignificance.
ambitions, the more so because I had been In December 1932 Cecil played in the
brought up in a chess household and was Australian Championship in Sydney, and
used to seeing a man's life dominated by 64
squares and 32 pieces. In 1931-32 he went
again to New Zealand, this time to the Con­
gress at Napier, where he came third. Soon
afterwards, he asked my father for permis­
sion to marry me. I was then 16.
I could not say that the suggestion was
greeted by either set of parents with great
enthusiasm, Cecil's parents considering that
Cecil was in no position to support a wife
(he was not yet able to support himselfj,
and mine, that I was far too young. Both
arguments were entirely sound. I was in my
second year at Sidney University, and al­
though I had won a State Exhibition my
parents found it quite a financial burden to
keep me there; they expected me to work
for at least a few years to justify the expense.
At Mrs. Crakanthorp's home at
For a woman to work after marriage was
Woolwich
almost unthinkable-indeed almost impos­
sible, since most jobs, including teaching, for the first time failed to gain a place. The
for which I was training, were completely title was won by Gregory Koshnitsky, the
barred to married women. My parents did reckless charioteer of 1930-now somewhat
not see why I could not complete my course, more mature and mellow, but no less hand­
get my Diploma of Education, and then some and charming. He was a little younger
teach with the Department of Education for than Cecil, and their early lives had been
the required six years before thinking of very different, but they formed a friendship
marriage. It was a reasonable suggestion, that lasted for almost 50 years. I think Garry
for even then I would have been only 25. really understood Cecil better than anyone
However, people in love are rarely reason- else ever has; he was an example of the

- 12 -
 CJ.S. Purdy-His Writings
friend "who knows you well, but likes you
just the same."
Garry's win was a great thing for the
Sydney chess community and, incidentally,
for Cecil. In June of that year Anthony
Hordern's, then Sydney's leading depart­
ment store, had started the Metropolitan
Social Chess Club, making available spa­
cious and comfortable premises and the
services of Garry Koshnitsky as manager.
His new title was quite a boost, and before
long there were more than 300 members.
With such a manager (unmarried too!),
women's chess, especially, flourished as it
never had before. Cecil, like most of the
other Sydney players, was a frequent visi­
tor, and new subscribers to the magazine
were enrolled almost daily. Only a few
months after he had started the Australasian
Chess Review the Great Depression hit Aus­
tralia, but although it ruined many other
businesses, chess seemed to flourish. People
who could no longer afford more expensive
pastimes turned to it for occupation and
companionship, and one had to be very
hard-up not to be able to afford the few
pence necessary to buy the chess magazine.
Cecil was also getting quite a lot of chess
reporting, including a column in the Daily
Telegraph, and a few months after I gradu­
ated my parents agreed that Cecil's finan­
cial prospects were fairly bright. Accord­
ingly, we were married inJune 1934, a few
days after my 19th birthday, and departed
happily for a fortnight's honeymoon in the
snow at Kosciusko (total cost £20).
In December of this year ( 1934) we both
went down to Melbourne, where Cecil com­
peted in the Australian Championship. To
make our happiness complete, this time he
achieved the goal he had striven for so long.
He won the tournament from a very strong
field, with a record margin of two points. As
a young and pretty bride, the daughter of a
famous player, and the wife of the new
- 13 -
champion, I shared in the limelight and
basked in reflected glory.
I am looking, as I write, at a photograph
of Cecil taken at about that time. He was a
very personable young man, with a thought­
ful, sensitive face, expressive brown eyes,
and soft blond hair with a slight wave in it.
He was of medium height, slender and ath­
letic-all his life he was a much more power­
ful man than he looked, and even as an old
man he could lift and carry quite amazing
weights. A good runner and an A-grade
tennis player, he was light and quick on his
feet and graceful in all his movements. I
think what I found most attractive about
him was the aura of freshness and good
health which he exuded. He neither smoked
nor drank, and for preference lived on a
very simple diet, which probably contrib­
uted to this, but it was even more something
within his own personality-a kind of child­
like enjoyment of the day and a refusal to
concern himself too early with the prob­
lems of the morrow. I was later to find out
that this carefree attitude could have its
disadvantages.
From the magazine and other sources,
Cecil's income at the time was £5 per week.
We paid £ 1 a week rent for a modern two­
bedroom flat close to the beach at Maroubra,
allowed 30 shillings a week for housekeep­
ing (when that ran out we descended on the
parents), saved £ 1 a week, and had the
balance for emergencies. Our furniture, such
as it was, was paid for, and we lived very
happily. The next year we were able to use
our savings, our wedding cheques, which
we had been keeping for such an occasion,
and generous presents from our parents
(my father had given me £ 100 on condition
that I didn't demand any fripperies such as
a wedding reception) and paid a deposit on
a house at Lurline Bay, Coogee, almost on
the cliffs, with a beautiful view up the coast.
A few months later a fine healthy baby boy
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection

was born, both sets of grandparents were These were a great success and sold out
delighted, and the whole picture looked very quickly, but of course we did not have
like one of the rosier fade-outs of the silentthe capital to produce any worthwhile num­
movie days. ber.
Fate, however, as is its usual practice, We managed to struggle on for a while,
was waiting behind the door with a rubber living close to the breadline. Looking back
cosh in its hand, and the scenario now now, I often wonder how we managed at
turned into something more like the mod­ all, except that food was very cheap, and
ern gloomy kitchen-sink drama. It was un­ healthy young people can live on almost
derstandable that the baby, the house, and anything. But it became obvious now that,
the interests which now filled my life so instead of saving, we were getting into debt.
pleasantly were not really enough for Cecil The final blow came one day when I dis­
(at heart a most undomesticated man), and covered by accident a letter from the bank
at the end of the year he went off again to threatening to foreclose the mortgage on
play in the New Zealand Championship at the house.
Wellington followed by a tour of several It is hard to describe what a shock this
months through New Zealand, giving si­ was to me. I had never had to think of
multaneous exhibitions and lectures. W hile financial matters before in the whole of my
he was away the Daily Telegraph had a change life, beyond the price of a new blouse or a
of ownership, and the new management, as pound of chops, and the money the bank
usual, started looking round for ways to was talking about terrified me. Had I been a
save money by cutting down on "features." little older or more experienced, I would
The ax fell on the chess column, whose have looked at the matter more calmly,
incumbent was not there to protect his in­ remembering that banks are never as fierce
terests. Dr. Purdy did his best to save it foras they sound and are very reluctant to
us, but in this field his influence was worth throw respectable young couples out into
nothing, and Cecil came back to find him­ the snow. But I was only a little over 20 and
self with a new baby, a house to be paid off, had no one to go to for advice; my father
and his income cut by almost half. Had our was dead, I had no brothers or sisters, and
families been able to give us financial help, my mother had been left poorly provided
I am sure they would have done so; but one for, and was working in a solicitor's office in
disaster was followed by another, much the country. So I did what I suppose was not
worse one-or, in fact, two. In 1936 Cecil's unusual for girls in those days-burst into a
father and mine both died in the same flood of tears, packed up a case and the
week, in each case of pneumonia, and it was baby, and rushed up to join Mother.
obvious that we would have to try to man­ Fortunately for both of us, the law did
age for ourselves. Cecil worked very hard at not encourage young people to make rash
the only things he could do; he got chess decisions about matrimony-or at least not
reporting whenever he could, he strove un­ about getting out of it. "For better or for
ceasingly to make the Australasian Chess Re­ worse" meant what it said, and if the "worse"
view a magazine of world standard, and he only meant having to make some fairly
wrote and published two small books on basic financial adjustments, the law didn't
the world championship matches, How Euwe really consider that to be very bad. My
ffiln and The Return of Alekhine [Ed. These mother was a sensible, well-balanced
works will be reprinted by Thinkers' Press}. woman, and I think she realized better than

- 14 -
 CJ.S. Purdy-His Writings
I did that I might not be terribly happy with
Cecil at the moment, but I certainly wouldn't
be happy without him-nor did she think I
was likely to be happy with anyone else, in
which she was probably correct. Anyway,
she set about putting matters to rights. She
resigned from her job, came down to Syd­
ney, and spent most of the remains of her
capital on buying an old rambling house in
Woolwich which was selling very cheaply;
it was still the time of the Depression, when
houses could be vacant for months or even
years, awaiting a buyer with some ready
cash. It was in a pleasant situation, close to
the ferry, and had enough rooms for people
to be able to get away from each other when
they felt they had to. We settled down to­
gether, she looked after the baby, whom
she adored, and I got a job. Here, after she
had done some preliminary "smoothing­
over" business, Cecil joined us.
It was obvious to me now, as perhaps it
should have been earlier, that if we were to
have a successful life together I would have
to undertake the financial responsibilities
for it. Cecil still had all the admirable quali­
ties for which I had married him-he was a
man of high principles, he was kind, affec­
tionate, intelligent, amusing, a good com­
panion; and I loved him. He was not
equipped to battle with the world, even for
himself, much less for a wife and child. I
admired him more than any man I had ever
known-1 still did, after 46 years of mar­
riage. The decision was an easy one-it was
how to implement it that posed difficulties.
I easily obtained casual work, but it was of
the "superior clerk" nature since I was en­
tirely untrained, and I found it boring and
unchallenging. I dare say I wasn't very good
at it either, so although we had no crippling
debts, we were only just keeping our heads
above water. The house at Lurline Bay,
which had been my pride, of course had to
go.
- 15
At first Cecil continued to run the maga­
zine from Woolwich, but he started, with
considerable enterprise but very little capi­
tal, to develop a modest mail-order busi­
ness, mainly in boards and sets, and this
demanded more storage space. Providen­
tially, at this moment Mr. E.A. Dunstan, a
fellow chess enthusiast, offered Cecil a share
in his rooms at 1 Bond Street, Sydney. The
building, a scruffy four-story relic of by­
gone days, stood where Australia Square is
today. Cecil's new office consisted at this
time of one tiny room which he shared with
a friendly mouse. Mouse was soon accepted
as his secretary and general help, and was
left in charge when Cecil had occasion to be
out-as he quite often did. Mouse was not
good at opening the door, but callers learned
to be tolerant, and sat on the stairs waiting
for the Editor's return. The building was
dilapidated, the lift hardly ever worked,
and Cecil lost no time in creating around
himself the kind of nightmarish mess which
he considered essential for his comfort and
well-being. It is extraordinary how, in the
midst of such confusion, writings which are
masterpieces of lucidity and organization
could have first seen the light of day.
Cecil was able to spend a lot of time at
the Metropolitan Chess Club, where he
often gave lessons, and the list of subscrib­
ers to the magazine grew steadily as its
value was realized, especially overseas. His
chess career was flourishing. He had won
the state championship three years running
(1934, '35, and '36) and the Australian title
at Perth (1936-37) after a marathon play-off
with Goldstein and Koshnitsky, and in 1939
he won the state title again. Then once
again our world, and this time everyone
else's as well, was turned upside down. In
the first place, I discovered that I was going
to have another baby.
Cecil was far too nice a person to ex­
press any opinion, but he was certainly not
-
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection

going round handing out cigars and asking

to be congratulated. My mother was prob­
ably horrified, but as usual she made the
best of it, and I was secretly pleased. I had
longed for another child, however ill-ad­
vised it might be, and, as far as my job was
concerned, I felt sure that eventually some­
thing would turn up. I was right-it did. In
the shape of World War 11.
When I heard the announcement over
the air that "a state of war exists . . . " I burst
into tears again. This sounds as though it
were my routine way of dealing with prob­
lems, which was not really the case. But the
prospect ahead seemed truly frightening;
one small child and another on the way, a
husband of military age and almost certain
to be called up, our only living at the mo­
ment a small business just shakily struggling
to its feet, and the whole world about to
burst into flames, with heaven knew what
horrors ahead! And yet, paradoxically, the
war which brought grief and disaster to
millions, and which I thought would ruin
us, ultimately set us on the way to a moder­
ate degree of prosperity. Fate, which had for
some time regarded us as its favorite foot­
ball, now decided to relent and toss a few
goodies from the cornucopia. Perhaps it
had enough on its hands now, dealing with
other people.
In the first place the baby, a girl, proved
not only to be fat and healthy, but of such
an incredibly placid nature that one would
almost have thought she knew we were
living in someone else's house on suffer­
ance and that she could get us all thrown
out. She was named after my mother, who
fell an immediate victim to her charms,
which was just as well, for we certainly had
nowhere else to go. As I had expected,
Cecil received a call-up notice and passed
his medical examination Al. He was duly
received into the Army, but with more sense
than one usually gives them credit for, the
Cecil at 25
authorities realized, after interviewing him,
that if they wanted to win the war they had
better find some other place to put him -
unless of course he could be induced to join
the enemy forces, in which case his ability
to sabotage any piece of machinery merely
by looking at it would be worth a battalion
to the Allies. They decided to use him in
Security, and he started off in the Depart­
ment of Censorship.
Cecil could work untiringly when some­
thing was important to him, and saving his
magazine, for which he had already made
such great sacrifices, was important. So he
set out to virtually do two jobs. He liked the
work in Censorship and did quite well there,
though he was always in clock trouble, just
as over the chessboard. He was never really
comfortable under the discipline of work­
ing to someone else's rules. At the same
time he was trying to keep the paper going
in spite of paper rationing, printing and
delivery troubles, and all sorts of other
troubles, some of which were unavoidable
in wartime and others which stemmed from
petty bureaucracy. He was still writing most

- 16 -
 CJ.S. Purdy-His Writings
of it himself, but Lajos Stein er and Maurice
Goldstein proved themselves true friends
by contributing articles and sometimes an­
notations, for which I am sure they could
not have been paid very much. Graeme
Stewart, a young man with a very keen
interest in chess who was not eligible for
military service, acted as "business man­
ager," which meant attending to sub­
scriptions, looking after the office gener­
ally, and supervising the sending of ac­
counts and the posting of the magazines.
He also made a valiant attempt at book­
keeping, but he made just about as much
mess of it as Cecil himself could have done,
which caused all kinds of problems and
nasty talks with the Taxation Department
when the war was over and they had time to
think about such things. In all other matters
he was invaluable, and without his help I
doubt whether the A. C.R. could have sur­
vived.
As far as I was concerned also, Fate was
kind. Of course with two young children I
could not be directed into employment, but
I longed for some kind of paying occupa­
tion. My chance came when the young man
who ran the Council Baths on the Lane
Cove River was called up; the Council were
at their wits' end to find someone to replace
him. I had been a long-distance swimmer of
very moderate distinction in my University
days, and our house was almost next door
to the baths, so I was asked to carry on for
the duration of the war. It was an extraordi­
nary job for a girl to be doing in those days,
but Australia was getting used to seeing
women do things they had never done be­
fore-like working on trams and buses.
The job suited me ideally. Our little boy
had just started school, but he was very
happy to spend all his non-school hours
with me at the baths, and I took the baby
down with me in a clothes-basket, in which
she continued to behave herself with im-
- 17
peccable propriety. It was the best paid
work, proportionately, that I ever did, for I
was receiving exactly the same emolument
as the young man would have done, almost
an unknown thing in those days, when
"equal pay" was a dream-or nightmare-of
the future.
Mter two years of this, an opportunity
arose to manage the baths at Greenwich
under the same conditions; for example
they had a kiosk (which meant extra rations
of tea and butter, and an allowance of to­
bacco and chocolate, both as precious as
gold). They also had their own residence,
which meant we had to leave the house at
Woolwich where we had all lived together
happily and comfortably. My mother was
sorry to leave it, but she packed up and
followed us, partly to help me and partly
because by this time she could not bear to
be separated from the children. We all
squashed somehow or other into a tiny
substandard dwelling which would have
been condemned if it had not been wartime
(and if the house had not belonged to the
Council). However, we settled in there and
managed surprisingly well. It was pleasant
living right on the river-in fact on one
occasion when there was a king tide we
found ourselves actually in it, with the wa­
ter almost lapping at the door. Cecil was
away a great deal of the time, in Melbourne
or Canberra, which made things easier, as
we were so crowded, but in the summer
season we worked tremendously hard do­
ing everything, including cleaning and re­
pairs, and had a lot of fun. On summer
weekends when he was in Sydney even
Cecil would help in the kiosk, with a slightly
bemused expression.
After a short time in the Censorship he
had caught someone's eye as being too
good for the job he was doing, and he was
seconded to Mr. (late Sir)John McEwan as
private secretary. Cecil admired his new
-
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
boss enormously, and they got on very
well, but Mr. McEwan obviously consid­
ered that Cecil needed to have a secretary
rather than to be one (in fact on some
occasions he found himself running round
finding things for Cecil) and they parted
with mutual expressions of goodwill after
about three months. Cecil then went into
Decoding, where the work was interesting
and challenging, and where he made a num­
ber of good friends.
During these years, organized chess was
at a low ebb, but strangely the game grew in
popularity and the A. C.R. 's subscription list
continued to grow with it. This was largely
due to the work of Gregory Koshnitsky,
who was stationed in New Guinea with the
Army Education forces, with the rank of
lieutenant. He did an enormous amount to
popularize chess in the army, and most of
The Purdy's first home
Maroubra 1937
the new players we met immediately after
the war told us they had learned chess from
"Koshninsky," as they insisted on calling
him. Cecil played in the state champion­
ships several times during those years, but
- 18 -
considering the pressures he was under it is
not surprising that he did not do particu­
larly well. Rereading those wartime A. C.R.s
I realize how hard he must have worked to
keep up the standard of the magazine.
At last the war ended-we found it hard
to believe that it ever would-and in 1946
another adjustment became necessary for
us, as for so many other families. A young
man came to replace me at the Council
baths, and we had to find another home.
Now we were in a much better position. Not
only had we both been earning more than
ever before, but of course we had been
living rent-free, and besides, there had been
nothing to spend money on. So with what
we had saved from our earnings during the
war years and the little I had managed to
salvage from the equity in the house at
Lurline Bay, we were able to buy a very
pleasant house at Greenwich.
We moved there in 1946 and stayed 26
years. We planted small slips and saw them
grow to great trees; we brought up two
children, who went to local schools; saw
them leave school, get jobs, travel, marry
and leave home, and then bring their chil­
dren back to visit us. I think the best years of
our marriage were passed there.
CHANGE TO CHESS WORLD
W hen the war ended, Cecil was released
from the Defense Department. If he had
wanted to, he probably could have stayed
on in Government employment, but he had
been longing for the time when he could
once again expend all his energies on his
brainchild, which was now starting to wilt a
little-not so much through deficiencies in
contributions or management as through
constant wartime shortages of one kind or
another. These, of course, were to continue
for quite a few years; but chess was still
benefiting from the fillip it had received,
 CJ.S. Purdy-His Writings
and the magazine eventually rode out its
difficulties.
In 1944 the name had been changed
from The Australasian Chess Review to Check!,
which had a less parochial sound (by this
time there were many overseas subscribers,
particularly in America), and in 1946 it
became Chess World. This was because of
the shortage of back numbers of earlier
magazines, which are now as hard to get as
the phoenix egg. After this, ample stocks
were printed so that complete back issues
would always be available, and very popu­
lar they proved to be.
He also greatly expanded the office in 1
Bond Street (Dunstan had left some time
ago) and set about importing books and
chess goods. After a few years he had estab­
lished quite a thriving business, and the
shop became a meeting place for Sydney or
visiting players, especially schoolboys in
the afternoons or on Saturday mornings,
the proprietor being only too accessible to
anyone who had an interesting position to
discuss.
W hatever he made was used to buy the
one thing valuable to him-time to pursue
his chess interests. As the financial return
became greater, he put on more people to
do the jobs he didn't want to do himself,
which soaked up much of the profit. He had
not really the temperament to be a good
businessman, though he always took a very
active part in the printing and distribution
of the magazine. The writing was what he
enjoyed and did superbly well; he spent
hours of patient research on every article he
wrote-checking, revising, rewriting. He
could not give up his search for perfection
simply to meet a deadline. It was a maga­
zine for connoisseurs (there is a file of letters
to show how widely it was read and appre­
ciated), but I think it was wasted on many of
his readers, who would have enjoyed it just
as much with a little less perfection and a lot
- 19-
more punctuality.
It would have been an ideal arrange­
ment if I had been prepared to run the
business side of Chess World for him. Theo­
retically we could have made a fine hus­
band-and-wife team, especially as I was play­
ing a lot of chess at this time. I had made
many sacrifices for chess, but this was one I
was not prepared to make. I had no liking
or talent for commercial work, and though
I found Cecil quite possible to live with (I
don't think anyone could have described
him as easy), I knew he would be quite
impossible to work with. After she left
school, our daughter Diana went in to man­
age the office for him, and apparently en­
joyed it, though Cecil sometimes made her
want to beat her-or preferably his-head on
the wall. She was a great help to him, and it
was one of the few wholly unselfish acts of
his life when he gave his support to her idea
of a working holiday in New Zealand-from
which she came back engaged to be mar­
ried. However, this brought a new chess
player into the family in the person of the
New Zealand expert Frank Hutchings, who
later became one of Cecil's closest friends,
so perhaps it was a matter of casting your
bread upon the waters and having it re­
turned made up into ham sandwiches.
I had to work at something, so shortly
after the war I found an excellent job as
editorial assistant in the CSIRO Division of
Radiophysics. It was very interesting work
with congenial people, and the salary
seemed to me so generous that I wondered
what I could possibly be asked to do that
would deserve so vast a reward. There were
a number of keen chess players there, and
we formed a club under the presidency of
Doctor, later Professor, Bernard Mills, a
chess master and the designer of the Mills
Cross Radio Telescope. He occasionally
looked in on our lunch-hour games, and
then shuddered away, groaning.
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
Cecil was always very generous in his
attitude to my career, and never worried
whether my earnings were greater than his­
nor did he attempt to dictate to me about
how to spend them. He obviously consid­
ered my taste for buying small home com­
forts, rather than traveling, to be extremely
odd, but he was prepared to let me alone
with my little eccentricities, as I was with
his. He was always interested in my work,
whatever I was doing, and in this case he
was also proud of my association-a very
tenuous one-with great scientific projects.
He liked to meet my friends, and enjoyed
talking with and listening to them. If he
resented my preferring academic work to
joining him in Chess World, he never showed
it. He probably realized that at any rate it
was much better paid.
Not long after we went to the house at
Greenwich, we started a chess club there.
There was a big lounge room, and at a
pinch we could squeeze in two grade match
teams. The club lasted for 17 years, until I
felt that the extra work it entailed was be­
yond me. All the members were roughly in
the same age group, except for the junior
Purdys, and both socially and from the
chess angle it was a great success. I made
pleasant friendships through it, some of
which have lasted to the present day, and
have brought me great comfort in widow­
hood.
This club was the nursery in which our
sonJohn's talents were developed, for there
were several strong players there, though of
course it was Cecil who taught and coached
him-sometimes rather more thanJohn re­
ally wanted. Cecil had absolutely no feeling
of rivalry towards his son-they were the
proudest moments of his life when John
won first the AustralianJunior and then, in
1954-55, the Australian Championship. He
gloried in the idea of a chess dynasty, and
never tired of boasting about it. Neverthe-
- 20 -
less, when he andJohn met in tournaments,
it was a matter of "no quarter asked or
given." I was at first annoyed, and then
amused, by a suggestion that in tourna­
ments they should be drawn against each
other in the first round to assure an honest
result! Knowing them both, I felt sure they
would fight harder against each other than
against anyone else.
One of the letters which I appreciated
most after Cecil's death came from a very
old friend in Melbourne, John Hanks. I
quote part of it because it seems to me to
sum up the essence of Cecil's greatness as a
person.
One aspect of his play that I have
always admired was that he played every
game and tournament right out. There
was never the least suggestion of a care­
less or uninterested attitude, even on those
rare occasions when he was well out of
the running.
Though all of us who grew up in the
A. C.R.era were noticeably influenced in
our play, it was perhaps Cecil's personal
conduct which influenced me more, and
my own attitude has always been similar.
By a rather unjust quirk of Fate, we each
unhappily damaged the other at critical
times by this otherwise admirable trait.
So far from either of them resenting this
unfriendly behavior, it increased their mu­
tual liking and respect. Playing by the same
code, Cecil and the son whom he had taught,
and in whose exploits he took such pride,
battled to the last pawn to put each other
out of prizelists.
This was a most active and creative pe­
riod of Cecil's chess life, but it is not my
intention to give data about the events he
played in; all this has been done by more
competent people in countless biographies
 Diana's wedding to the New Zealand player Frank Hutchings
congratulated by Ortvin Sarapu (1960)
and newspaper articles. There were, how­
ever, some events and achievements which
warrant individual attention because of their
special importance to him. In Brisbane
( 1951}, he won the Australian Champion­
ship again (for the fourth time} against the
strongest field which had ever competed up
to that time. In 1952 he played a match with
the Estonian-born master, Ortvin Sarapu,
for the Australasian Championship, which
was drawn; they were declared joint cham­
pions. In 1960, when he was 54, he won the
championship of South-East Asia and the
Pacific, which was played in Sydney, against
representatives from New Zealand (Sarapu
again), Indonesia, Malaya, and Singapore.
Happily, this victory coincided with our
daughter's marriage to the New Zealand
player, Frank Hutchings, so we were able to
invite all the visitors, together with many
others of our chess friends, to a double
celebration. Cecil contributed greatly to his
own and every one else's enjoyment by
making a witty speech, and I had vicarious
pleasure in the "frippery" of the wedding I
-21 -
had missed out on when I was a girl.
Perhaps inevitably, from our tally of three
grandsons and two granddaughters there
has not yet appeared a champion to carry
on the dynasty, though as the youngest is
two years old there is still hope, if that's the
right word. In 1958 John married Miss Fe­
licity Stapleton, a girl who had achieved
considerable academic distinction. Their
elder son, Colin (CJ.S. Purdy II), was a
promising chess junior; but at 19 his inter­
ests are diversified, and he seems likely to
seek other, perhaps more profitable, fields.
In 1956 Cecil's mother died, and he
inherited a small but welcome life pension
from a family trust she had set up. This
came too late to do any good to the family,
John and Diana having both left school and
launched themselves into the job market
and independence with praiseworthy speed.
It did, however, allow him the luxury of
overseas travel-the only thing he ever
wanted that money could buy. In 1961 he
played an All-Asian Zonal match at Ma­
dras, India, against Manuel Aaron, which
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
he lost-partly, I think, because he found it
hard to adapt to the weather and the strange
food. In spite of his love of travel, he was a
most unadventurous eater, and must be the
only person who has run around in the heat
of Madras trying to find a hotel where he
could get oatmeal porridge for breakfast.
He loved India and the Indian people, and
always intended to revisit them someday.
In 1964-65 he played in the Australian
Championship in Hobart, the town of his
childhood, and proudly took me to see the
elegant colonial manor, built in 1840, in
which he and his family had lived. He was
sad to see that the ivy had been removed
and the orchard and much of the grounds
had been absorbed by other dwellings. As
more than 50 years had passed, it was not
surprising. In this tournament, at the quite
astonishing age of 59, he tied for first, losing
the playoff to Hamilton.
I think he felt that the high point of his
career-at least as far as over-the-board play
was concerned-had been reached when he
was chosen as one of the team to play in the
Chess Olympiad in Siegan ( West Germany)
in 1970, when he was 64; he notched up the
very creditable score of four wins, four losses,
and one draw. The team, bolstered up by
[Ed.:Walter] Shawn Browne at Board 1,
achieved much their best result up to that
time. In 1974 he went again, this time to
Nice, as nonplaying captain, though he did
play one game, which he won. This time I
accompanied him and we had a wonderful
time, especially as the ICCF as usual held
their conference immediately afterwards,
so that we had the pleasure of meeting
people who before that had only been
names, to me at least.
At Nice, Cecil received an invitation to
compete in an International Masters Tour­
nament at Bienne (Biel), Switzerland, and
we spent a fortnight very pleasantly there,
Cecil battling away every afternoon and
- 22 -
evening, and quite often in the morning
too, while I happily explored the Neufchatel
Lakes. Cecil distinguished himself, and cer­
tainly won my admiration, by conducting a
long, heated, and technical argument in
German, a language of which he only un­
derstood a few words, on the subject of a
breach of the rules by one of his opponents.
He won the argument of course-on any
point concerning the rules of chess he was
likely to be right, seeing that he had helped
to formulate them-and was grudgingly con­
ceded his point, the officials obviously con­
sidering it was somehow unfair for a man
who had to do his arguing with a dictionary
in his hand to end up talking them down.
His final result was very good, considering
the strength of the opposition; he came
23rd (I think) in a field of well over 40, all of
IM strength.
Mention of the ICCF (International Cor­
respondence Chess Federation) brings me
to what was probably the climax of Cecil's
chess career, and certainly the title which
brought his fame overseas. This was his win
of the first Correspondence Chess World
Championship in June 1953. He had not
played a great deal of correspondence chess
previously, but he had won the Australian
Championship in 1940 and 1948. How­
ever, when he embarked on the World
Championship in 1947 he certainly had no
idea that he would be the ultimate winner.
The contestants were divided into 1 1 sec­
tions of seven each, the winners of each
section to meet in the final- "not a very fair
arrangement," Cecil commented in Chess
World for August 1948.
The tournament was immensely time­
consuming; it cut very much in to his work­
ing hours and left no time at all for social
life. The reason he gave for playing was that
he would be able to make the time pay for
itself with the book he intended to produce.
He started work on it, but unfortunately
 John and Cecil at the Chess Club in our Greenwich home 1952.
pushed it aside for 25 years, and then wrote
half of it. Had his health been more reliable,
he might have lived to see it published. His
real reason for playing was the challenge
and excitement, the sheer mental pleasure
it brought him. He considered it as close to
a "pure" form of chess as it was possible to
get. Even here, though, accidents could oc­
cur. Cecil was diligent and organized over
this as he was in few other things, but the
whole family went through a dreadful pe­
riod when he discovered that he had made
a clerical error against Mitchell and thrown
away what he had expected would be a
drawn game. The house was full of boards
set up with current games and with note­
books containing columns of hieroglyph­
ics, and it was a miracle that such things did
not happen more often.
Disaster was narrowly averted on one
occasion when Cecil had actually posted a
move and then discovered that he had made
an oversight. What was to be done? Only
Cecil could have dealt with the problem.
He stationed himself firmly outside the
- 23
mailbox-1 think he would have chained
himself to it if necessary- and waited for the
postman to come to clear it. Then he told
such a heartbreaking story that the postman
allowed him to fossick through the letters
till he found his own, open it, alter the
move, reseal it, and put it in the bag. The
postman doubtless dined out on this story,
though not when his superiors were about,
believing that this was the move that won
the tourney-as, for all I know, it may have
been.
As the tournament drew to its close, and
it started to look as though Cecil might
actually become the first Australian to win a
world title at chess, excitement in the Purdy
household fairly bubbled over. We could
hardly believe it when at last, after Cecil
had agreed to a draw with the Swedish
player Malmgren, victory became certain,
hats could be thrown in the air and cham­
pagne opened. The media certainly did
well by him, and for weeks pictures and
articles appeared, giving him, and inciden­
tally Chess World, all the publicity he could
-
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
possibly desire.
He never played in the Championship
again, though after his retirement I urged
him to consider it. He had reached the top,
and there was no further challenge. It gave
us both great pleasure to find that he was
still remembered 25 years later, when we
received a postcard from Munich signed by
officials of the ICCF, addressed to Grand­
master CJ.S. Purdy, O.A., saying "Greet­
ing to you upon this the 25th anniversary of
the 1st World Correspondence Chess Cham­
pionship."
Although the much publicized book of
the correspondence games did not come
out during his lifetime, he did produce three
other books which met with considerable
success: Chess Made Easy, in collaboration
with Garry Koshnitsky, Guide To Good Chess,
and How Fischer Won. The first of these has
gone through 24 editions and sold almost
half a million copies. I have often wondered
how many households where no one plays
chess must have a copy lurking somewhere,
possibly bought in the hope that some child
would learn to play in the school holidays,
as Cecil had done so long ago.
In 1976 he received the award of Mem­
ber of the Order of Australia (A.M.) in
recognition of his services to chess in Aus­
tralia as a player of international standing,
an administrator, and a writer. This public
acknowledgment of what he had meant to
chess in the past helped to sweeten a little
the bitter pill he found so hard to swallow­
the realization that time was dulling his
concentration and weakening his splendid
mental powers, and that the moments of
glory would never come again. He raced
desperately against old age right to the end,
and I don't know whether he ever, except
in occasional bouts of depression, accepted
the fact that it had caught up with him.
Although things on the whole had gone
well with him in the Fifties and Sixties, a
- 24 -
few nasty little clouds were gathering. In
Chess World for March-April l967 there ap­
pears an article headed "No Bitterness," but
it is obvious that when he wrote it, he was in
fact quite bitter. In 1948 the NSWCA had
started to produce their own publication,
which gave local news, local games, and
dates of forthcoming events. Unfortunately,
it was no use these being advertised in Chess
World, whose dates of publication were no­
toriously unreliable. The event was likely to
be over before the issue advertising it had
come out. Cecil had to acknowledge the
logic of this, and he accepted the new pub­
lication with a good grace and did what he
could to help it along, with the Council's
assurance that it was not intended to be a
competitor. But as time went on, the mem­
bership on the NSWCA changed, and so
did their policy in this matter, so that by 1967
they were producing a rival magazine, ex­
pensively printed and produced, and fea­
turing overseas news and games with anno­
tations. They were able to do this because
they did not have to make the magazine
pay for itself, much less make a profit. Sub­
scription was automatic when a player reg­
istered with the Association, as of course all
active players, including Cecil, had to do,
and the costs came out of registration fees.
The final blow came when they started
printing more copies than were needed and
selling the surplus to Gordon and Gotch at a
loss. No privately owned paper could stand
up to this kind of competition, and Chess
World appeared for the last time in Sept.­
Oct. 1967. Cecil had made a last desperate
bid for a compromise, but the "gentlemen's
agreement" of 1948 did not bind the new
Association members, and apparently they
did not consider that horror bound them to
anything, either. I think this was what Cecil
felt most, for he himself was incapable of
behaving in any ungenerous way.
His own attitude was not a very sensible
 Wilfred Wallace, Lajos Steiner, Cecil and Berniejohnson
one. He would have been wise to simply
hand Chess World over to the Association
and retire with a good grace, for it had not
for many years paid for the time and effort
he had put into it; but this he simply could
not bring himself to do. He had brought the
magazine into the world, nurtured it as a
sickly infant, seen it grow to robust matu-
rity, and now he had to stand back and
watch it die. For him, nothing could really
take its place.
Sore though he had obviously been in
March-April l967, by the next issue (May-
June 1967) he had found it expedient to
hold out a cautious olive branch. His life
was still bound up in playing chess and
selling chess goods, and he was hardly in a
position to pursue the kind of merry ven­
detta that had been accepted in the chess
life of 50 years earlier. Besides, he was
never a man to cherish a grudge. He never
really disliked anyone, and, even in the face
of fairly pointed evidence to the contrary,
he found it hard to believe that anyone
disliked him-and in fact very few people
did. He could irritate and hurt people, but
- 25
he did it so innocently that he was always
forgiven, usually without ever realizing that
he had been in disgrace.
In a brief editorial note (Chess World,
Mayjune 1967, p. 104), he disclaimed any
personal animus against individual mem­
bers of the Association. An Association, as
he realized, has no heart to touch and not
much reason to appeal to; it has no regard
for the past or responsibility for the future.
Cecil himself, who had been part of the
chess world for so long, was rather in the
position of the monarch who sees parlia­
ments come and go-or as he, a devotee of
"Mr. Chips," put it:
The Editor of C.W. stands in much the
same position in the N.S.W.C.A. as a
veteran schoolteacher, who sees one lot
of pupils after another pass through the
school. Each lot thinks of itself as being
the school, whereas to Mr. Chips the
school is largely memories, and the present
pupils merely the cast that happens to be
performing a play whose run is so long
that it outlasts them.
-
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
Order of Australia 1976
The NSWCA did compromise to the
extent of giving up the grossly unfair system
of "remaindering" below cost for casual
sales, and with the latest (and present) edi­
tor, a friend of long standing, Cecil always
had the most cordial relations; he had the
pleasure of continuing to annotate games
and drive printers into hysterics of rage and
frustration with his late copy right up to the
time of his death. Of all the many bodies
which paid tribute to him after his death,
none did so more handsomely or gener­
ously than the Association with which he
had been jousting since he had entered the
lists as a brash youth of 18.
Mter Chess World ceased publication, he
carried on for a while with the shop and
importing business, but he was not really a
business man. Writing was what he liked
doing, and what he did superbly well. Why
didn't he now write the books which had
always been waiting "until he had the time"?
Mainly, I think, because although he could
discipline himself to meet the dateline de­
manded by a magazine (even though he did
- 26 -
not always meet it very punctually), he could
never discipline himself to producing a set
amount of material when there was no set
time. He still did so much writing, rewrit­
ing, correcting, and starting all over again.
In the search for perfection he wasted an
incredible amount of time and, over the last
years, achieved very little.
It was part of his temperament that he
would fling himself into anything which
took his interest and work at it furiously,
doing with very little sleep and stimulating
his flagging mental powers with caffeine;
these periods of feverish, often rather aim­
less activity would be followed by weeks,
even months, of profound depression, when
he would withdraw entirely from his sur­
roundings, and his exhausted body and
brain would be given a chance to recuper­
ate-just in time to be hurled into another
round of frantic activity.
In his old age he was able to pursue
many of his interests with all the enjoyment
of a young man. He played bridge, chess,
and tennis (he had been playing in a regular
 CJ.S. Purdy-His Writings

four the Saturday before he died). Only a

few months before his death he had been
joyously dashing around South America, in
the wake of the Australian Chess Olympic
team. He contributed regularly to the maga­
zine Chess in Australia and did quite a lot of
private coaching, which he enjoyed and at
which he excelled. Happily for those count­
less friends who remember him, it was dur­
ing one of these active periods, when he
was having great fun playing in a chess
tournament in Sydney, that he suffered a
massive heart collapse and died within half
an hour. He was actually playing a game
when he collapsed, and his last words to
John, who was also competing, were, "I
have a win, but it's going to take time." He
didn't realize how fast his time was running
out.
One of the rules of tournament play
which he had always impressed on his fam­
ily was "The only thing whichjustifies with­
drawal from a tournament is death-and
even then only with a medical certificate."
For himself, even this was not enough. He
had to have a number of expert witnesses
present to testify that his withdrawal was
indeed unavoidable.

- 27 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

Cecil Purdy's international reputation did not rest on his World Corre­
spondence Championship victory, but on his writings in A . C.R./Checkl
Chess World, which earned him recognition as one of the world's best chess
journalists.
His secret was that his magazine was the only one in the world that set
out to actually teach its readers how to play better chess. Each volume is a
gold mine of instructional articles that give advice on all phases of the
game.
These days every time a promising junior asks me how he can
improve, my first advice is to read through all the articles in Chess World.
Fortunately, back issues of the magazine are still readily available, and one
can only shudder to think how low would be the standard of Australian
chess had each decade of aspiring players not had Cecil to teach them
through the pages of Chess World.
In the folowing pages we have selected one article from each volume of
A.C.R.!Check/Chess World, presented in chronological order, as a sample of
Cecil's teachings. Anyone who reads through them cannot fail to improve
their chess.

- 28 -
 His Writings

EXCHANGING
To swop or not to swop. In chess this problem is often an extremely nice one, beset
by all sorts of complex questions. But there is one simple aspect of it, extraordinarily
important, which is usually not fully understood and which has never, as far as I know,
been specifically dealt with in any book. That is the time aspect.
The general rule is: An exchange loses time for the player exchanging first if the
opponent can retake with a developing move. (A developing move is one which brings or
helps to bring a piece into better play, or brings you nearer to attainment of a special
objective.)

An obvious example from Morphy's
famous game against the Duke of Brunswick
and Count Isouard, played in a Paris opera
box: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Bg4? 4. dxe5
Bx£3.
This exchange is forced, but it loses a
move; for before the exchange, White and
Black each had one piece in play, but after
White has played 5. OJJ3 White will have
one piece in play and Black none.
The tragedy oflosing a move is brought
home to us when we realize that to be three
moves ahead in development is, other things
being equal, almost invariably a sufficient
advantage to win the game. And Morphy
was now two moves ahead, for being White
gave him one at the start.
Had White been compelled to retake
by 5. gxj3, a nondeveloping move, each side
would have lost a move in development,
and things would have balanced. The point
is that if both pieces exchanged are equally
in play, the player exchanging first never
advances his development because he virtu­
ally takes his own piece off the board as well
as his opponent's, for it will go into the box
next move. The second player will or will
not gain a move, according as he retakes
with a developing or a nondevelopingmove.
Most players realize all this only vaguely, so
that they often forget it.
But suppose the first capturer was in
play, and the captured not. Then the first
player will actually put his own develop­
ment one move back! If then the opponent
retakes with a developing move, he gains
not one move but two! The most striking
example I can find is from a game Purdy­
Gundersen, Melbourne Christmas Tourney,
1927. The position was:
White played 1. R£8, and Black replied
1... Rxf8 which, of course, lost a move,
since White's 4) was brought one move
nearer the capture of the ft , its objective. It
would actually have paid Black to play the
absurd-looking move 1... RcB! This is not
merely a nondeveloping move, but a retro­
gressive move. But it would have made
White exchange himself, thus capturing a
piece out of play with a piece in play, and
himself putting back his development a
move as explained above. Then Black would

- 29 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
have retaken with ...KxcB, developing his
�. He would thus have saved a move, and
analysis showed that this would probably
have made all the difference between los­
ing and drawing.
One often hears a player say, "Well, if
I don't exchange, he will, so here goes!" But
allowing the opponent to exchange will
often save two clear moves. E.g., a game
sent by a Victorian country correspondent:
1 1. Qxd3
Let us take stock. White needs but one
move to complete his development, namely,
with his �- .§. . But Black needs five, one
with a ft to free his light-squared A, one
with his light-squared A, one with his ¥11 to
free the .§.s, and two with his .§.s. He is
therefore four moves behind instead of one!
How has Black lost three moves? First of all,
he lost a move by 2 . . e6, for it prevented his
.

1. e4 c5 2. b4 (the Wing Gambit) cxb4 3. developinghis light-squared A in one move.

a3 e6. Now White, probably reasoning as Then his exchanging maneuver lost him
above, played 4. axb4? which, of course, is two more moves, for 9.. Nb4 was moving a
.

a move-losing exchange since Black retakes piece already developed and 10 .. Nxd3was
.

by 4 .. Bxb4, a developing move. Had he

. a move-losing exchange, since White re­
left Black to exchange fts, White would took with a developing move. White won
have gained a move by retaking with his instructively as follows: 11 ... dxc4 12. Qxc4
own .1£). This would have made a difference Be7 13. Bc7! Qe8 14. Nb5 Nd5 15. e4 a6
of two moves, and White would have had 16. Nd6 b5 17. Qb3 Bxd6 18. Bxd6 Ne7
some compensation for his ft . Such cases 19. Rc7 Qd8 20. Rd1 Ng6 21. Qc2 h6 22.
arise in nearly every game, most frequently Bxf8 Qxf8 23. Rcl Ne7 24. Qc5 1-0.
with .§. exchanges.
A marked characteristic of the style of
the 1929 Australian Champion was his will­
ingness to allow opponents to exchange off
their .lbs for his As. He relied on the gain of
time outweighing the small difference in
the value of these pieces. Here is an out­
standing example from a gem of a game
played at board 1 in the N.S.W.-Victoria
match of 1923:

S. Crakanthorp-G. Gundersen
1. d4 d5
2. c4 e6
3 . Nc3 c5
4. Nf3 Nc6
5 . Bf4 Nf6
6. e3 Be7
7. dxc5 Bxc5
8. Bd3 0-0
9. 0-0 Nb4
A very plausible exchanging maneu­
ver, but it was fatal.
10. Rc1 Nxd3

- 30 -
 His Writings

HOW TO IMPROVE AT CHESS

COMBINATIONS
The Motif of Function
Some players have a habit of saying: "If your Rook wasn't there, I could mate you."
This is irritating, but nevertheless, it is by observing things of this sort that an enormous
number of combinations are found.
The :§ in such a case has the "function" (Lasker) of defending his r3f from mate. Now
any piece which is burdened with a "function" (defensive task) is thereby enfeebled. Its
power in other directions is curtailed or perhaps nil; though it may have a whole ocean of
squares to which it can legally move, one must see through all its sham and treat it just as
if it did not command those squares at all.
For instance, an undefended enemy :§ article are also present. The geometrical
is confined to its back rank to prevent a motif gives the idea of forking the :§ and
mate by our :§ . Now we can put our ¥!1, say, the "loose" A on e7 with the � ' and the
en prise to that :§ and chase it to another encircling motif is really the most impor­
square on the rank, and by this means we tant of all, for the real theme of our combi­
may gain some other piece or a tempo. Yet nation is the attack on the castled r3f, which
the average player does not readily grasp as we said is to be included under the "en­
such opportunities; the mere visual effect of circling" heading. Now in nearly all middle­
the :§ apparently commanding those game combinations, these three motifs all
squares is too much for him. occur together. In this instance, any one of
them would give a good player the idea for
the combination.
In his Manual, Lasker gives a position
from one of Alekhine's games which is a
perfect example for our purposes.

L. Kubmann

In the Lasker-Capablanca position dia­

grammed after the moves 1. Bxf6 Nxf6?
White wins, as Breyer pointed out, by 2.
Ng6! The motif of function gives the idea
for this move. The f- i has the function of
defending the point e6, and the � can be
put en prise to it with impunity. But note also
that two motifs we discussed in our last Alekhine (to move)

-31 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
It is clear that combinations are in the
air, so we naturally search for possible mo­
tifs. The geometrical motif appeals at once­
white Y/1 and black W and the 4Js on the
same open file! But we must not make the
mistake of seeking at once for moves to
exploit this. If we do, we may waste much
valuable time or even forget to look for
other motifs.
Learn as much as you can about a
position before working out any particular
line of play.
So we look for the second motif-any
pieces with very few squares to move to.
The black 4J, of course, is one, because he
is practically pinned; but the black <:#} has
but one free square. This automatically sug­
gests a mate, and surely we cannot help
noticing that Nf6 would mate but for the
black Y/1! Motif of function! The black Y/1 is
confined to the sixth rank. Insist to yourself,
therefore, that it has no control over any
other square; imagine it off the board ex­
cept that it prevents Nf6, and now what
move is suggested? Surely 1. Qb5t! This is
the sort of move that is difficult to find
without some such reasoning, for it takes
the Y/1 away from its apparently deadly post
on the file occupied by the black W-just as
the hardest chess problems are "change­
mates." But once we see the move at all, its
merits quickly suggest themselves. The re­
ply is forced, 1. Nd7. Now the geometrical
••
motif suggests 2. Rfel! Can Black take our
Y/1 or 4J ? No, because of Nf6#. (Note dis­
covered check and double check as geo­
metrical motifs.) The only reply, therefore,
is 2... Be7. Now we could win a piece after 3.
Q):b6, or play as Alekhine did, 3. Ned6t!
Kf8 4. Rxe7 Qxb5 5. Rxf7t Kg8 6. Ne7#.
Now we have our three main motifs for
middlegame combinations. Lasker gives a
number of others which really all fall under
one of the three main heads, and if we are to
apply the method of motifs to practical
- 32 -
play, which Lasker does not suggest, we
must have a conveniently small number.
Under the geometrical motif, for instance,
we must consider "loose" pieces which sug­
gest forks, e.g., the "loose" � at e7 in the
Breyer combination referred to above. And,
as we have already indicated, the motif of
the castled W may be considered one of the
"encircling" variety.
The student in playing through games
should search for these three motifs, and
work out all the combinations he can find
which are not obviously unsound. Plenty of
practice at combinations is most important.
But there are three more entirely dis­
tinct combination motifs which belong
rather to the endgame. So that in the end­
game we have more combination motifs
than in the middlegame! These additional
three are the motifs of ft promotion, zug­
zwang, and stalemate.
The Motif of Promotion
The advance of a passed ft is first a
matter of position play. We methodicaly
play to gain control of the squares through
which the ft must pass, and to drive away
blockaders. But when it is on the seventh/
second rank, we can often afford to fling
our pieces away with the utmost abandon
in order to wrench from the enemy the
long-withheld coronet.
An example follows:
White: ft /a7 attacked by a .!, � /a8.
Black: W Ic7.
White wins by Rc8f, sacrificing his �
to enable his ft to queen.
Here are two remarkable examples
which show that promotion combinations
 His Writings
are not altogether confined to the endgame. perfect as you can make it, and any move
A game, Schlechter-Perlis, began: 1. must create a fatal loophole. Zugzwang is
d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. e3 Bf5? 4. Qb3 Qb6 5. very frequent in ft endings. An example
cxd5 Qxb3? 6. axb3 Bxb1 7. dxc6!! Be4? from a game won by Tarrasch (White):
8. Rxa7 Rxa7 9. c7 4)- moves 10. c8=Qt
1-0; five moves out of White's ten are
made with one ft !
C.L.R. Boyce-Purdy, Australian
Championship, Sydney, 1926.
� � g •
� �����'f"%�"'f'
� j}} ��"��
tjij�
��'· '""'t�%"/.'%'"::<
� i1l "'
��%0:'�/{•·�i1l· ·"'"P 'i
White, to play, sees that an impetuous
invasion with his 'it> is in vain: e.g., 1. Ke6
��,�
.....

'� ·"�,,�
� KeB 2. j7t KJB 3. Kf6 stalemate; or 1. Kj5 Kj7
�-� ����
�- " � 2. Ke5 (forced) KJB! and we are back again.
White is at his wits' end, till he suddenly
C.L.R. Boyce-Purdy (to move) notices that if Black had to move, White
would win at once, e.g., 7... Kj7 2. Kj5 and
Black here initiated a combination Black must allow him fatal entry at g6, or 1...
which at first sight appears premature, in KeB 2. Ke6 KJB 3. j7. This sets White looking
view of his incomplete development. 1 ... for a means of bringing about the same
b4! 2. Ne2 b3! 3. Nxd4. position with Black to move. This is easy: 1.
Here Black faltered and played 3 ... Ke4 ( 7. Kf4) Ke8 ( 7 . . . KgB; if 1.. . Kf7?, 2. Kj5
Qxd4? thinking that after his originally in­ wins at once) 2. Kf4 (2. Ke4!) Kf8 (still not
tended line of play, to wit, 3 ... bxa2! 4. Nb3 2 . . . Kj7?) 3. Ke5! and the deed is done.
RhB! White could spoil the combination by In general, the point of a zugzwang
the simple 5. Na 1; but Black had over­ combination, as in the example above, is to
looked a resource later pointed out by the change the move. In endgames, therefore,
Australasian: 5... Qs3! keep an eye open for such chances.
Encircling motif-immobility of 'itf! Or,
if you like, "function"-... Qs3. White again The Stalemate Motif
cannot take the YfJ. He has no defense; The secret is simply to think of stale­
indeed, Black must ultimately even queen mate. If you do, and there is a chance for
one, it is seldom possible to miss it. You
his ft ! E.g., 6. Kd1! Rxb2 7. Ke2! Rh 1 8. Rdd1
OJa 1 9. Kd2 (Black threatened ...Rxd1 10. notice that your 'it> has few or no moves,
Rxd1 0Jd1 t!) QP2, and the ft must queen. and that otherwise you have but one mov­
able piece. You then seek a chance to fling
The Motif of Zugzwang this piece away and produce the stalemate.
Zugzwangis the glorious untranslatable The opponent is tricked, as Lasker phrases
German word meaning "the plight of hav­ it, "by the wording of a rule;" stalemate is
ing to move." It is sometimes disadvanta­ quite foreign to the spirit of chess.
geous to have to move. Your position is as

- 33 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
The Motif of Desperado
Lasker's motifof"desperado" is of slight
practical importance, because whenever it
occurs it is quite obvious. It simply cannot
be missed; you see you must lose a piece, so
you let him run amok before he dies and
sell his life as dearly as possible.
An example from the French Defense:
1. e4 e6 2. d4 dS 3. NcJ Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5.
Bd3? dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nxe4 7BxeZ Now Black
must save his ¥11, so the � is doomed.
Therefore, the black � has become a "des­
perado," so Z .. Nxj2!Black comes out of the
melee a ft up.
Summary
Chess technique-as opposed to chess
art-is in the last resort simply the avoid­
ance of oversights. Now the way to reduce
oversights is by having, as far as possible, a
set method of thinking. I mean, if we just
look vaguely for "a combination" we are far
more likely to miss one than if we narrow
down our search to six different sorts of
combinations in turn. So we do strongly
advise the student in his play to run through
in his mind at every turn the different mo­
tifs we have discussed. Most of these will
generally be dismissed in a mere flash of
thought, of course.
Let no one think that this amounts to
mechanizing chess. The real mechanical
player is the man who devotes all his days
and nights to chess and acquires a sort of
chess sense. Surely there is more fun for the
amateur who can attain the same results by
less practice but more thought, just as it
gives us more pleasure to solve a math­
ematical puzzle by methodical reasoning
than by making intuitive springs at it. In
actual practice, it is very, very hard, how­
ever, to remember to be methodical. At any
rate, the present writer, although convinced
of the efficacy of a set method, has never
had the patience to apply one consistently.

THE PURDY MYSTIQUE

In May 1992 we published Ralph Tykodi' s compilation
CJ.S. Purdy's Fine Art of Chess Annotation and Other
Thoughts. The U.S. Chess Federation turned down
offers to retail it! In the meantime the whole printing
has been sold in bookstores throughout the country.
This volume is the first of 5 (!) of some very impressive
notes and ideas. A very few copies are available directly
from Thinkers' Press at $20.00 + $2.00 S&H.

- 34 -
 His Writings

A SYSTEM TO REDUCE ERRORS

Playing by System
This is something quite original in chess literature, and needs a preface. I have called it
"Playing by System," and by "system" I do not mean a system of strategy like that of
Nimzovich (which I have already summarized), but a system of thinking to be applied at
every move-a sort of chess Pelmanism. A new system of chess strategy (like that of
Nimzovich) would not be listened to unless it came from a great master of the game, but
the value of a system of thinking can, I think, be demonstrated merely by an appeal to
common sense. The amazing thing is that nothing of the sort has ever been put forward
before. J ames Mason catches a glimpse of a rudimentary system of thinking in his Art of
Chess, p. 355. He says:
Chiefly in avoidance of oversights, that certain tests will be useless, but he
question yourself, move by move, some­ always follows the set system as a guide.
what as follows: 1. Object, what? or what That system has been designed to give the
does he threaten? 2. Can I let him do it (if maximum saving of time and energy and
anything), or must I stop his little game? the minimum of error. Why should some­
3. What will be the position (generally) thing approaching this not be possible in
immediately [after] I have made this chess?
move? In other words, can he take any­ The system I am going to put forward
thing not intended by me, or in a manner consists of a more or less elaborate series of
not intended; can he check, menace an questions which one is to ask oneself. It
unsupported force or important uncom­ does not follow that the mere asking of
manded point; or can he make any move these questions produces the correct an­
surprising me in any of these respects? swers, but it makes the correct answers
These are leading questions, put in a mo­ more likely than if the questions are not
ment, and upon the completeness of the asked at all. It does not enable one to avoid
answers to them the precision of your errors due to an insufficient or faulty knowl­
play will depend. edge of chess, but it enables one to play
with the maximum strength that is possible
This is only a glimpse, nevertheless. for one with that insufficient or faulty knowl­
Most chess players arrive at their moves edge-that is, it should enable one always to
by a series of clumsy jumps rather than by play at one's best! It is only fair to confess
following a chain of reasoning. It is quite that I myself have never had the patience to
otherwise, for instance, with the chemist apply the complete system consistently, al­
analyzing an unknown salt. He has definite though I have sometimes drawn up a list of
tests laid down for him to apply to any and the mistakes I have made during a tourna­
all salts, and a definite order in which to ment, and have proved every time defi­
perform them. He, too, will make jumps nitely-to my own satisfaction-that the "sys­
sometimes, because his experience tells him tem" would have saved me from more than

- 35 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
half of them!
When Not To Use the System
Part ofthe system is to know when not to use
it. When one is following book moves in
the opening, or when there is obviously
only one good move, there is clearly no
need for the system.
If, however, there is a very obvious
move, we should ask ourselves, before play­
ing it:
Question 1: Have I anything better, or can
I with advantage make any other move first?
An example to show the desirability of
this: 1. e4 Nf6 2. NcJ d5 3. exd5Nxd5 4. Bc4
Nxc3?Here the average player would auto­
matically retake the � ' but if he always
forced himself to ask the question above, he
would have a chance of seeing that 5. Q/3!
should be played first. This forces 5... e6
and makes it hard for Black to develop his
light-squared A. lf at once 5. bxc3,then 5...
e5!
Though no single move may be obvi­
ously best, the choice may be obviously
limited to two or three moves between which
it is quite easy to decide, and here again
there is no need for the system; only make
quite sure that the choice is as limited as it
appears!
But suppose, as happens nearly always,
that the choice is not obviously limited to
two or three moves, or that if it is so limited,
it is nevertheless not easy to decide between
them. Then we begin applying the system.
First comes the reconnaissance.
The Reconnaissance
In warfare, the first step is always the
reconnaissance or survey. No move of any
sort is considered before that. So it should
be in chess. We should not allow ourselves
to go tracing out the consequences of any
move that may strike our fancy until a
reconnaissance or general survey has been
- 36 -
carried out.
Its advantages are as follows:
( 1) It gives a general valuation of the
position as a whole. It is tremendously im­
portant to know if one has the superior or
the inferior game, and by how much, and
also precisely in what the superiority or
inferiority lies. It is otherwise impossible to
make correct plans or to avoid blunders. To
take the most obvious instance, the mo­
ment one is at a disadvantage one should
cease to play for a win, and should seek a
draw, unless circumstances compel other­
wise; but how can one perceive when that
moment has arrived without examining the
position as a whole at every move?
(2) It facilitates the calculation and
analysis which is to follow, and prevents
"chess blindness." For after a proper recon­
naissance you already know what squares
each piece commands, so that their possible
moves are, as it were, already at the back of
your mind, and do not have to be sought so
laboriously.
(3) It has a special psychological value
in enabling one to avoid "chess hypno­
tism." It is dangerously easy to fall in love
with some move which has struck the fancy,
so that it becomes harder and harder to
refrain from playing it, even in the face of
clearly indicated objections; a preliminary
general valuation of the position helps one
to see things clearly and see them whole,
and so remain sane.
A still more frequent error is to be­
come so intent on a certain plan formed
some moves back that one overlooks a fresh
opportunity which has arisen through an
alteration in the position. The position
changes at every move; hence, a plan should
be revised at every move. If one keeps
revaluing the position at every move, one
can tell when the moment has arrived to
alter a plan.
For an example, see Capablanca-
 His Writings
Blanco, in Question 3.
What Are His Threats?
Practically every player in the world,
however unmethodical, follows a set sys­
tem at one point in his thinking at every
move; as soon as his opponent has made his
move, he immediately looks for any threats
it may contain. The question to oneself
should be put in the form:
Question 2: Mat are his threats?
Certainly not, "What is his threat?"
How often does a player, having found a
threat, forget to look for others! That, of
course, may lead to fatal blunders. Mason
puts the question in the form "What does he
threaten?" This again does not emphasize
sufficiently the dangerous possibility of there
being more than one threat. The universal
custom of putting this question first is a
good one. This may seem to contradict the
previous statement that the general recon­
naissance should come before any particu­
lar moves are considered. But we meant
particular moves on our own part. The
search for threats is itself part of the recon­
naissance. It is not, theoretically, the first
part, but in practical play most of the recon­
naissance has already been carried out at
previous moves (see later), and perhaps
partly during the time one's opponent has
been considering his move. And the ques­
tion "What are his threats?" may enable
one to see at once that the choice of moves
is very limited, and so save the bother of
applying the system at all.
On the other hand, it may not. It may
be very difficult to decide if a certain appar­
ent threat is a real threat, i.e., if its execution
would actually harm us, and to solve this
problem much calculation may be neces­
sary. This should not be embarked on till
the reconnaissance has been carried fur­
ther. Again, on finding a threat one should
not at once set about searching for ways of
- 37 -
parrying it. Where there is any difficulty
whatever about seeing the best move, this
problem should also be postponed until
one has valued the position as a whole. You
may then find that the threat or threats can
be ignored. A weak player, on seeing a
threat, seeks automatically for a defense
against it, while a strong player seeks auto­
matically for a way of ignoring it, i.e., he
looks first to see if he can afford to allow the
execution of the threat and continue with
his own designs.
How To Treat a Threat
One of the most difficult problems I
have found in evolving the system is how to
treat threats. Till recently, my idea was that
one should first ask "Is the threat real?" and
answer this by seeking to discover what
would result on its execution. This, how­
ever, involves a waste of thought, for even if
the threat is real, there may be some attack­
ing move on the board for you which will
make it unreal, and you are taking no ac­
count of this.
The following illustration shows how
Capablanca made this mistake in his game
with Bogoljubov at Carlsbad, 1929. The
moves (Capablanca played White) were: 1.
d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 0-0 5. e4
d6 6. Ne2 Nbd7 7. 0-0 e5 8. d5 Nc5?
Before making his last move, Bogol­
jubov should have adopted the precaution
usual in similar positions of playing 8... aS!
to prevent the 4J being displaced by b4, but
 The Search for Chess Perfection
in this case he thought he could transpose Example (Capablanca-Blanco, Ha­
the moves because of the threat to the e- ft . vana, 1913): 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4
Capablanca thought the same, and so 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Nf3 Ngf6 6. Nxf6t Nxf6 7.
defended the e- ft by 9. Nbc3? and Bogo Ne5 Bd6 8. Qf3 c6? 9. c3 0-0 10. Bg5 Be7
immediately established his 4J by 9... aS. 11. Bd3 Ne8 12. Qh3! White pursues his
Capa had missed a splendid opportunity, as attack on the black ra;; . Here Black played
was pointed out by Znosko-Borovsky, who 12... £5.
contributed a list of Carlsbad "howlers" to Now the average player, with White,
L'Echiquier. Capa should have played 9. b4, would be likely to seek for some way of
for if then 9.. . Ncxe4 White wins the piece by continuing his attack on the ra;; , merely
10.f3, so that Black would have had to retire because that is the plan he has been follow­
his 4) to d 7 with probable fatal loss of time. ing, and the chances are that by patient
What would be the best process of search he would find a way, and duly lose
reasoning for the discovery of this? The the game. If, however, he asked himself the
question "Is the threat ( . . . Nxe4) real?" would question above, he would realize, more or
be useless, for in the position as it stands the less clearly according to his strength, that
threat is very real; it is only the move b4 Black's last move has completely changed
which, by preventing the 4J's retreat to cS the position, that the attack on the ra;; is
after capturing the ft , makes the threat over, but that a new weakness has arisen in
unreal. I therefore believe that the proper the backward e- ft , and that the attack must
treatment is: now be concentrated on that instead. Capa
Imagine the threat could not possibly now exchanged As, castled (0-0), doubled
be executed. Then what would be my best his )"is on the e-file, and played c4 and d5,
move? Try out each candidate separately: and very soon he was wiping Blanco on his
imagine the position as it would be after this shoes.
move, and then and only then work out A complete reconnaissance, however,
whether the opponent would gain by carry­ must be carried out quite frequently. The
ing out the threat. first one should be made, of course, in the
opening as soon as known paths are left.
Making the Reconnaissance Again, at any stage of the game, a series of
How is the reconnaissance to be car­ two or three forced moves, or even a single
ried out? In what follows we assume, for exchange of pieces, may so change the posi­
convenience, that the student is confronted tion that a complete revaluation becomes
with a position that is altogether new and necessary.
unfamiliar to him. In an actual game this is Let us assume that Questions 1, 2, and
not so, for each position is usually identical 3 have proved inadequate, and that a com­
in most of its characteristics with the one plete new reconnaissance is to be made.
preceding. Therefore, it is usually not nec­
essary to go through the whole process 1. Material
afresh, but only to ask: First, we count up the material. This is
Question 3: How has that move changed very easy, and it is the first thing that any
the position ? player does when confronted with a new
This general question comes after the position.
more particular question "What are his Besides the mere counting, however,
threats?" one should take special note under this

- 38 -
 His Writings
heading, "Material," of two things:
(1) minor pieces; and
(2) ft majorities.
To elaborate this: One should note any
of the various possible combinations of mi­
nor pieces:
(a) two As+4J vs. two 4Js+A;
(b) two As versus A+4:);
(c) two As versus two 4:)s;
(d) A versus 4:) ; and
(e) As on opposite colors.
If (a) or (b) obtains, for instance, one
always has to consider the possibility of one
of the two 4Js exchanging itself for a A and
so producing As on opposite colors, which
combination has powerful drawing tenden­
cies in the endgame. Also, one should see
how the value of each minor piece is af­
fected by the ft formation. E.g., in blocked
positions the 4J is usually the superior piece;
ifthere are a great many fts on dark squares,
a dark-squared A is usually too immobile
to be of much use; while on a fairly open
board, especially if the fts are numerically
unequal on one or both wings (so that a
passed ft can be forced by one party or
both), a A is usually much superior to a 4:),
both in the middle- and endgame.
And as to ft majorities: "The majority
of fts on the 'l!¥-side" is a familiar parrot
cry, but few players know just when and
why it is a real advantage. It is of no advan­
tage unless both �s are castled on the
�-side. If both are castled on the i!¥-side,
the majority on the �-side is an advantage.
There are two reasons:
(1) A majority in front of a castled �
cannot advance before the endgame with­
out exposing the � so that the player with
'
the majority on the other wing gets a big
start with his passed ft ; in fact, his oppo­
nent is debarred from getting one unless
and until the endgame arrives.
- 39
(2) And when the endgame does ar­
rive, our � is all ready to stop the enemy
passed ft , while the enemy � is on the
wrong side to stop ours (the � is much
better at stopping fts than helping them on,
for the latter duty forces him to move a long
way, and he is so painfully slow).
If the �s are castled on opposite wings,
each � is similarly placed as regards his
own and his opponent's majority, so it is not
in itself an advantage to have the majority
on one wing or the other.
Of course, a majority on either of the
two wings is always an advantage if the
opponent has not a majority on the other.
This can occur even with equal fts, e.g., in
the exchange variation of the Ruy Lopez
after 7. e4 e5 2. NJ3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6
dxc6. Black has four fts to three on the
i{y-side, but has not a majority because he
can never get a passed ft . This is because
he has no ft on a file not occupied by an
enemy ft . Black can, however, force a
passed ft with a formation like that result­
ing, also in the Ruy Lopez, after 3 d6 4.
•••
Bxc6t bxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Nxd4. This is
because, in spite of his doubled fts, he has
one ft (here, the d- ft) on a file unoccupied
by an enemy ft , and in a ft ending this can
be forced through, though not as easily as
with all four fts united.
Having finished with material, the sec­
ond thing to consider in the reconnaissance
is . . .
2. The King Positions
The conclusion to be drawn from the
mere counting of material may have to be
considerably modified because of the ex­
posed position of one of the �s. An ex­
posed � may be worth a piece to the other
side, and so throw into insignificance such
weaknesses as isolated fts, which otherwise
loom large.
A castled � position is usually weak if
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
one of the fts in front of it has been moved,
more particularly the b/g- ft or a/h- ft , as it
then invites exposure by a pawnstorm.
There is another way a r:; can die
besides by exposure, and that is by the
reverse ill of suffocation-that is, when he is
castled and so hemmed in by his own sup­
porters that he falls victim to a sacrificial
mating net.
3. Weaknesses and Strengths
Thirdly, we make a mental list of all
the weaknesses and strengths of each side.
Of course, one might include both under
the heading of weaknesses, for a strength to
one side is a weakness to the other; but a 4J,
say, entrenched at d6/d3, or �s on the
seventh/second rank, and so forth, are much
more conveniently considered as strengths
to the possessor than as enemy weaknesses.
The term "strength" is unusual, but it is the
only way to avoid a circumlocution, the
word "disadvantage" having drawbacks.
Briefly, the various kinds of weak­
nesses are, in general:
( 1 ) weak fts (isolated, backward,
doubled, or even merely unprotected, as a
tempo may be gained by attacking them in
this case, even though they may be able to
move into safety) ;
(2) weak points or "holes," i.e., squares
on one's own side of the board which can­
not be protected by fts, and which are open
to occupation by an enemy piece;
(3) confined pieces;
(4) a generally cramped game.
Strengths are:
(1) larger terrain (more than half the
board for one's pieces);
(2) greater elasticity or freedom of
movement;
(3) well-posted pieces (commanding
open files or diagonals, or seventh/second
rank, occupying weak points, or blockading
- 40
enemy fts in the center);
(4) command of central squares.
4. Development
Lastly, we carry out the simple process
of calculating how many tempos either side
is ahead of the other in development. This
is done not by counting up all the moves
made by each side as Znosko-Borovsky
rather absurdly does-for some of these may
have been completely lost moves, e.g., a 4J
which has taken three moves to get from
bllb8) to g3/g6 is not necessarily better
developed than at c3/ c6, where it could
have got in one move-nor even by count­
ing up developing moves, in our opinion,
but by counting up the minimum number
of moves each side needs to complete its
development. Our reasons will appear later.
We have not so far considered combi­
nation motifs. The reconnaissance is merely
a survey of the position considered stati­
cally. Its objects are:
(1) to enable us to tell who, if either,
has the advantage on the whole, in what it
lies, and how great it is; and
(2) to help us to form a plan if it be­
comes necessary.
The Reconnaissance: Example
Blackburne
Alekhine (to move)
This position is Alekhine-Blackburne,
-
 His Writings
St. Petersburg 1914.
Let us first apply, in order, the three
preliminary questions.
• Question 1: This does not arise, as
there is no obvious move, or if there is,
Alekhine missed it!
• Question 2: What are his threats? An-
swer: 1 ... Qg5 winning the A, for if 1. a4,
then 1... a6, etc. This leads White to the
correct move at once, and here we have an
example of how these preliminary ques­
tions will often save all the bother of carry­
ing out the system in its entirety.
Alekhine, however, did miss the threat
and played Nd2??, and duly lost the .il !
If Alekhine missed it, perhaps some of
our readers might have too. But need they
therefore fail to find the correct move in the
end? Not a bit of it! Provided they follow
the system right out, the danger simply
must come to light!
• Qyestion 3: How has his last move
changed the position?
This question assumes that the player
has been examining the position of previ­
ous moves and so does not need to carry
out a complete new reconnaissance, but
only to revise his last one. Actually, Black's
last move was Kf8 (in answer to Bb5t),
•••
and this should have made Black's threat
very obvious.
However, let us assume that we have
not made any reconnaissance at previous
moves. Then let us make one now-we also
assume that we have not yet seen Black's
threat.
1. Material-Equal ; and as to minor
pieces and ft majorities, each player has
two As and � ' and the fts balance numeri­
cally on each wing. These observations have
not helped us materially so far, but, in other
cases, they may give the key to the whole
situation.
2. KingPositions-The white � is pretty
safe, we note, so long as the two diagonals
-41 -
g1-a7 and h1-a8 remain closed by the black
center fts; but the black � will certainly
have to expose himself somewhat to let his
§. develop, unless the §. comes out very
awkwardly by h5, etc.
...
3. ffi?aknesses and Strengths-Running
through the list of all the possible types of
weaknesses and strengths, we see that our
own (White's) weaknesses are the back­
ward c- ft (and, indeed, the b- ft , for if it
moves the square c3 becomes a "hole"), the
"hole" at e3, and the lack of mobility of the
light-squared .Q.. This piece has only one
free square, which fact should at once sug­
gest danger to us and, incidentally, show us
Black's threat of .. Qg5ifwe had not already
.
seen it. As a matter of fact, this point really
belongs to "combination motifs," for the
reconnaissance does not deal with particu­
lar moves. But we must not obey such rules
with such imbecile slavishness as to neglect
particular moves during the reconnaissance
if they insist on slapping us in the eye.
Although even the feeblest player could
now see that Ba4 is White's only move, let
us complete the reconnaissance as an illus­
tration.
To continue: White has no particular
"strength" except that he can control the
e-file.
Black's weaknesses are the isolated
doubled fts and, of course, the weak �
position; his strengths are his light-squared
.il controlling so many important dark
squares, and his control of the center squares
given by the isolated doubled fts! Thus the
latter is simultaneously a strength and a
weakness. In any case, it does not look like
being a very vulnerable weakness for quite
a long time.
4. Development-This position, like al­
most any possible position in chess, is a
good example of the uselessness, even as a
preliminary, of Znosko-Borovsky's idea of
counting up all the moves of any kind made
 The Search for Chess Perfection
by each side; for instance, we should have
to count Black's ...Kf8, which is really a
minus move.
It also shows, in our opinion, that it is a
mistake to rely on counting up even the
purely developing moves by each side. For
this would give us four for White (the initial
moves of the two center fts, the sortie ofthe
light-squared .\l, and 0-0), and three for
Black (the two initial moves of his center fts
and the move of the dark-squared A). But
this method takes no account ofthe number
of moves Black will need to develop his
h- l==L
No, the only sound way, as we have
said, is to count up the number of moves
each side needs to complete its develop­
ment. This method has the advantage of
applying to all stages of the game instead of
only the opening. For instance, in the
middlegame (or the endgame) we can often
count up the number of moves each side
needs to attain a special objective it hap­
pens to be striving for; the simplest ex­
ample is the familiar one of counting the
minimum number of moves each side needs
to queen a ft .
Let us apply our method to the posi­
tion before us. It is not as easy as it might
appear. The minimum number of moves
required by White, we might say, is five­
two with the 4) , one with the dark-squared
A, one with the '{:ff to free the a- § , and one
with the a- E( . An experienced player, how­
ever, would see that the answer for White is
at least six, owing to the clear necessity for
expending a move on the safety of the light­
squared .\l.
The minimum required by Black is
also six-one with the 4) , one with the light­
squared .\l, at least two to free the h-E( , and
one with each § , but not necessarily one
with the '{:ff, as the '{:ff can, if desired, de­
velop at b6 with gain of time by its threat to
the b- ft (subtleties like this must be searched
- 42 -
for) . Thus the first method gave an advan­
tage of 1-1/2 tempos to White, while ours
gives only half a tempo to White-we give
half a tempo to the player having the move.
The objects ofthe reconnaissance were:
(1) to enable us to tell who, if either, has the
advantage on the whole, in what it lies, and
how great it is; and (2) to help us form a plan
if it becomes necessary.
Now, although in the difficult position
I have chosen it would not be possible for
the average player to give an exact answer
as regards ( 1), he would certainly get nearer
the mark after a reconnaissance on the lines
suggested than without it, and similarly, as
regards (2), he would have a much better
chance of conducting his game along logi­
cal lines; for he knows now where his own
weaknesses are that he must try to cover,
and where the opponent's weaknesses are
that he must try to exploit.
Is There a Combination?
Having carried out the preliminary re­
connaissance, the next question we ask our­
selves in any position is: Have I any sound
and correct combination?
We consider it of enormous impor­
tance that this should come before any
search for a plan. Not until we have an­
swered the question above either with "No"
or "Not sure" should we begin looking for
positional lines of play, i.e., plans.
Most writers insist that we should al­
ways have a plan. This is a very mischie­
vous doctrine. How often does one see a
young player of the studious type evolve
the most grandiose plan of campaign after
long and intensive thought, when quite a
simple combination beginning, say, with
Bxh7t (Bxh2f) has been all the time staring
him in the face?
The ultimate aim, after all, is simply to
find the best move in each position, and if
we can find it without going to the trouble
 His Writings
of making a plan many moves deep, which game of the match between Sultan Khan
may have to be thrown by the board at the and Tartakover:
very next move, why not do so?
A player who always sets out to form a Mir Sultan Khan (to move his 1 6th)
plan automatically would never see a com­
bination at all, either for himself or his
opponent, and would never win a game!
The missing of a combination either way is
usually a most serious thing, whereas be­
tween one plan and another it is usually
more a matter of hair-splitting.
It was only after reading Emanuel
Lasker's Manual that I made this discovery,
namely, that one should always lookfor combi­
nations before plans, and though like most Tartakover
players I had usually done so all along
instinctively, I worked out that if I had Tartakover's admirable note in L'Echi­
made it an invariable rule I should have quier reads:
avoided about 20 percent of my blunders in
match games. That is, provided I had also Black's game is already materially su­
looked for combinations in the right way. perior.... White's last move, 16. a.3, invites
We must take that now as read, and Black to win a pawn by the combination
pass on to planning. But we shall return to 76... Bxa3!? 1Z Nxb5 axb5 78. bxa3 Rxc2
combination "motifs" in the final examples 79. Rh7 Rc5 {if 20... Ba6?, 27. Rd6!) 20.
referred to above. Be2 Rxe5 (if 20... Ba6?, a4) 27. Bxb5. White,
But a word on the criteria by which however, would have recovered a field of
combinations are to be judged. A combina­ action and even the initiative.
tion, leaving out of account wild ventures That is why Black wisely rejects this
embarked on as "the only chance," must be gift, and chooses by his following three
not only sound, but correct. A combination moves a positional plan which consists in
may be sound, meaning that it cannot be undermining White's advance-post at e5
refuted, and yet incorrect because it does and placing his own Bishop on a very
not make the most of the position. effective diagonal.
The reconnaissance helps us here. It 16. ••• Be7!
has enabled us to form a rough estimate of 17. Rd2
the amount of our advantage, and if for To free his Knight.
example we are a .ft up with the better of 17. ... f6!
the position, we should not embark on a Following up the plan mentioned
combination to win a second .ft if it would above, whereas the new combination 7Z ..
sacrifice our positional advantage and give b4!? 78. Ne4! {more enterprising than 78.
the enemy the initiative. A combination Nb7, etc.) bxa3 79. bxa3 Bxa3 20. Rb 1!,
which will not yield the advantage that our etc., would have presented for Black, in
position entitles us to expect should be dis­ spite of the pawn won, much embarrass­
carded in favor of a positional line or plan. ment.
Here is an example from the second 1 8. exf6 Bxf6.

- 43 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
We now leave Tartakover's notes. Black
has realized his plan. This was the position
he visualized on his 16th move. White's
great strength, the ft Ie5, with its cramping
effect on Black's game, has disappeared,
and Black is bearing down on White's weak
�-wing. White is now forced to waste time
with 1Ji'jd1 and c3, and then Black, after ... 0-0
and ... d5, is ready to prepare an ultimate
breakthrough on the �-wing by a ft ad­
vance.
Sultan Khan realized that White's ft /e5
was the key of the whole position. That is
how plans are made: the reconnaissance
has told you what are the weaknesses and
strengths of each side, and you then set
about looking for a feasible method of ex­
ploiting the enemy's weaknesses while re­
moving your own, and of removing the
enemy's strengths while establishing your
own, or at least doing as many of these four
things as possible.
Here White's weakness was his �­
wing, Black's his backward cl- ft ; White's
strength his ft /e5, and Black's his two .Q.s,
which wanted open lines. See how all these
four items have been at least partially at­
tended to.
And the main point is that Black, in
visualizing the present position, reckoned
that it would give him better winning
chances than the tempting combination 16...
Bxa3!?
One more sermon from this stone: note
once again the difference between the work­
ing out of combinations and plans. With the
combination, what we saw first was the
initial move 16... Bxa3. It hit us, or should
have, in the eye, and we then followed out
its consequences. This could be done be­
cause of the numerous forced moves, the
essential of combinations.
N.B.-If the combination did not "hit
us in the eye," we could still find it easily by
the "motif" method. The motif of function!
- 44
We look for any unit burdened with more
than one defensive task or function. The
white b- ft ! This tells us that the a- ft's pro­
tection is illusory, and 16... Bxa3 is sug­
gested automatically.
But with the plan, what Sultan Khan
saw first was the future position, and he
then sought to bring that position about.
His opponent had many possible replies,
too numerous for calculation, but all that it
was necessary to see was that White had no
way ofpreventing the execution ofthe plan.
Planning
In the last example, we gave an illus­
trative position in which a very tempting
combination was rejected by a master player
for a positional line or plan, and we detailed
at some length the working out of the plan.
This time, we give further examples of
planning. In each case it is understood that
we have already searched for possible com­
binations, and have found none worth con­
sidering.
What Is A Plan?
One of the favorite questions of the
heathen to his chess friend is, "How many
moves do you see ahead?" Reti's answer to
these irritating people was, "As a rule not a
single one."
Allowing as few as even three reason­
able possibilities at each move, to see three
moves ahead would involve holding in the
mind 243 different variations, and four
moves ahead would bring the number to
2187.
Exact calculation more than two moves
ahead is possible only when we can make
threatening moves which practically force
our opponent's replies; that is combinative
play.
How then do we usually think in chess?
The answer is that most players evolve the
majority of their moves without thinking at
-
 His Writings
all. They rely on their "instinct" or "chess
sense"; this is really the product of accumu­
lated experience. Just as the cricketer in­
stantly selects without conscious thought a
more or less correct way of playing each
ball bowled at him, so the practiced club
skittler selects in a twinkling a more or less
correct way of treating each position that
arises in a game of chess. Such players are
doomed to permanent mediocrity-in chess
we mean, not in cricket.
Of course all players develop a "chess
sense" in some degree, but only those who
make it their servant instead of their master
can reach the stage of the second-class ama­
teur.
The other way of evolving moves, apart
from combinations, is by planning. The
essence of planning is the visualization of a
future position of some or all of your pieces.
You then seek to play for that position; you
do not worry much about your opponent's
replies except to make sure that your plan is
feasible, and also that you are not leaving
any opening for a combination; these ex­
ceptions are naturally of vital importance.
A simple example of playing by plan is
the book mate with W and � . You visualize
the final position with the enemy W on the
edge of the board, your own W in "opposi­
tion" to it, and your � smugly administer­
ing the coup de grace. The position takes
quite a number of moves to obtain, but the
obtaining of it, once the position is seen in
the mind, is ease personified.
We now give a more difficult example,
and we select this one first to show how
impossible it is to arrive at the same moves
by "instinct" as by planning.
- 45 -
Capablanca (to move)
janowski
In this position 999 players out of 1000,
assuming they had never seen it before,
would play 1... e6; Capablanca's move was
1.. Bd7, and ... e6 only on his next move!
.
Absurd on the face of it! Black has carefully
developed his ¥11-,il before playing ...e6,
and now deliberately uses up a move to put
it back where the e- ft will block it. This is a
great illustration of a fallacy beloved of
chess logicians; that because we did such
and such some moves ago, we must do thus
and thus now. Actually, we should try to
wipe all previous moves in the game from
our mind, and plan anew if necessary at
each turn, for the position is constantly
changing.
Capablanca looked for the things in
the position thatreally mattered. What were
the weaknesses on each side? His own were
the doubled b- fts, which were immobile
and likely to become fixed nuisances.
White's was the a- ft . How could Black
remove his own weaknesses and exploit
White's?
He decided to use the b- ft as a support
for a battering ram. He visualized it at bS
supporting his 4:\ at c4. If then White drove
the 4:\ by b3, the a- ft would be backward.
Otherwise, White could only relieve the
pressure of the well-posted 4:\ by exchang­
ing it off. That would undouble the b- fts,
and the rear member of the previously im-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
mobile unit could then advance down to
b4, fixing the a- it or, if the latter had then
advanced one square, making use of it as
part of a �-side attack.
But first Black must develop his pieces
by ... e6, ...Bd6, etc. If, however, he were to
play ... e6 at once, not only would he be
unable to advance his b- it (because of
White's 'itJ-.Q.), but his � could also be
prevented from going to a5 and c4 by the
pin (Bb5). Hence the plan was quite impos­
sible without first preparing the way by 1...
Bd7!! White's harmless reply was 2. Be2.
Janowski had failed to fathom Capablanca's
ideas. He could have put a nasty spoke in
Capa's wheel by 2. Bb5. 2... e6 3. 0-0 Bd6
4. Rfc1 Ke7! The 'itJ is quite safe here and
much better developed than after castling.
5. Bc3 Rhc8. Note that Capablanca care­
fully completes his development before
embarking on his real plan. 6. aJ Na5! At
last the real business begins. Note that Capa­
blanca carefully completed the whole of his
development first. To have played ...Na5,
etc., earlier would have been childish-an
assault by one piece against an army! 7.
Nd2 f5. White threatened f4 opening the e­
file on the black 'itJ. 8. g3 b5 9. f3 Nc4 10.
Bxc4 bxc4. The pressure of the � was
intolerable to White, as Black had foreseen.
11. e4 Kf7 12. exf5 exf5 13. f4 b5.
"All as the weird sisters promised."
Black now formed a new plan, to fix White's
pieces on the �-side by threatening ... b4
(by doubling the �s on the a-file), and then
to break up the 'itJ-side by ...g5 in due
course, and to occupy the g-file through the
greater mobility of his �s.
For remember that it is usually quite
easy to defend against an attack concen­
trated on one side of the board only. The
final assault is nearly always a switch-over,
bringing in the element of time. Black car­
ried out this plan and won the game.
We do not ask the student to study this
- 46 -
example with great care. What is wanted is
for the initial move, the surprising ...Bd7, to
grip his imagination and inspire him to take
a delight in making real plans of his own.
We now give a very famous example.
Capablanca again. It is Black's move. He is
a it down. How is he to gain compensa­
tion? White's weaknesses are the a- it and
b- it . Capablanca therefore visualized the
following position: �s/ a8/b8, .Q. where it is
on g7, and �/c4 supported by the �- With
the combined pressure of all these forces
against the two weak its, he expected "to
regain the material lost while at the same
time keeping the initiative."
Capablanca (to move)
Nimzovich
White, however, threatens to complete
his development in a very few moves. It is
therefore necessary to impede him by com­
bining the carrying out of our plan with
direct threats against merely temporary
weaknesses, e.g., the e- it . So: 1... Qe6!!
This makes room for the � to proceed
to c4, and at the same time forces White to
lose time with a defensive move. Not 1...
Q!;7, for the � is needed to support the �/
c4. 2. f3 Nd7 3. Bd2 Ne5 (another direct
threat en route) 4. Qe2 Nc4 5. Rab1 Ra8 6.
a4.
White should have let the a- it go by 6.
b3 Nxd2 7. Qfd2 RaJ. He was greedy. 6...
Nxd2 7. Qxd2 Qc4! 8. Rfd1 Reb8 9. Qe3
 His Writings
Rb4 10. Qg5 Bd4t 11. Khl Rab8.
Black's plan has succeeded. Clearly he
must at least regain his ft , and also retain
the initiative.
It will be seen that Black hardly needed
to take a single one of his opponent's replies
into consideration when making his own
moves. Nor would it have profited him to
do so.
The subject of planning in chess is
much too important to be hurried over; we
give another illustrative position.
Lasker
Tartakover (to move)
The position diagrammed arose be­
tween Dr. Tartakover and Dr. Emanuel Las­
ker in the New York tournament of 1924.
Mark this! The plan executed by Las­
ker here is a perfect example of"prophylac­
tic" play, yet this conception is not sup­
posed to have been unleashed on the chess
world until the publication of Mein System
by Nimzovich two years later! It gives me
much pleasure to illustrate the main thesis
of the "freakish" Nimzovich by a specimen
of the play of Lasker, the apostle of "com­
mon sense."
We are to see how 'Th.rtakover came to
grief through defying Nimzovichian Prin­
ciples, and how Lasker triumphed by em­
ploying them.
It is White ('Th.rtakover) to move. Stu­
dents of Nimzovich will recognize that the
- 47
center is occupied by two ft chains; the
white chain consists of the fts/e4/d5, and
the black chain consists of the fts/e5/d6,
the bases being respectively at e4 and d6.
White's obvious plan, to this student, is
therefore to attack the base of the black ft
chain by c5, and the initial preparatory move
is at once suggested, namely, b4. It will then
remain to bringfurther support to the square
c5 by Be3 and Rc1, for Black, after ... b6, will
have three units protecting that square.
Alekhine says in the book of the tour­
ney, "To be sure, the breach by c5 would not
easily have been carried out; nevertheless,
it would have been a plan to accord with the
position which might have been prepared
without risk."
For the benefit of those to whom the
"pawn chain" is Greek or worse, it may be
pointed out that once the white c- ft arrived
at the fifth rank, White would be constantly
holding over Black's head the threat of open­
ing the c-file; White could double his �s on
that file, while Black, before he could do the
same, would have to wait till the file was
opened. This would clearly put the initia­
tive in White's hands, as far as the i!_¥-wing
is concerned.
Black's obvious counter-plan would be
to prepare an attack on the base of the white
ft chain by .. .j5. But this would be an even
more difficult process. To free the f- ft Black
would first need to play ... h6 and ...Nh7, or
something equally anemic, and, further­
more, his pieces are by no means ready to
make use of the f-file even then. Alekhine
suggests that Black might try at once 1. ..
Nf4, "to assure himself of two Bishops." But
then after 2. Bxf4 exf4 3. Nj3 followed by
Rfe1 and Bfl (a change of plan dictated by
the change in the ft position), he notes that
Black would have been confronted with a
triple task, "first and second, to reckon with
the possibilities bound up with c5 and e5,
and third, to guard the f-pawn."
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Actually, White indulged in a tempting
course of playing for a <tti-side attack by 1.
£4!? Black naturally replied 1... ex£4, for this
gave his only chance of counterplay; White's
e- ft , the base of the ft chain, is now a
permanent weakness, and if Black can
weather the attack on his <tfi-wing he will
have a telling pull. The procedure against
an isolated or backward center ft is, in the
words of Nimzovich, "First restrain, then
blockade, then destroy!"
To restrain a ft means to guard the
square in front of it, so that it cannot ad­
vance without being lost; to blockade it is to
place a suitable piece on that square, so as
to stop it advancing at all. The weakness is
then fixed irrevocably, and the final pro­
cess, destruction, is ready to begin.
2. Bx£4 Nx£4! Naturally! The A was
an "anti-blockader," besides being a mobile
unit for attack. Alekhine remarks, "White
has temporarily extended his range but in
return has surrendered to his adversary per­
manent advantages, such as the control of
the dark squares and the weakness at e4."
That is the point: Black's advantages
are permanent, while White's is temporary.
If, therefore, White's attack should fail, he is
doomed.
3. Rx£4 Be7!! Here is the beginning of
the "prophylactic" maneuver. The piece to
be used as the blockader at e5 is clearly the
4:'1; it must go there via d7; for this the �-A
must get out of the way. Meanwhile, White
is massing against the undefended f- ft ; this
point must be protected before the 4:'1 can
begin its maneuver.
Both aims, the defense of the f- ft and
the removal of the �- .il to make way for
the 4), can be accomplished by placing the
<tti- )':'( at f8 and the �-A at e8. Black's last
move makes room for the )':'( , and also
develops the A for the purpose of making
use of the weakened dark squares.
In actual play it would be extraordi-
- 48 -
narily difficult to conceive such an appar­
ently retrogressive regrouping, for it is only
a few moves since Black played his <tfi- )':'( to
e8 and his <tfi-.il from f8 to e7! This proves
my contention that previous play should be
ignored, and one's plan thoroughly over­
hauled at every move, since the position is
always changing.
It looks at first sight as though Black is
not taking adequate measures to restrain
the e- ft . Can White not play now 4. Nf3
(threatening e5) ?No, because of ...Nh5!trap­
ping the )':'( .
4. Raf1 R£8!! 5. Qd3 Be8!! (Com­
pletely shutting in his )':'( ! According to
copybook strategy, Black has already lost
about six tempi in the opening.) 6. Qg3
Qd8!! (Not at once .. .Nd7 because of Bg4
pinning the would-be blockader.} 7. Ndl
Nd7! (On the previous move, this would
have led to the pin Bg4.) Now at last the full
meaning of Black's pitiful-looking shuffling
is clear. Black's <ttf is absolutely safe, and
Black has complete control of the dark
squares. His <tti- A, having no enemy A to
challenge him, is terrific; his 4:'1 is ready to
occupy e5. The weaknesses created by
White's plausible 14th (l. f4! ?) are strangely
brought to book. White should now have
played 8. Nj3 or 8. h4, remaining, however,
with a potential disadvantage after 8. . . Bf6,
as Alekhine points out. Instead, White goes
for tactical chances.) 8. Ne3 Bg5!! [Ed.:
Much ofthis paragraph was revised based on an
obituary notice and eulogyfor Lasker in the 7947
ACR to correct errors in the original September
7937 ACR article.]
A combination! And not the obvious
.. .Ne5, even though Black has been playing
for that move from the start. This shows
how important it is to look first for possible
combinations at every move, and not to
become obsessed by a plan, however artis­
tic it may be. A chess player must be an
opportunist as well as a planner.
 His Writings
The positional play ends here, but we
continue for the student's interest.
The motif for the combination here is
the "enclosing motif," the motif of a piece of
small mobility and therefore liable to be
trapped. Such a piece is the l=':( /f4.
9. Rg4. If 9. R4f2, . ..Bh4. If 9. R4f3,
...Ne5. If 9. Rf5, .. .Bh4 followed by ...Ne5 or
...g6. White must lose the Exchange: 9. . f6!
. use the system in the opening while the
10. Qf2 h5 11. Rg3 h4! (not . ..Bh4, 72.
Rxg7f! with chances) 12. Rg4 Bh5 13. Nf5
Bxg4.
And the game is decided. Black's play
is all wonderful, and the morals drawn from
it above will be of great value to the student
if he will store them in his memory.
Playing by System
Before completing the discussion on
planning, I propose to set out the complete
system whose various parts I have been
explaining.
As you have seen, the system consists
of a series of questions which a player is to
ask himself at every move. Of course, if he
finds the correct move with certainty before
he has asked all the questions, he does not
need to complete them.
Here are the questions. The student
might copy them out onto a single sheet of
paper, and keep the sheet standing up fac­
ing him when playing over master games,
on which he should practice the system.
I might remark that it is vain to imag­
ine that one can keep the system for impor­
tant match games and not bother to use it at
other times. Unless he practiced using the
system slavishly for a long time, it would be
quite impossible for anyone with blood in
his veins to keep it up throughout a single
game. As remarked before, although the
writer has proved the efficacy of the system
beyond doubt-he has never been able to
train himself to use it consistently through­
out a game.
- 49
Curiously enough, the writer evolved
a simple form of the system-without any
mention of combinations, for example-very
soon after learning the moves. Then he
merely kept on elaborating it as he imbibed
the views of various writers, chiefly Lasker,
until it took its present shape.
It is to be understood that you do not
game continues along a line familiar to you,
that is assuming that you are quite certain
that the "book" moves are the best avail­
able. As soon as the stage is passed-it may
be on the third move or the thirteenth-you
begin using the system.
The System
(It is my turn to move.)
1. Is there an obvious move?
If so, have I anything better, or can I
with advantage make any other move first?
2. Or is the choice clearly limited to a
veryfew alternatives which I can
decide between most easily without
using the system?
3. What are his threats?
Consider each threat as follows: Can I
ignore it? To answer this, imagine the threat
could not possibly be executed. Then what
would be my best move? Imagining that
move played, would my opponent then
gain by executing the threat?
4. Who, ifeither, has the advantage?
In what does it lie, and how great is
it?
If Question 4 does not tell us this, we
must carry out a complete reconnaissance
of the position, 5.
5. Make a reconnaissance, consider­
ing:
•
( 1) material, including minor pieces
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
and ft majorities; (2) � positions.
• Weaknesses and strengths. Weak­
nesses are (1) weak fts, (2) weak squares, (3)
confined pieces, (4) a generally cramped
game. Strengths are (1) larger terrain; (2)
greater elasticity, (3) well-posted pieces, (4)
command of central squares.
• Development, counting the num­
ber of moves each side needs to complete
its development.
8. If not satisfied that the answer to 7
is yes, what is my correct plan?
To help in answering this, use the re­
connaissance. What are all the weaknesses
and strengths of each side? How can I best
exploit his weaknesses and establish my
strengths, remove his strengths and my
weaknesses, or do as many of these things
as possible? What future position (of all the
pieces) should I visualize? Can I attain it?

6. Now answer 4. 9. What, finally, are all the moves I

(Our answer to 5 (What are the weak­ have to consider?
nesses and strengths of each side?] is to About each, ask "What could he do ifl
serve as a criterion for judging the value of did this?" looking for combination motifs
combinations or of plans.) from the other side.

7. Have I a sound and correct combi­ (It is his move.)

nation?
To help in answering this, look for the
presence of the following motifs.
I. The geometrical motif (pieces on
the same line, pins, pieces liable to a fork,
loose pieces, etc.).
2. Motif of confined pieces, including
the castled �.
3. Motif of function. See if any unit is
burdened with more than one defensive
task.
The next three motifs are endgame
motifs.
4. .ft promotion.
5. Zugzwang.
6. Stalemate.
Having hit upon the initial move of a
combination, visualize the position after that
move, see what are all his possible replies,
what I could do then, and so forth.
Spend your time in making a general
reconnaissance. Then when he has moved,
Question 4 will be sufficient to answer Ques­
tion 5.
Look for combination motifs, as in
Question 7.
Carry the reconnaissance (7) even fur­
ther by examining what squares are com­
manded by each piece on the board.
A general examination of the position
pays much more than calculation based on
his possible moves, unless one is in the
midst of a combination and is fairly certain
of the opponent's next move, or is short of
time and one's only chance is to have one's
reply ready.
In such cases, or where you have re­
connoitered to saturation point, imagine
him to have played a move, and then think
as though it were your turn to move.

- 50 -
 His Writings

THE SNARE OF THE ODD PAWN

One of the least questioned of all that horde of little maxims beloved of the pious
woodshifter is, "When a pawn up, exchange at every opportunity."
Yet we venture to say that it has turned many a won game into a draw. A striking
illustration occurred in a vital game in an Australian Championship, Koshnitsky-Crowl.
F.A. Crowl (to play his 1 4th) Black would have obtained far better
winning chances-in our opinion a definitely
winning position-by 14... 0-0! This simple
and straightforward move immediately pro­
duces equilibrium in development, the op­
posing .§. s being exactly similarly placed,
and, forgetting about the ft plus, would be
the one a strong player would naturally
choose. Therefore, we maintain, it should
have been chosen anyway. Our theory might
be stated thus:
G. Koshnitsky A ft plus frequently proves insuffi­
cient for winning an endgame if it is accom­
In the diagrammed position, Crowl panied by a disadvantage in position other­
did what almost anyone would do without wise. Therefore a single ft plus in the mid­
hesitating. Being a ft up, he simplified by dlegame does not justify us in playing for
14... cxd4 15. cxd4 Q.xd2 followed by 16... exchanges where it involves submitting to
Nxd4; it seemed such a clear case for fol­ the slightest positional disadvantage.
lowing the maxim. Yet, as will be seen from But we must examine 14... 0-0further.
the full score of the game, Crowl found Does it not lose a tempo too, for cannot
himself face to face in a few moves with White, by 15. @2, force Black to retreat his
almost a dead draw. By simplifying, Crowl lt thus keeping back his development one
threw away his chance of making the odd move? No, because White's @2 is equally
ft tell! non-developing; his � was already in play,
The objection to the course he took is just as Black's .Q. was already in play.
simply that it loses a clear tempo, as the This move, 15. @2!, is clearly the only
exchange of �s immediately opens up the one we have to fear; it has a double threat
way for White's other .§. to develop. (dxe5 and 0Jb7) while keeping the cl- ft
An exchange where both pieces are in protected. Therefore, let us examine the
play loses a tempo for the exchanger if the variation to corroborate our general re­
second player recaptures with a developing marks. 14... 0-0! 15. @2 cxd4 16. cxd4Bf6 1Z
move. OJb Z What else? Black threatened ...Rd7,
Here 16. Rxd2 is certainly a develop­ etc., and while the �/b2, the cl- ft is pinned
ing move, as it helps White to double .§.s­ and forms a fine target.
or to develop his �- .§. elsewhere. 7Z .. Nxd4 18. Bxd4 Bxd4! Better than

- 51 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
getting off a pair of .§s, for now Black is able difference that the two c- ft s
to threaten ...RfeBon Move 20. With .\ls on
opposite colors, exchanges for their own
sake are wrong.
79. QfeZ (If 79. Rfe 7, ... e5 20. Re2 RhB;
and if 27. Q,d5, say, ...Rh5, doubling on the
b-file with great effect.) The ft at e5 estab­
lishes Black's .ll where it dominates the
board.
79... Qfa2 (after 19. Qxe7) 20. Q§2. Prac­
tically forced, for Black threatens ...RfeB,
and White's �- � cannot develop while the and the �s are off (cancel them out, as the
f- ft is menaced. 20... Qfe2 27. Bxe2 Rd6. �s were both developed pieces), and White's
White is now at a distinct disadvantage, .§ is on d2 instead of d 1. This difference
apart from his ft minus, for he cannot means that White will need only one move
double �s (if Rd2, . ..Bxj2t; and if Rd3, to double .§s instead of two. He has been
...RfeB!, also winning) . .\ls on opposite col­ presented with a clear tempo.
ors come nowhere near ensuring him against There followed 16... Nxd4 17. Bxb7
loss, for all the .§s cannot be got off. We 0-0 18. Rfd1 Rd7 19. Bxd4 Bxd4 20. Bc6
give one possible continuation just as an Rd6 21. Rxd4 Rxc6. Now White draws by
example. 22. Rh 7 a5 23. Rh3 a4 24. Ra3 Ra8 Rd7 ( .§ on the seventh rank), but had White
25. Rh 7 Bc5 26. Ra2 (if 26. Rc3, ...Rd2 2Z Bf3 not had that extra tempo, and played the
Ra5) a3 2Z Rh3 Rh6! same way, Black would have captured first,
This exchange is offered to free the .\l, and would forestall Rd7by ...RftB threaten­
which aims at b2. Black should then win, ing ...Rc7, winning. In other words, Black
owing to the superior mobility of his � . would be able to keep equilibrium in devel­
While development still remains un­ opment, and this, as usual, would make the
completed the habit of thinking in tempos ft plus decisive.
is a valuable one to acquire, for during that In conclusion, we invoke Alekhine.
phase of the game a tempo has a pretty The observant student of Alekhine's games
constant value, varying roughly between a can see that his favorite way of exploiting a
third and a half of a ft . For the benefit of the ft plus is to seize an opportunity of return­
beginner, we explain that a tempo is the ing the ft for an equivalent positional gain.
time-value of a move. It is what you lose if He just goes on remorselessly making the
your development is held up for a move most of his position, and only exchanges for
(while your opponent's goes ahead), or what the endgame where he can do so without
you gain if you yourself make a developing making any positional concessions.
move and he does not.
As an illustration of what a tempo can
do, let us see what a difference it made to
Koshnitsky's game against Crawl.
After 14... cxd4 15. cxd4 Qxd2 16.
Rxd2 you see that White has gained a
tempo? We have the original position with
the same player to move (Black), with the

- 52 -
 His Writings
THE SNARE OF THE SWOP
This article shows the evil of a time-losing exchange.
In the diagrammed position, the very natural but time-losing exchange 10... Bxc4?
decided the Victorian Championship!
A.A. Faul (to play his I Oth)
G.R. Lamparter
The position is very instructive. First of
all, there may still be some new readers
who do not see that a tempo is lost: the
point is that after one move on each side
(10 ... Bxc4 11. Nxc4) a developed A on
each side has left the board, and a white �
has moved into play-net result, White has
gained a tempo in development on Black.
Any exchange of two equally devel­
oped pieces loses a tempo if the opponent
recaptures with a developing move. If he
recaptures with a non-developing move, no
time is lost or gained; such an exchange
would be Bxe6 in this position if it were
White's move, Black replying with .. .fe6, a
non-developing move (as it helps no piece
into play).
Black was tempted to exchange by the
prospect of quickly playing ...Nd5-the �
must move to allow the dark-squared A to
come out, and d5 is clearly the �'s right
square. And he saw that if 10... Nd5 at once,
White would answer Ng5, forcing an ex-
- 53 -
change of � for A which would be unfa­
vorable to Black.
And perhaps Black thought, "Why
should I worry about the rights and wrongs
of this when I can dispose of the burden­
some Bishop at once simply by exchanging
it?" He took the lazy way, the way of "sim­
plification." But frequently the wages of
simplification is death, and so it was here.
Black did not "think in tempos," as we
want our students to do. That is, he did not
reflect that after 10... Nd5 11. Ng5 White
himself lost a tempo in development by his
move of an already-developed �. There
was thus a difference of two whole tempos
between this way and the way chosen, and
the unfavorableness of parting with the A
for a &2) and getting a slightly weak ft (at e6)
could never be as unfavorable, in the open­
ing, as the loss of two tempos (the equiva­
lent of a whole flank ft). Thus, without any
analysis at all, Black could have dismissed
10. . Bxc4 as inferior to 10. . Nd5.
. .
However, some analysis will be very
instructive.
Demonstration by Analysis
After 10 ... Bxc4 11. Nxc4, some readers
may wonder why Black should lose. If we
count up the number of moves each side
needs to complete its development, we find
that White needs only four ( d3, A moves,
-Qy moves, 'Uy- );:! moves-his �- );:! is already
on an effective file), while Black needs no
fewer than six. It is Black's move, so we take
off half a tempo, leaving White 1- 112 tern-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
pos ahead. That is, White is only one tempo
off a winning advantage already. White also
has two spatial advantages, his threat of
posting a 4) in Black's vitals at d6 (after
Ng5-e4 if necessary) and his mobile ad­
vanced .fts. Black has some advanced .fts,
too, but they are not so mobile, as White is
going to blockade them by d3.
What a different tale there is to tell
after 10... Nd5, the straightforward develop­
ing move! White is only half a tempo ahead,
for he now needs an extra move to com­
plete his development (his 'lt;t-4) cannot
count itself developed on the miserable
square a3). A corollary is that the possibility
of posting a White 4) at d6 is "off." Further­
more, White's advanced e- .ft is blockaded.
Let us see what would have happened:
70... Nd5 77. Ng5 b5 (the student should see
how ... Qg7?? would lose the game, and
...Be7? a .ft ) 12. Nxe6 fxe6 73. Bd3! This
threatens Q,h5f and is the only move to
cause Black any worry. Now that Black's
light-squared � has vanished, White's is a
great force. However, White is backward in
development, his 'lt;t-4) being especially
feeble, and Black has equal chances-better
than a forced loss, which 10... Bxc4 gave
him! After 13... g6(practically forced), Black's
right course will be ... Qg7, ...Be7, and ... 0-0-0!
followed, as soon as may be, by ...g5! to
break White's .ft center or open the g-flle
- 54 -
for attack. Note that 'lt;t-side castling is safe
enough, for Black will answer a4 later with
... b4, blocking the 'lt;t-wing completely, e.g.,
13. Bd3 g6 14. Be4 Qj,7 15. d3 Be7 16. Qg4 0-
0-0 17. h4!? (to stop . ..g5) RdgB! 18. Nc2 h6
79. a4? (if Bxg6?, ...Bxh4) b4, followed by
. . .g5, which White can no longer stop.
Thinking In Tempos
Thinking in tempos helps to make chess
easy, but remember it is not always exact,
for a "developing" move that puts a piece
on its second-best square is not as good as
one that puts it on its best square; some
rough allowances have to be made. Still,
our rule of counting a tempo as worth a
third of a center .ft and half a flank .ft -in
the opening only-will be found a useful
guide. Remember, it is only in the opening
that a tempo can be given a standard value .
When both sides have developed their
forces, the value of a tempo usually tends to
diminish, at least temporarily, for one's big
job for the time being is complete, and as
Nimzovich puts it, there is a difference in
going to sleep over your work, and after it!
Indeed, you cannot strictly be said to lose
or gain a tempo at all unless there is some
job on hand which asks to be done in good
time, e.g., development, an attack, a defen­
sive maneuver, getting a .ft to the queening
rank, etc.
 His Writings

GENERAL ENDGAME STRATEGY

The endgame starts when the forces are so reduced that mating attacks are off. That
being so, it is virtually impossible for either side to win without ultimately queening a ft .
Therefore, the object of mate is replaced by the object of queening a ft . Why does this
object rarely engage our attention in the middle game? Well, the great number of moves
necessary and the assistance required from pieces-first of all to make a passed ft , and
then to get it to the queening rank-would give the opponent time for a vital attack, owing,
directly or indirectly, to the vulnerability of our 'it>. With that vulnerability removed, we
are free to concentrate on queening.
Nevertheless, just as we don't open the tioned that the most important squares in
game with the idea of checkmating-see the endgame, apart from center squares,
"Law of Combat" [Ed.: will be reprinted in are squares in front of passed fts. Note here
"CJS. Purdy's Fine Art of Chess Annotation that it does not always require a superiority
Vol. 2 '}-neither do we start off in the end­ of force to help on a passed ft . If you have
game with the idea of rushing fts forward a passed ft on e5/e4 and want to play it to
before everything else. If we do, the fts will e6/e3, you only need to have the same
simply be cut off and foully murdered. No, number of pieces commanding e6/e3 that
we must "develop," i.e., get all our fighting your opponent has. This tells us that the
pieces in as good positions as possible. efficient way of stopping a passed ft is to
And now the 'it> is a fighting piece. "blockade" it, i.e., place a piece right on
This follows from our definition of the end­ e6/e3 itself, provided it cannot easily be
game. He is no longer vulnerable to mate, driven off.
except by easily avoidable accidents-and For example, white passed ft at a4,
should therefore be used to the full. white E! behind it at al, black E! some­
If you already have a passed ft , how­ where. Now it will pay Black to play his E!
ever, it is occasionally good to advance it to a5, if possible, for then he not only block­
even with "development" incomplete, in ades the ft itself, but ensures that the white
order to draw away enemy pieces. But if E( will command only three squares of the
you have only a majority of fts, which must a-file, i.e., only three ranks, while Black
all advance before a passed ft can be made commands four. Reducing the mobility of
at all, it is the height of folly to move them enemy �s, and increasing that of one's own
without developing as fully as possible first. �s, is the main secret of � endings.
fts, of course, are real acquisitions in The position diagrammed occurred in
the endgame, whereas in the middlegame a challenge match in Sydney.
they were only obstructions and valuable
merely on account of the prospect of an
endgame. But even in the endgame, ft
sacrifices to gain time, especially time for
advancing a passed ft , are very frequent.
In "The Law of Combat" it was men-

- 55 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
J. Cornforth (to move)
A.E. )eater
Black is two its up, and should win.
Cornforth, becoming careless, decided to
offer exchange of .§s in order to play ...a5,
etc., and get two united passed its. The play
went 1... Re5? 2. Rd6 a5 3. g5 Kh5? Thus,
Black reasoned, I shall get it for it . But this
maneuver contravenes a cardinal maxim of
rtl play: Don't play the King to the side of the
board. Rarely does a it pay for the time lost.
4. gxf6 Kxh4? 5. Kf4! And White
wins, owing to his threats of mate, e.g., 5...
ReB 6. f7 threatening Rh6 mate. Or 5... Rh5
6. Rd1!, etc. If 5... e3, 6. Kxe5 e2 7. Rd4t, etc.
Black lost because he evolved a plan
out of his own fancy instead of out of the
nature of endgames. His plan was too slow.
Black had an advanced passed it , and
his first thought should have been to use it,
just as in the middlegame a mass of pieces
round your opponent's rt/ makes you look
first for a mating attack. Clearly 7 ... c3 fails.
Therefore you look at ...Rc6first, and quickly
see that you can paralyze White's .§ . We
have 7 ... Rc6! 2. Kxe4 c3 3. Rd1 c2 4. Rc1.
This is a good time to mention
Tarrasch's Rule once again: Whether an ad­
vanced pawn is your own or the enemy s, your
Rook is best placed behind it.
The reason is that the further the it
advances, the more squares on the file are
given to the .§ behind it. The point that an
enemy .§ in front of a it stops it advancing
- 56 -
altogether is of relatively small importance.
If the .§s were transposed in this posi­
tion (the position after 4. Rcl), Black could
win by checking, but White could have
played in such a way as to avoid this. With
no safe check available, the black .§ /cl
would be powerless.
As it is, the passed it is stopped, but
the white .§ is paralyzed while the black .§
has the freedom of the board. Black wins
either by ...Rc3 or . . Rc4f.
.
This ending illustrates two principles­
( I) that the lord of the endgame is the
passed it ; (2) that .§ endings are largely
decided by the number of squares com­
manded by the respective .§s.
Note the word "advanced" in our ver­
sion of Tarrasch's Rule. If the passed it is
only at a4/a5, an enemy .§ is obviously
best placed on the square immediately in
front of it, i.e., "blockading it." For then the
supporting .§ is confined to his three back
ranks. If the it is at a3/a6 or a2/a4, the
blockade is still better. It is not the blockade
of the it that matters; it is the blockade of
the supporting .§ ! The principle of it -block­
ade in the middlegame is just the same.
BOOK STUDY
During his tour in the Northern Dis­
tricts, Mr. Koshnitsky emphasized that while
it paid to devote a little study to the open­
ings, study of the endgames paid better.
"Don't talk disparagingly of 'book' play­
ers," he said; "it is only book players that
are any good!"
Endgames are themselves of immense
practical importance. But for beginners and
average players, the study of endgames has
an added value. It helps your middlegame
play. In the middlegame, the basic prin­
ciples are at first obscured by a multitude of
pieces; in the endgame, they shine out
clearly. If you want to learn juggling, you
start with two oranges-not a snooker set.
 His Writings
SOME VITAL PRINCIPLES ILLUSTRATED White is a ft up, but cannot keep it.
Black's )"( has an open board, while White's
The Rook has not. White's first care is therefore to
The following simple but most instruc­ open up an avenue of attack. This is easy.
tive little endgame occurred in the simulta­ How?
neous exhibition given by the writer at the 1 . h5
Metropolitan Social Chess Club. Still cover the moves below. Black now
Mr. H.F. Pike, one of the heroic 60-odd has two ways of capturing a ft ; either . .Rxc4,
.

who braved flood-rain and cyclone, proved which leaves him still a ft down after 2.
invulnerable till the following )"( ending hxg6 and makes his f- ft isolated, or else
was reached, when he fell into an error ...Rh4t, which regains the ft and leaves
which not manyplayers could have avoided. White's )"( still "biting on granite." Which?­
It illustrates the following three vital And why?
principles of endgame strategy: 1. ... Rh4t?
1. In Rook endings, become the aggressor at Like 99 players out of a hundred in
all costs. Two fts up will frequently not win a over-the-board play, Black is tempted by
)"( ending, while no fts up with a strong the bait of equalizing the material; but this
initiative nearly always will. move loses the game. For the Ws are both
2. The W is a champion ft blockader. on the w-side, so that passed fts on the
Therefore, prefer to havepassedpawns on the side w-side will be easily blockaded, whereas
where the enemy King does not stand. Two i;¥-side passed fts will be deadly. Also, the
united passed fts on the sixth/third rank black )"( is taken out of play (at h4) for one
win unaided against )"( , �' or � in any move, whereas at c4 he would still be free as
position, but a W in front of them stops the mountain air.
them easily. Black should have disarmed White on
3. Rook and pawn on the seventh/second the i;¥-side by 1.. . Rxc4. Then 2. hxg6 Kg7 3.
rank with the enemy King confined to his back Rxj5 Kxg6. Black is now a ft down, but his
rank, twofiles or more away, win against prac­ )"( is so mobile (threatening both .. Rc2 and
.

tically any power on earth. . ..Re4) that he draws easily.

As always, cover the moves below the 2. Kgl Rxh5
diagram with a card-otherwise you derive 3. Rd2
less benefit. Then look at the diagram. So White gets an avenue just the same!
3. ... f4
H.F. Pike 4. Rd7
White should win, for he gets passed
ft s on the i;¥-side and has the additional
advantage of "Rook on the seventh/second
rank absolute." That is, he not only has the
glorious seventh rank, but he confines
Black's W to the eighth-see Rule (3) above.
If Black had a sheltering ft on f7 or g7, he
could emerge, but now his confinement is
"absolute."
4. ... Rxe5
Purdy (to play) Feeble would be 4 .. a5; White would
.

- 57 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
get a passed ft all the sooner by Rh 7. In El ­ suppose Black has his El on his back rank.
versus- El endings, where you have the In order to queen his ft , White must play
choice, take or attack rather than attempt to run his )':'! to the eighth rank, and he cannot do
away or defend. Pawns cannot escapefrom Rooks this until his El is on the file adjacent to the
by running away. ft .
5. Rxa7 g5 12. h4
6. b4 g 4 13. b6 h3
7. Kf2 Re3 14. gxh3 f3
To play ...g3fwithout White answering 15. b7 Resigns
Kj3. This ft race is no use, because of Rule For if ...g2f, 16. Kf2 Re2f 17. Kxj3 g1=Q.
(2); but any attempt to disarm White on the 18. bB=Qj and mates.
�-side comes too late. See next note. Emphasis has been laid on the impor­
8. a4 g3t tance of attacking in El endings, even at the
9. Kf1 cost of material. The general reason is that a
El is too valuable a force to waste on de­
fense. A defensive task ties him down.
But another reason is that a El has a
special advantage not possessed by a A or a
1£): he moves in the same direction as a ft . This
makes him very good at:
1. attacking enemy fts;
2. backing up non-blockaded passed
fts on their way to queening.
For once a El gets on a ft's file, he
9. ... Re4 commands every square along that ft's
Instructive is ....Rc3 10. a5! bxa5 17. b5 route. Consequently, an isolated ft cannot
Rb3 12. c5! Rxb5 13. c6 Rc5 14. c7. The ft escape from a El , and a passed ft backed
must queen, because Black's ra; is confined to up by a El can keep advancing even though
his back rank. See why that makes all the every square on its route is under fire, so
difference? If 9... Rb3, 10. c5 wins.1 long as it is not blockaded, i.e., walled up by
10. Rc7? a piece directly in front of it.
10. a5, making a passed ft quickly,
wins much sooner. The Passed Pawn
10. h5 That the endgame begins and ends
1 1. a5 bxa5 with the passed ft cannot be too often
12. b5! reiterated. Mere superiority in material goes
On principle, it is best to have your El for nothing when there is a dangerous passed
on the file adjacent to the passed ft . For ft in the offing. Below is a classical ex­
when both El and ft are on the seventh, ample.

1 Ed.: It's not quite so obvious to most ofus, but in lieu of Purdy' s remarks two paragraphs
down, it would seem that the win is in: 10 . . . bxc5 1 1. b5! Rb4 12. Rc7 c4 13. a5 Rxb5
1 4. a6 Ra5 15. a7 +-; if l l . . . c4 12. Rc7 c3 13. Ke2 Rb4 14. Rxc3 Rxa4 15. Rb3 Ra2t
16. Kf3 Rf2t 1 7. Ke4 f3 18. b6 fxg2 19. b7 Re2t 20. Kf5 Re8 2 1 . b8=Q

- 58 -
 His Writings
By the way, a few striking examples the hostile camp (A) .
fully discussed are much better than a large 2 7. Rf6
number that soon flit from one's mind. I 28. hxg6 hxg6
find that what helps me most in endgame 29. Rhl
play is the memory of a few such positions White plays logically to utilize his ad­
which have seized my imagination; the prin­ vantage on the �-side, and very properly
ciples which they have impressed on me does not concern himselfwith the weakness
have come to my aid in endgames quite of his �-side. Black, on the other hand,
unlike the actual position remembered; in­ makes a defensive move which he could
deed, I would usually be quite unable to set perhaps have omitted (R).
up the "remembered" position exactly. And 29. RJ8
I think most people have this sort of vague 30. Rh7 Rc6
picture-mind. 3 1. g4!
It will be interesting to compare Anxious natures might have moved
Alekhine's notes from the Book of the New the � towards the �-side, but Capablanca
York Tournament 7924 with Reti's in Masters adheres to the principle of aggression that
ofthe Chessboard. governs .§ endings (R).
3 1.•.. Nc4
Tartakover 32. g5!
He gives his opponent the opportunity
of winning a ft . But Capablanca has confi­
dence in the passed ft which he obtains
(R).
Threatening Rh6 followed by f5, and
against it there is nothing to be done (A).
32. ... Ne3 t
33. Kf3 Nf5
Or 33... Ndl 34. Rh6 Kj7 35. f5 Rxc3 36.
fxg6f KgB 3Z Ke2 Nb2 38. Bf5 with an easy
Capablanca (to play his 2 7th) win (A).
34. Bxf5
Each side has a �, so it is a question of Simple and compelling (A).
who can attack first. If it were Black's move, 34. ... gxf5
he would have time for the file-opening 35. Kg3!!
move ... c5, followed by depredations with It is extremely instructive to see how
his .§ . But White has the move. What is his Capablanca is no longer in the least con­
corresponding file-opener? Clearly another cerned about material equality, but thinks
file must be opened, for the e-file offers little only of supporting his passed ft (R) .
prospect; the black � defends the end of it, Decisive! White sacrifices material in
and eS would be a feeble post, as Black order to obtain the classical position with
would easily secure himself with . .. c6. �lf6, ft /g6, and .§/h7, whereupon the
Notes ending (R) by Reti; notes ending black fts tumble like ripe apples (A) .
(A) by Alekhine. 35. Rxc3t
2 7. h5! 36. Kh4! Rf3
This is the calamity-the .§ now enters 37. g6 Rxf4t

- 59 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
38. Kg5 Re4 46. Rxa7 Rgl
39. Kf6! 47. Kxd5 Rcl
It is a frequently available finesse in 48. Kd6 Rc2
such positions not to capture hostile fts, but 49. d5 Rcl
to pass them by in order to be protected in 50. Rc7 Ral
the rear against checks by the )':( (R). 51. Kc6 Rxa4
39. Kgl 52. d6 Resigns
40. Rg7t Kh8 In the words of Reti, Capablanca's
41. Rxc7 Re8 management of this endgame . . .
42. Kxf5
Again the simplest. Kj7 would not yet ...gives the impression of being so
have been disastrous because of RdB, etc. natural that one easily forgets the
(A) . difficulty of such precise play. The
42. Re4 difficulty is chiefly psychological.
43. Kf6 Rf4t In chess, as in life, one is so accus­
44. Ke5 Rg4 tomed to place value on the mate­
45. g7t Kg8 rial factors that it is not easy to
Mter exchanging )':(s, White would win conceive the idea of indulging in
still more easily (R). pawn sacrifices when there is so
little available material.

- 60 -
 His Writings

PLAY WITH THE PIECES

We all play a great deal of rotten chess-some more than others-and one of the roots
of the trouble is the tyranny of the .ft. .
There are still many players whose idea of winning a game of chess consists in
grabbing a .ft. and struggling through somehow to an endgame-where, they fondly
believe, a .ft. plus is an automatic win. Here we see the tyranny of the .ft. in its vilest and
most nauseating form. But there are degrees, and even in master play we find weak moves
being made through an insufficient contempt for .ft.s.
To get away from the tyranny of the .ft., you need to start looking at chess from an
entirely new angle. Picture the game more as a hand-to-hand struggle between the pieces.
The woodshifter, as the name implies, sees the pieces as blocks of wood, whereas the real
player, whose eye "in a fine frenzy rolling, cloth glance from heaven to earth, from earth
to heaven," sees them as units of energy which he can combine in beautiful ways, just as
the musical composer can build up bewitching melodies out of a scale of mere sounds,
each in itself no more interesting than a wooden chess figure.
Don't look at chess in this way because it is romantic. It is, but look at chess this way
because it is the way to win. Contrary to the general notion, a positional advantage-that
is, a better disposition of your forces generally-is always easier to exploit than an
equivalent advantage in material, even for the weakest player. Even in the endgame, a
positional advantage will more readily win. If your pieces are poorly posted in an
endgame, a .ft. plus is frequently insufficient to win. On the other hand, the very slightest
positional advantage in an endgame will often grow and grow like a snowball-without
any mistakes by the opponent-until a win is easily forced.
Thus we see that a .ft. + is not the ideal sort of advantage even for an endgame. And
in the middlegame, it is usually no help at all. So by winning a .ft. at a heavy cost in
position, you are deliberately making the middlegame hard for yourself, for the sake of
something that should not turn out to be of much use even if you get to an endgame,
assuming that your opponent retains his positional advantage. Surely a silly, as well as
despicable, way of playing chess!
We can now see why Alekhine was always so anxious, after winning a .ft. , to return it
for an advantage in position. One often hears about Alekhine's "dynamic" style. "Dy­
namic" is just a clever way of saying that he plays with the pieces.

with a single move. It was made by Capa­

A DYNAMIC MOVE blanca against Lasker at St. Petersburg, 1914.
I can illustrate what I mean by "play­ The diagram shows the position with Capa­
ing with the pieces" or "dynamic chess" blanca to play.

- 61 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Lasker
Capablanca (to play his 1 9th)
Before reading past this paragraph,
think what move you would play here, or
rather, what you would have played if you
had not been told there was something
special.
Tarrasch says in the book of the tour­
ney that 99 players out of a hundred would
have played 19. Nj3, and his computation
cannot be far out. It looks so obvious! In
one move, the 4J can develop himself, free
the lt and protect a ft which Black is
threatening to capture.
The fallacy in this reasoning-truly a
popular one-is that the ft needs defending.
Capablanca rebelled against the tyr­
anny of the it and looked at the position
from the viewpoint of the pieces. Undoubt­
edly the 4J should move, thus freeing both
himself and the -'1,, but where to? What
square gives him the most power? Thus
Capablanca was led to play:
19. Ne4!!
At e4 the 4J has a far better range than
at f3. Most important, he counters Black's
natural developing move ...Bc5, and threat­
ens, after defending the e- ft by f4, to win a order to avoid a drawish symmetry.
ft himself by Nc3. And if Black takes the
e- ft at once, he loses a valuable tempo in 2 [Ed.: Black caves in. Even moves like 2 1 . . .
development, enabling White to get all his
pieces into beautifully aggressive positions.
The game continued:
19. ... Rxe5
- 62 -
Played only because anything else loses.
20. Rd1 Be7
21. f3!
This quiet move shows how silly it is to
lose your head just because you have given
up a ft . Some players think they have to
institute a desperate attack. Here White
simply supports his 4J on its center square,
frees the back line from mating threats,
prepares the way for � development later,
and threatens Bf4-the last being, of course,
the most important.
21. ... Rf52
22. Rc8
And Black must give up the c- ft , as
... c5would lose by 23. RcxdBfand 24. Nd6f.
When you have a strong initiative in
pieces, you will always arrive at a position,
like this one, where the opponent is forced
to disgorge his ill-gotten gains, often with
interest.
A FAMOUS EXAMPLE
There is no better illustration of "play­
ing with the pieces" than Capablanca's 15th
to his 25th moves in his game against Nim­
zovich at St. Petersburg, 1914. We give the
play leading up to the crucial stage, as it
bears on the discussion.
Nimzovich-Capablanca
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Nc3 Nf6
4. Bb5 d6
Black submits to temporary cramp in
c6 or 2 1 . . . 0-0, in spite of White's Bf4,
seem more survivable than 2 1 . . . Rf5.
2 1 . . . c6 22. Bf4 Rd5 23. Rel (23. Rcl ?! f5
24. Nc3) 0-0 24. Real +.]
 His Writings
5. d4 Bd7
6. Bxc6!? Bxc6
7. Qd3 exd4
8. Nxd4 g6!?
More solid was . ..BeZ
9. Nxc6 bxc6
10. Qa6 Qd7!
Probably Nimzovich hoped that Capa­
blanca would play 10. . . c5? to save a ft .
Then White would get a positional advan­
tage instead, by 11. Qs6f Nd7 12. Bg5!
Rather than submit to a marked posi­
tional disadvantage, always give up mate­
rial. The loss of a ft ; the Exchange for a ft ;
or ¥f1 for � , A and ft : all these cause
absurdly disproportionate alarm to the ma­
jority of players. So long as you have a little
positional superiority in compensation, there
is not the slightest need to become timorous
or desperate.
1 1. Qb7 ReS
12. Qxa7 Bg7
Let us take stock. How many tempos
for the ft ? The white ¥f1 has so far lost three
moves, and will have to lose another in
getting back to safety. The black � has lost
one, and will have to return to a8, making a
total of two moves gone West. Thus Black
has gained two tempos for the ft . This is
quite enough for a flank ft in general, in the
opening, but here we must remember that
White has gained the very definite advan­
tage of a passed ft . Furthermore, White's
fts are nearly all unmoved, displaying few
weaknesses. All in all, any woodshifter
- 63
Bewitching - Hypnotic
Purdy doesn't even comment on Lasker's
21... Rf5?! and yet authors sueh as S.
Tarrasch (in hls writings of the tourna­
ment) refer to Lasker's hypnotic influence
because Tarrasch says "Lasker bewitehes
his opponents! And not only his oppo­
nents, but the whole chess world! Capa­
blanca, and after mm the entire chess
world, did not see that he could have won
the Knight and thereupon probably the
game with 22. g4 Rxf3 23. Kg2 Rb3 24.
Nc5 Rb4 25. Nb7... the power of sugges­
tion (upon Capablanca) that Lasker ex­
erted over him, with the strange move
Rf5, in the place of which castling was
objectively better." Basically it seems Purdy
missed 22. g4 also whlle it is very doubtful
Lasker did. However, moves like 2L. c6
and Tarrasch's suggestion of21 . . . 0-0 seem
to hold the position. Purdy also fails to
mention that Lasker drew this game in
lOO moves! The funny thing is that Purdy
mentions this on the previous page. Inter­
estingly, editor Dale Brandreth notes that
Tarrasch's comments were excised in the
Leipzig 1921 edition, possibly because the
German publication Deutsches W�
{July 19, 1914) believes Black obtains the
advantage with 25... 0-0 26. Nxd8 Rg4t
27. K-any, and 27 .. . f5 with the threat
... Bd6 and .. .g5. Also interesting is that
after White's 27th move D. W. says "Ap­
parently, however, Lasker has been be­
witched here by Capablanca." Even
though Purdy's original purpose in this
article was to commend Capablanca's spirit
for ignoring the protection ofthe pawn on
:e5, it may have been temperate to have
shown just how complicated this position
really is and to note how "psychological"
considerations can, at any time, raise their
head over all the objectivity one can try to
muster.
Editor
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection

would consider himself in clover in White's 16. f3 Nd7

position. 17. Bd2 Ne5!
In what follows, we are not concerned 18. Qe2 Nc4
with improvements that might have been If now 19. b3?, ...Bd4f 20. Kh1 Nxd2
made in White's defense. All we want to followed by ... Qs5, winning a piece.
show is that Nimzovich played quite rea­ 19. Rab1 Ra8
sonably all the time, and yet found himself 20. a4
with a dead loss in a dozen more moves. Playing to save the precious passed ft ,
The point that needs emphasizing is that, which would be lost after 20. b3 Nxd2 21.
no matter whether you are a ft up or not, it ()Jd2 RaJ. But this greed seals White's doom.
is always very difficult to play correctly 20. Nxd2!
when the enemy has the initiative. This is 21. Qxd2 Qc4
simply because he calls the tune; you have 22. Rfd1 Reb8!
to allow for a hundred and one things that Not satisfied with merely regaining his
he might possibly do, and under a time ft with advantage, Black puts on more
limit this is a very serious handicap. You pressure.
may feel you ought to win, but you are 23. Qe3
playing against loaded dice. So it is here If 23. Qj3, ···0"5f and then ...Rh4!
with White. 23. Rb4
13. 0-0 0-0 24. Qg5 Bd4t
14. Qa6 Rfe8 25. Kh1 Rab8!
It will now be seen why White chose to White is now completely jammed. In
bring back his ¥k via a6. At e3 (the alterna­ desperation, he decides to give up the Ex­
tive square), it would have been badly change.
placed, and would have had to shift any- 26. Rxd4 Qxd4
way. 27. Rd1 Qc4
15. Qd3 28. h4 Rxb2
With the quite sensible idea of killing Unlike most ft -hunts in the opening,
two birds with one stone-defending the this one of Nimzovich's was quite sound
e- ft and centralizing the ¥/1. and correct. And yet it led to disaster. Fail­
Now, how is Black to proceed? It is ing to start off correctly, with 14. f3!, which
easily seen that he has no combination avail­ would have given his ¥/1 a retreat at f2 when
able. Therefore, he must depend on a plan. needed, he just drifted imperceptibly to
To do this, he enumerates the weaknesses perdition. How much more likely are you
and strengths of each side. This reconnais­ to lose when the ft -grab is of a more doubt­
sance should show him that he has but one ful character!
advantage that is at all permanent-his com­ Therefore, when in doubt, don't!
mand of the long dark diagonal. He must
try to make White move his ¥/1-flank fts
forward so as to accentuate this advantage.
Above all, Black must achieve this design
with a succession of smites if possible, else
White will complete his development, leav­
ing Black with no advantage at all.
15. ... Qe6!

- 64 -
 His Writings

THE PLAY FOR POSITION AFTER THE OPENING

It is extremely difficult to play a perfect opening, but quite easy to play a reasonably
good opening. To play a reasonably good middlegame is far less easy.
The reason is that in the opening your object is always the same-development. But
when development is completed you have to find a new object, and that object depends
on the position.
Having discovered a good object-say the posting of a � on c5/c4-you seek moves
that will fit in with your object. This is planning, or position play.
But-this is where the books fail to warn the student-before you begin looking for a
plan, make sure there is no good combination available, i.e., a forcing line of play starting
with a threat. You can do so much more with a combination than a plan; therefore, at
every move in every game you play, look first for a combination.

List of Combination Motifs and the
Normal Ways of Taking Advantage of
Them
1. Exposed King. Expose him more.
2. Castled King without a protectingpiece
(such as a � on f3/f6/c3/c6). Quick sacri­
fice of a piece to bring about mate.
3. Any undefended unit. Fork it, pin
something on the line of it, or attack it to
gain a tempo.
4. Forkable units. Fork them.
5. Masked battery. Unmask.
6. Big pieces on some file, rank, or diago­
nal. Pin.
7. Pinned unit. Attack it.
8. Any tied unit, e.g., piece protecting
another piece or back row from mate, etc.
Attack it or put something en prise to it.
Assuming that there is no sound com­
bination available-there rarely is one early
in the game, unless your opponent has done
something rather silly-and also assuming
that you have no more pieces to be devel­
oped, your problem is to find a plan-a
good plan, and if possible the best plan.
The first step in finding a plan is to
enumerate the weaknesses and strengths of
each side.
List of Possible Weaknesses and the
Normal Way of taking Advantage of
Each
1. Weak squares. Post pieces on them.
2. Weak pawns. Fix them, and then
make the opponent use pieces to defend
them.
3. Pawn moved in front of castled King.
pawn storm, provided stormer's W is not
endangered.
4. Confinedpieces. Prevent freeing.
5. Generally cramped game. Keep
cramped; prevent freeing moves.
6. Backward development without cramped
game, i.e., pieces as yet undeveloped but
with good squares free to them (no disad­
vantage in space, only time). Look again to
see if there is a combination; if not, use your
temporary superiority as best you can.
List of "Strengths" and
Normal Ways of Removing Each
1. Well-posted piece. Exchange.
2. Greater terrain. ft -advance to gain
space.
3. Greater elasticity. Loosen your own
position.
4. Control ofcenter. ft -challenge.

- 65 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
AIM OF PLAN
A plan will aim at one or more of the
following four objectives, according to rela­
tive importance and feasibility, and accord­
ing to which side has the initiative. For
example, if you have a strong initiative you
do not, for preference, set about trying to
remove your own weaknesses, if any, but
rather to exploit the opponent's.
The four possible objectives:
1. Exploiting enemy weakness(es).
2. Removing enemy strength(s).
3. Removing your own weakness(es) .
4. Establishing your strength(s).
PRACTICAL EXAMPLE
In actual practice, planning always
works out much more simply than these
lengthy tables and lists would make it ap­
pear. As a rule, only two or three of the
listed phenomena will occur in any one
position.
Our first example is from the match
Capablanca-Lasker, Havana 1921, for the
world's championship.
Capablanca-Lasker
13. Rfd1 Bd7
Observe that at every stage where it
was feasible to make a developing move,
White has done so-with the sole exception
of 3. c4, which, however, is a move made for
the ultimate purpose of development (by its
aid, White gets useful files for both .§ s).
We advise all players who are not ex­
perts to follow this principle always-except
where the opponent, by a bad move, gives
the opportunity for an early combination.
True, Reti mentions a case where he
was partnering Capablanca in a consulta­
tion game, and Capablanca refused to play
the natural developing move "which Mor­
phy would have played as a matter of
course." Well, a move Morphy would have
played cannot be very bad. In short, the
natural developing move in a position is
always a good move, even if not perfect,
while any other move is usually bad.
As for Black, it is obvious that he is
deliberately giving himself a cramped game
in the desperate hope of inducing White to
overreach himself.
White has now completed his develop­
ment. His next move is the one most play­
ers would make, and requires no comment.
14. e4 Nb6

1. d4 d5
2. N£3 e6
3. c4 Nf6
4. Bg5 Nbd7
5. e3 Be7
6. Nc3 0-0
7. Rcl Re8
The score stood at 3-0 against Lasker,
which accounts for his anxiety to avoid the
beaten track. It is now time to think. First of all, it is
8. Qc2 c6 obvious that no combination is possible.
9. Bd3 dxc4 What then? The � has a choice of four
10. Bxc4 Nd5 squares. As none of these four possible .1;1-
1 1. Bxe7 Rxe7 moves would carry a threat, none is obvi­
12. 0-0 N£8 ously better than the others. It would only

- 66 -
 His Writings
be waste of time to try to calculate the
possible results of each in turn. The thing to
do is to discover what is our correct plan of
campaign, and then make whatever move
fits the plan best.
We first proceed to enumerate the
weaknesses and strengths. In the first place,
White has no weaknesses, and has a pro­
nounced strength in his greater control of
the center. Evidently he has to look out for a
ft challenge by ... c5 or . . . e5 at some stage.
Black's castled W is well protected,
and there is no ft moved in front of it. Nor
has Black any weak fts.
He has weak squares, at d6 and cS. The
only way to take advantage of these would
be by e5 and Ne4, but, as the position now
stands, this would give Black a splendid
post for his �-4) at dS. Therefore, such a
plan belongs to the future rather than the
present, and we must try to drive away
Black's 4J by a4-a5 first, if possible.
Finally, Black has a generally cramped
game.
To this last fact our reaction should be:
Can I keep him cramped? What freeing
moves might he aim at? Answer: .. . c5 or
... e5. Can I prevent them?
We can prevent ... c5by answering ...RcB
with b4.
Thus we have already ruled out one
plausible A move, namely 15. Bb3.
What about the other freeing maneu­
ver, ...Ng6 followed by .. e5? Most players
. 18. a4!
would reason that the only way to stop ... e5
is to meet ...Ng6 by e5 (after all). If this plan
is chosen, then 15. Bd3 seems the move, in
order to use the diagonal if we have to open
it by e5. This idea is quite good, and there is
no reason for a student to become discour­
aged because Capablanca chooses a differ­
ent plan and plays 15. Bfl. Fine shades only
count in master play. The important thing is
to choose a reasonable plan, and play the
move that seems best to fit it.
- 67
15. Bfl
Capablanca's choice of this move sim­
ply shows that he did not intend to meet
15...Ng6by e5 (not caring to give Black dS
gratis), and therefore his A would be merely
an obstruction at d3. Far better at fl, where
it can obstruct nothing.
Capablanca may have intended to al­
low Black to play ... e5, knowing that he
would be able to reap a little advantage
from the opening of lines, being better de­
veloped. More probably, he intended to
stop it by answering 15...Ng6 with 16. h4!,
which indirectly prevents 16... e5because of
1Z h5 exd4 18. hxg6 dcx3 19. gxh7f, since 19. . .
Kxh7 would lose by 20. e5f KgB 21. Ng5
(threatens mate because White's � is not
obstructed by the Bishop!) g6 22. e6!, etc.
But do not get the idea that it is neces­
sary to look so deeply to play chess well. As
already stated, 15. Bd3, intending to meet
. ..Ng6 with e5, is quite a good plan, and
should retain an advantage.
15. ... Rc8
16. b4 Be8
We could now proceed at once with
our plan of driving the black �-.:'£) away
from the command of the square d5, by 1Z
a4, and, once again, this would be quite
good. However, it is a good principle in
chess to consolidate every advance-leave
nothing undefended.
17. Qb3 Rec7
Ng6
19. a5 Nd7
Now our course is obvious.
20. e5 b6
21. Ne4 Rb8
We are now right into the middlegame,
and to go any further would trespass on the
preserves of this article. However, it may
cheer the student to know that Capablanca
did not conduct the entire game like a ma­
chine. Here he should have played either
22. a6 (logical, to prevent all freeing maneu-
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection

vers) or 22. Qg3; but he made what is really Capablanca-Aiekhine

quite an elementary slip, with 22. Qc3? Cambridge Springs Defense
This enables Black, after 22... Nf4, to come
into d5 with a gain of tempo. Black thus 1. d4 d5
obtained quite a playable game, and only 2. c4 e6
lost through mistakes further on. 3. Nc3 Nf6
So much for the "machine-like accu­ 4. Bg5 Nbd7
racy" myth, and there is comfort here. Chess 5. e3 c6
is too big for any man to play perfectly; all 6. NfJ
that any player can aim at is to do his best. The natural developing move. Many
The next example is from the 1 1 th players now consider it a shade better to
game of the Alekhine-Capablanca match prevent the Cambridge Springs by 6. cxd5
of 1927, possibly the greatest game of chess followed by Z Bd3. But that is by the way.
ever played. 6. ... Qa5
It illustrates the most difficult type of 7. Nd2
position play-that is, the management of As is well known, White must inter­
equal positions. rupt development here owing to Black's
Our aim will not be to show how the strong threat of ...Ne4. Particularly rotten is
precise moves chosen by Alekhine and Ca­ Z Bd3 ??, as Z .. Ne4 then wins off hand.
pablanca could all be worked out by an 7. ... Bb4
ordinary player, but simply to show how to 8. Qc2 dxc4
think in such positions. If the student can Here Black interrupts his development
learn to plan logically, he will avoid serious voluntarily. In compensation for the time
errors and recognize such errors when made lost, he forces White to exchange a strong
by his opponent. .Q. for a �.
Again, one must warn the student But the natural developing move 8...
against becoming discouraged when, in spite 0-0 is quite playable, and was adopted by
of his best efforts, he fails sometimes to play Alekhine in a previous game of the same
exactly the same move as a master. It so match.
often happens that one move is almost, if 9. Bx£6 Nx£6
not quite, as good as another; the thing is to 10. Nxc4 Qc7
avoid moves that are really against the spirit l l. a3
of a position. "Putting the question" to a A does not
Don't play this game just for instruc­ count as an interruption in development,
tion. It is really quite thrilling to watch how, unless, of course, the opponent can ex­
without any but the most infinitesimal er­ change off the A without suffering disad­
rors by Capablanca, who plays the game vantage.
splendidly, the balance of power edges by 1 1. ... Be7
almost imperceptible degrees against him, 12. Be2
and how Alekhine ultimately forces a win Here Bd3 is not a bad move, but there
by black magic. is no justification in this position for plan­
ning a �-side attack. Much better to put the
� on the fianchetto diagonal, as Black is
bound to play for ... c5 sometime, and then
that diagonal will come open. The rule for

- 68 -
 His Writings
close games is: simply by 14. Rfd1 or 14. Rac1 on the prin­
Post your pieces where they will become ciple that:
usefol ifthe enemy breaks through in the center. The opening oflines shouldfavor the better
This plan can never fail, for if you thus developed army.
deter the opponent from breaking through, 14. ... b6
that is itself a gain. This move will have to be played some­
But the better method of fianchettoing time if ...c5 is to be enforced. However, )"\
was, as usual, g3 and Bg2 instead of Be2-Bj3. development first was equally good. The
For it decreases one's mobility or elasticity order of moves is frequently vital, but here,
to place a piece infront ofpawns, especially in or a toss-up.
near the center. 15. Bf3 Rac8
True, weakening ft moves can also be 16. Rfd1 Rfd8
dangerous, but here Black must himself 17. Rac1 Be8!
castle on the w-side, and so could hardly
make anything out of the "weakness."
12. ... 0-0
13. 0-0 Bd7
It would be a mistake to fianchetto
here, as Black will have great difficulty in
enforcing ... c5, and until then his ¥11-A would
be a prisoner. If 13... c5 at once, he would
get into trouble through 14. Nb5. The text
prevents this, and therefore threatens ...c5.
Now let us take White's side. His de­ At last development is completed by
velopment is not complete, but White has both sides. This is where many players be­
at least attained the important stage where gin to feel "bushed." But this apparently
his )"is are "connected," i.e., have nothing complicated position all centers around one
between them. simple issue-Black's freeing move, ... c5.
When your Rooks are connected, ifthere is The move is not threatened at the mo­
no open file for one of them to take it is quite ment because of the reply dxc5 bxc5, b5!
permissible to postpone completion of develop­ Black would then have a passed ft , but
ment infavor ofsome other usefol maneuver. efficiently blockaded and therefore value­
In other words, one can consider one­ less for the middlegame, whereas White
self in the middlegame when the opening would have a potential passed ft that would
has got to that stage, and plan accordingly. be very hard indeed to blockade.
Going through the lists given in the Has Black any other feasible freeing
previous article, we soon come to the con­ move? Possibly .. .Nd7 and ...e5, but this is
clusion that Black has only one weakness-a obviously feeble, as White could answer
generally cramped game. . .. Nd7by e4, and if then . . . e5, d5!
Automatically, we look for possible Any other freeing move?
freeing moves by Black. Obviously, . . . c5. Yes, .. Nd5, threatening an exchange.
.

This suggests: Any exchange isfreeing to a cramped game.

14. b4! This suggests 18. e4, which was White's
Even here, however, it would have simplest and possibly best move. If then
been quite good to continue development 18. . . Qf4, threatening to dominate the
- 69 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
�-side, certainly White would be virtually
forced to offer the exchange of '(gs by 19.
Qj2, but Black's other pieces would remain
cramped.
Capablanca evolves a more subtle and
elaborate plan. He decides to permit . . .Nd5,
which will give him time for a regrouping
maneuver by which he hopes to prevent
... c5, and also be able to open a battery onto
the ft /c6. He cannot do this while his �/c4
is in the way.
18. g3
The full point of this will soon come to
light. In a way, it lends weight to our note
on Move 12.
18. . . . Nd5
There is a special point in this threat­
ened exchange. Mter it, White could no
longer play b5, so that it renews the threat of
. . . c5.
19. Nb2!
Now ... c5 is again prevented, e.g., 19. . .
c5? 20. Nxd5 and White wins a ft ; or if first
19... Nxc3, 20. Q!c3 c5. White has time to
utilize the pin of the c- ft by doubling ,§ s
onto it.
But if White had not played g3, Black
could throw a negro [Ed: of course Purdy is
referring to one ofBlack's chessmen.3] into the
woodpile (preferable to a spanner) by .. .Bd6.
This would unpin the c- ft by defending the
'(g, and White would have to lose a move in
protecting his h- ft .
As it is, Black is confined to a passive
unpinning of his c- ft , and Capablanca is
thus able to execute his regrouping plan.
19. ... Qb8
3 [Ed.: Ralph (compiler) and I debated
whether we should leave this in and be
accused of being racist. Neither of us are
racists, but I am not a PC history-revision­
ist. To see Purdy's true conviction on the
subject see the opening remarks of Game
#44.]
- 70 -
20. Nd3
Now ... c5 is directly prevented. Capa­
blanca has played with his customary single­
ness of purpose.
What is Alekhine to do? His plan of
playing ... c5 has been frustrated.
He therefore turns to the possibility of ex­
ploiting some weaknesses in White's position.
The ordinary player would see none,
but Alekhine hath an eagle eye. He sees a
weakness in the point e3!
20. ... Bg5!
This threatens a combination. The
threat is easily parried, but thereby White
must to some extent become fettered. A
very instructive conception!
21. Rb1
White parries the threat by removing
his l"i from danger. If now 21 ... Nxe3!?,
Black merely loses a piece for three fts.
But the vacating of the c-file is itself a
concession to Black. So would have been
21. Qs2- using a ¥tl for a menial task!
21. . .. Qb7
Aiming at a regrouping by . . . Qs7, or in
some variations even ... Qg6.
White now becomes irritated by the
potential combination hanging over him. It
might be described as a drawing-pin of
Damocles. White decides to get clear of it
forever.
22. e4 Nxc3
23. Qxc3
Thus Black has induced White to cre­
ate a rather more definite weakness in his
position, in the undefended cl- ft [Ed.: That
is, it is no longerprotected by the e- ft .] This, in
a measure, makes up for Black's weak c- ft .
Had White played e4 on Move 18, it
would have had the advantage of keeping
Black's � in bondage. Now, with the �
exchanged, the cramping effect of e4 is very
slight, and the weakening of the cl- ft is the
only real result obtained. However, there
was certainly provocation for the advance.
 His Writings
23. ... Qe7 The rest of our notes will be very brief.
24. h4!? 33. Rxd1t
This seriously weakens White's W-side, 34. Rxd1 Bc6
but White feels that something has got to be 35. Re1 Qf5
done. His pieces do not cooperate; the 4), 36. Re3 c4!
which is preventing .. . c5, is at the same time 37. a4 a5!
obstructing a B: and will have to move If 37. .. Bxa4?, 38. ReS! with an attack.
sometime to provide support for the d- ft . 38. Bg2 Bxg2
Capablanca therefore decides on a bold 39. Kxg2 Qd5t
plan for eliminating one of Black's l;ls. 40. Kh2 Qf5
24. ... Bh6 41. Rf3 Qc5
25. Ne5 g6 42. Rf4 Kh7!
Forced. If 42... @4, 43. Qs3 c3 [Ed.: Surely a
26. Ng4 Bg7 Purdy typolerror since 44. Rxb4 Kh7 45. Qs7!
2 7. e5 h5! KgB 46. Rb7 and White wins; 43 . . . @3? 44.
Black is bound to play this to avoid Rxc4!] 44. Rf5!!
Nf6f after ...c5, etc. 43. Rd4 Qc6!!
28. Ne3 c5! 44. Qxa5 c3
At last! 45. Qa7 Kg8
29. bxc5 bxc5 46. Qe7 Qb6!
30. d5 exd5 Work out 46... c2 ? 47. RdBt, etc.
3 1. Nxd5 Qe6 47. Qd7 Qc5
A grisly blunder would be 31 ... Qfe5 ?? 48. Re4
32. Nf6t Bxf6 Only move!
33. exf6 48. Qxf2t
49. Kh3 Rf8
50. Qc6 Qf1 t
51. Kh2 Kh7!
We have ignored some repetitions.
52. Qc4 Qf2t
53. Kh3 Qg1
54. Re2 Qflt
55. Kh2 Qxf6
56. a5 Rd8
57. a6 Qfl
Thus White completes his plan. 58. Qe4 Rd2
Let us take stock. The ft /f6 is a thorn 59. Rxd2 cxd2
in Black's flesh, but Black has lessened its 60. a7 d1=Q
effect by providing a flight square for his 6 1. a8=Q Qg1t
W/h7. 62. Kh3 Qdf1 t
Black has a powerful passed ft . Can White resigned, as Black mates prettily
he force a win? By magnificent chess, he by ... Q,hlf next move.
did, and although the rest of the game is The four ¥/Js make a picturesque fi­
outside the bounds of this article, we are nale.
sure most of our readers will want to see it.

-71 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

COMMON ROOK ENDINGS

1 to the understanding of the most commonly
White w anywhere legal.
Black draws with the move.
2 to defend the ft laterally, but there is no
Either moves.
White wins.
3 by 1. RhB! Rxa 7 2. Rh7f, winning the
White w anywhere legal.
Black draws with the move.
The three positions just given are vital
occurring type of endgame:
a- or h-pawn with its own Rook infront of
it.
It is easy to see why the aggressor )':!
should so often find itself in this awkward
place, i.e., in front of the ft . It has come
down and grabbed some fts, and is then
forced to defend its own passed ft . If that
ft is attacked laterally, the )':! has no alter­
native but to go in front of it; if the ft is
attacked from the rear, the )':! may be able
advantage in that unless the ft has crossed
the middle of the board. By going in front of
the ft , the )':! enables it to advance.
It is when the ft has advanced to the
seventh/second rank that the )':! really feels
the awkwardness of its position. Its mobility
is reduced to a minimum.
Diagram 1 illustrates this. If the )':! has
a safe check, White would win at once if he
had the move. Also, if Black's W were at f7,
e7, or d7, White with the move would win
enemy's )':! .
But as long as Black's W remains at h7
or g7, White can do nothing. As soon as his
W plays up to b6 or b7, defending the ft ,
Black simply checks till the W leaves the ft ,
and then resumes his vigil on the a-file.
In such endings a beginner is often
amazed to see an expert scuttling his W
away for dear life, taking it out of play
instead of into play. He wants to reach the
safe squares.
Evidently, if the defender's W can reach
the safe squares we should bring our ft to a

- 72 -
 His Writings
halt on the sixth rank. This enables our �
to shelter from vertical checks at a7, at the
same time defending the ft ; thus the ag­
gressor t! is freed.
Diagram 2 tells when we can win in
this position. This time, Black's � would
like to be close up; but we must assume that
he has been forced to stay at g7 until a7was
no longer a threat. So he has been able to
get no closer than f7. Black's last move was
obviously ...Rb 1 f, driving the � in front of
its ft ; if Black had let the � stay at b7,
White could have freed his t! without hav­
ing to block the ft with the � at all.
It is now Black's move again, and he
finds his � is just one square too far away.
Thus, 7... Ke7 2. RbB R moves 3. Kb7 Rbl f 4.
KaB! R moves 5. a7and wins easily, either by
Kb7 or, if the � stops that, by RhB and KbB.
But in Diagram 3 we see that Black, by
some crafty device, has transferred his �
from the a-file to the sixth rank. He is still
attacking the passed ft , and instead of ver­
tical checks he can give lateral checks. Now
our � can find no shelter at all.
Ifthepawn were not an a-pawn, he could,
by getting to leeward ofit.
But an a- ft has no lee side. So in
Diagram 3 you can put White's � any­
where legal, and Black will either check it (if
necessary) or take some other suitable square
on the sixth rank.
For example, if the white �/b5 Black
must immediately start checking. And here,
note that it is of vital importance for the
black t! to be at safe checking distance. If
he were at d6 instead of further along, and
the white � could go to b5, all would be
over, e.g., 7... Rd5f 2. Kc6, and there are no
more checks.
Would e6 do? Yes, 1... Re5f 2. Kc6Re6f
3. Kd7, and Black has time for 3 .. Rf6!,
. absolute!). Incidentally, this shows the merit
getting into the diagrammed position. But
g6 or h6 would not! The white � could not
then be checked on the eighth rank. The
- 73
f-file is the perfect one.
In Diagram 3, suppose the white � at
d5. Then it would be fatal to check because
of Ke6. But the � could safely play to b6,
and if Kc5, back to f6. Or he could preserve
the status quo with ...KhB.
We thus see that Tarrasch's rule, that
either the attacker's or the defender's t! is
always best placed behind a passed ft , is
subject to at least one important exception.
Sometimes the rank is better. Note that if
White plays Ra8f and a7 in Diagram 3,
Black can resume his vigil on the a-file
behind the ft . This might be important.
Now for Endgame 243!
With Diagrams 1, 2, and 3 to help us,
we can now very easily fathom the extraor­
dinarily subtle endgame, No. 243, which
has baffled every one of our solvers. We
reprint the diagram.
Black plays, draw.
White plays, win.
With the move, Black can immediately
obtain Diagram 3: 1... Ra5! 2. Ke3 Re5t!
3. Kd4 Re6! Easy draw.
Note that Black had to reach the sixth
rank by means of a check. If he leaves the a­
file without a check, White wins with ridicu­
lous ease by Rb7 and a7 (the seventh rank
of keeping our � at a7 as long as possible
rather than at aS. Do not unnecessarily give
up the seventh rank absolute.
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Now the hard part, White to move! Ke7, trying to steal a march on us with his
Not 1. Ke3?, as Black again obtains Diagram W, we win by 5. a7! The black W is out of
3 by 1... Re1 t! and 2 ... Re6. But 1. Ke2!! his crease, and if the white W is checked, he
Now Black's only way to reach the simply retreats until the checks end.)
sixth rank with a check is by 1... Ra5 2. Kd3 3. KbB Ra 1. Now the W and §. change
Rd5t 3. Kc4 Rd6. But then 4. Kb5, and we places. 4. RaB Kj7. (If 4... Rh 1 t, 5. Ka 7t, and
have seen that the §. is not at a safe check­ if 4... R elsewhere, 5. Kb7t, and the same
ing distance. He must go back behind the thing comes about.) Common sense tells us
ft and abandon any attempt to take the that we should not play the W in front of the
sixth rank. ft until driven to. 5. Kb7! Rb1 t! 6. Ka7. And
The only problem that remains is: can we have Diagram 2.
White produce Diagram 2? He can. There is some interesting play if Black
There are two ways he can get his W to immediately forces us to play RaBt. Start­
a7. The obvious one is to play RaBt and ing from the diagram as it stands, we have:
then simply bring the W up. 1. Ke2!! Kg8 2. Kd3 Kj8 3. RaBt! Kg7 4. Kc4
If White's King is distant, this method Rf1!? 5. Re8 Ra 1 6. Kb5 Kj7 7. Re4. And wins
should not be used unless it becomes necessary, as easily by the well-known device of inter­
it involves giving up the seventh rank. posing the §. , and then playing it behind
It does become necessary if Black plays the ft .
his W to f8, for he then threatens ...Ke8!,
when RaBt and a7 would come too late;
Black's W would get right up to the passed
ft ,
Example: 7. KeZ!! RaJ 2. KdZ KgB 3.
KcZ Kf8 4. KbZ Ra5 5. RaBt! (now forced)
Kg7 (not ...Ke7??, as explained under Dia­
gram 1) 6. Kb3 Rf5!, and now White has to
win by 7. RbB! Ra5 8. Rb6! His W can just
get round before the black W can head him
off. Either plays, White wins.
The less obvious method, which should
be used where possible, as it avoids tricks, is 7. Kd3 Rb4 (or 1... Kh7) 2. e6Rb63. Re1
to play the W down to b8. There he is safe Rb8 4. e7 Re8 5. Kd4 Kg7 6. Kd5 Kf7 7. Kd6
from a vertical check, and his §. would Ra8 8. Rfl t Kg7 9. Ra 1! and wins.
interpose at b7. If Black plays first, he cannot materi­
After 1. Ke2!! it is so easy to force the ally alter the position, as his §. must stay on
white W to b8 (as long as Black does not its rank, trying to keep out White's w.
play his W to f8) that we need not give all
the play. Just imagine that White has trans­
ferred his W from f2 to b6, and it is Black's
move. Black's W is at g8, let us say.
Playing from that situation, we have:
1... Rb1 t 2. Kc7 Rc1t. (If 2... Ra1, we use the
Ra8 method, as White's W is no longer
distant, e.g., 3. RaBt Kf7 4. Kb7. If now 4...

- 74 -
 His Writings

A METHOD OF THINKING IN CHESS

It has taken me many years to evolve a good method of thinking in chess.
Almost as soon as I had learnt the moves, I conceived the idea that a player's
consistency in chess would be greatly enhanced by his following a set system in thinking
out his moves. My original system was extremely rudimentary. It consisted of the
following pair of obvious questions:
1. What is his threat?
2. What can he do if I do this?
As years went by, the system developed into the quite ponderous series of questions
given in the A.C.R. of December 1931, at the cost of the main part of our series "How to
Improve at Chess," which ran through 1930 and 1931.
The system made a considerable impression on thinking players in various parts of
the world. In England in 1934 someone started a correspondence chess school, which
announced that it was based on the following three things. I quote in full because it will
help our discussion.
(a) The "Steinitz System," as explained by Dr. Lasker in his Manual, which
advocates positional play and the accumulation of small advantages as opposed to
the constant search for winning combinations. As Dr. Lasker puts it, "When the
position warrants it, the combination will present itself." This helps to avoid
premature attacks, and the waste of time and energy in hunting for possibilities that
do not exist.
(b) How Not to Play Chess, written by Znosko-Borovsky, where constant analysis
of the position as a whole is the main theme.
(c) A series of articles on "How to Improve at Chess," by CJ.S. Purdy in The
Australasian Chess Review, in which he suggests among other things a number of
questions which the player should constantly ask himself. These soon become
automatic, and so waste very little time, as they can usually be done whilst waiting
for your opponent to play. This habit once acquired will enable the player to avoid
many oversights and mistakes, and save much time, besides being an aid to the
development of "chess sense."

The above is well put, for the most
part. However, as regards (c), it is an exag­
geration to say that the questions can "usu­
ally be done while waiting for your oppo­
nent to play." It is very true that you can
often carry out a very full reconnaissance
(the most important part of the system)
during that time, which will be of great
service if, when he does move, you ask
yourself in what ways his move has altered
the position. But the system itself is based
on the idea that your opponent has just
made a move.
As regards (a), this sounds very well,
but it is an example of how small parts of a
book can be quoted in such a way as to give,
quite unintentionally, a wrong impression
of the work as a whole. Quite rightly, "The
Steinitz System" is put in inverted commas.
It should be called the Steinitz-Lasker Prin-

- 75 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

ciples. Lasker has been much too modest in the 1937 booklet of the Correspondence
giving so much credit to Steinitz. One will Chess League of Australia.
search in vain in Steinitz's own writings for Mclntosh advocates, for correspon­
anything like the exposition in Lasker's dence players, a positional reconnaissance
Manual. taking in the following five points:
I am, however, unable to find that 1. material;
either Steinitz or Lasker made a fetish of 2. development;
discouraging the search for combinations, 3. space;
which a player should never omit. It is true 4. weaknesses and strengths;
that a combination will arise naturally only 5. possibilities for a breakthrough.
out of a positional advantage. But it may Further on, he writes:
arise through an error by your opponent at
any time, and you must ever be on the alert But besides the five factors we men­
for such errors. tioned, there are other factors which may
Steinitz himself was a master of combi­ modify your judgment of a position, al­
nation, and so is Lasker. Steinitz won more though they always arise out of the posi­
brilliancy prizes than most of his "brilliant" tion. They are the tactical possibilities.
rivals. Some players prefer to look for them first.
True, Steinitz concentrated on the po­ But it is better in the long run always to
sitional side of the game in his writings, look at the position first; because then,
because the players of his own day searched when you do find tactical maneuvers, or
for combinations automatically. They did combinations, as they are called, you will
not need to be told to take this side of the imperceptibly learn what type of position
game seriously. Moreover, it was not then they arose out of; and after a while you
thought possible to give any instruction will almost automatically know whether
about combinations. there is a combination to be found in a
Lasker in his Manual devotes a whole certain type of position and, if so, of what
section to combination, and all subsequent type it is likely to be.
books on combination are merely develop­ So always seek to grasp the essentials
ments of it. The command to look for these of the position first. Then look for
"combination motifs" is really implicit in combinative possibilities arising out of
Lasker's book. But it is not explicit. There­ the position, such as:
fore, it did not help players as much as it {a) Forks . . . ;
might have. {b) Attacks along lines . . . ;
I say all this because I do not want {c) Loose pieces . . . ;
students to think my ideas are in defiance of {d) Confined pieces . . . {especially
Steinitz and Lasker. They only contradict King) . . . ;
subsequent writers who have studied {e) Pieces which have a double func­
Lasker's book without devoting any origi­ tion . . ..
nal thought to it. If Lasker had seen any of
my own writings on the subject, I do not In over-the-board play, the positional
think he would disagree with any of them. reconnaissance can be carried out during
A valuable article bearing on some of your opponent's turn to move. And at that
these points was published by G.F. Mcln­ time it is not possible to make an exact
tosh, the Sydney correspondence player, in tactical reconnaissance, because your op-

- 76 -
 His Writings
ponent's move will probably upset any tac­ visualized that move. At the same time,
tical possibilities there are. A positional re­ "jump moves" help in the search for the
connaissance deals, in its nature, with the other kinds of combinations as well.
static elements of a position, and a single Mr. Mclntosh states that the article in
move does not radically upset it, as a rule. question was developed from my own se­
Consequently, Mr. Mclntosh's remarks ries published in 1930 and 1931. His devel­
apply to over-the-board play even more opment consists partly in a simplification
cogently than to correspondence play. Your for memorization. It is a well-known psy­
positional reconnaissance must come first. chological fact that the mind can keep five
Then, when your opponent has moved, units before its attention at the same time,
you first finish your positional reconnais­ but rarely more than five. Hence the desir­
sance by asking yourself how his move has ability of grouping points into groups of not
changed the position. You then examine his more than five.
move for threats and objects. But he has made a definite addition to
The next step, assuming that the posi­ the positional reconnaissance by making
tion is not so simple that your move can be the possibility of a "breakthrough" a special
chosen without it, is the tactical or feature. One should certainly know the
combinative reconnaissance, to see if there points on the board where a breakthrough
is a good combination available. may take place, as they are of immense
If there is none-and there usually is strategical importance.
none-you must be resigned to trying for In no game does "form" vary more
some small, unambitious objective (only a than in chess. Some "Rook" or "Knight"
combination can give a substantial gain), players will occasionally break loose and
and must make a plan. play a game that, if published without names,
That is my system, put broadly, and might be credited to a first-class player. You
the only remaining problem is to boil it can never safely bet on a game of chess. If a
down to a series of simple questions that player is in Class 3, say, it means that his
can be memorized without effort. The se­ form varies between Class 2 and Class 4,
ries published in December 193 1 was too while a Class-4 player is one whose form
unwieldy for convenient use. varies from Class 3 to Class 5. When these
Let us be quite clear. First comes the two meet, the Class-3 man may play in his
rough "positional" reconnaissance, then the Class-4 form, and the Class-4 man in his
tactical or combinative reconnaissance-then Class-3 form. Then the Class-4 man will
the search for possible combinations, and win.
finally, if no good one is found, the forma­ "Form" in chess depends partly on
tion of a plan, for which we use data found health and the other external factors, as in
in our original "positional" reconnaissance. other games. But it varies chiefly through
Before leaving the citation from Mr. sheer accident. We all make oversights at
Mclntosh's article, I would suggest that, times, which are not only avoidable by us
after having seen my articles on "jump but are unworthy of players many classes
moves," he would probably be willing to below us. Sometimes fortune smiles on us,
scrap "(e)" in his tactical reconnaissance in and we play a whole game without any such
favor of a search for "jump mates," etc. For oversight; other times, we make several.
it is not possible to see that a piece is pre­ Why is this? It is simply because in
venting a certain move unless you have first chess we have to keep so many things before

- 77 -
 The Search for Chess Peifection
our attention. In tennis, there is just one
thing for a good player to attend to-the
ball. All his actions in hitting the ball are
mechanical; and he has already decided
where to hit it. Even in bridge, a little analy­
sis will show that there are far fewer things
to attend to than in chess.
The greater number of things we have
to deal with-assuming all the things are
different-the greater the chance of a mis­
take. In business, mistakes are reduced to a
minimum through card indexing, double­
entry bookkeeping, and systems of all sorts.
Without such order and method, a business
of any magnitude would rapidly fall to bits.
But in chess, most of us use no method
or system at all. It stands to reason that no
system can make a bad player into a good
one-only the acquirement of further skill
can do that. But might not a good system
enable that Class-3 player always to play in
either his Class-2 or Class-3 form, and avoid
those graver blunders that put him some­
times in Class 4? Of course it might, and
thus put him automatically in Class 2- 112.
Might it not even enable him always to play
in his Class-2 form, and thus raise him a
whole class? Certainly it might; more than
that, it actually has done that, and more.
To quote one example with a flavor of
romance about it: a young girl of 15 who
played in the Women's Championship of
New South Wales some years ago was at­
tended by a young man who informed me
that they had taken up the game only a few
months before, and had been studying it
together-entirely from the "How to Im­
prove" series in the A. C.R. and Znosko­
Borovsky's little work, How Not to Play Chess.
The young man had slightly simplified the
system given in the A. C.R. of December
1931-thereby showing a commendable ini­
tiative so often lacking in students-and the
girl was religiously following the system in
her games in the tourney, which was her
- 78 -
first attempt at playing against other oppo­
nents than her friend.
There were 14 players, most of whom
had been playing for many years, and I was
anxious to see if the girl could manage to
break 50 percent. She gained fourth prize,
with 10 points out of 13! It was an example
of a player starting off on efficient lines,
without first having to "unlearn." Sad to
say, chess has seen no more of either the girl
or the efficient young man, though when I
saw them both accidentally some years later,
still together, they expressed a hope that
they might someday return to it.
After one game, which the heroine of
this tale played in a nice, combinative style,
and which a newspaper found good enough
to publish, it was amusing to hear her in­
quiring of her friend, with girlish enthusi­
asm, "And did you notice all the function
motifs?" Terminology that gray-beard play­
ers would have thought sheer gibberish­
though familiar enough to students of
Lasker's Manual, which formed the founda­
tion for my system.
Students will remember that the idea
of "function" may be profitably replaced by
my new idea of ')ump moves."
By a system, I do not mean here a
system of chess strategy, such as that put
forward by Nimzovich in My System, butjust
a set order of dealing with the problems that
arise in chess positions generally. Such a
system was given me by my schoolmaster
in an elementary chemistry class for analyz­
ing an unknown salt. First one applied the
physical tests of sight, smell, and taste-then
tested for flame calor in a Bunsen burner­
then applied certain chemical tests- all in a
certain order.
Being convinced of the value ofmethod
is a different thing from being naturally
methodical. And I must confess that, being
unmethodical by nature, I have never been
able to train myself to use my own system
 His Writings
throughout a game! However, as I said in
the A. C.R. of February 1931, "I have some­
times drawn up a list of the mistakes I have
made during a tournament, and have proved
every time definitely-to my own satisfac­
tion-that the system would have saved me
from more than half of them!"
The new, simplified system put for­
ward in this article, however, will be found
quite usable. I admit that the one given in
1931 would be found irksome to 95 percent
of players.
The system consists of a series of ques­
tions which a player is to ask himself at
every move. Of course, if he finds the best
move with certainty before he has asked all
the questions-as he often will-he does not
need to complete them.
It goes without saying that you do not
use the system in the opening while you are
following a predetermined line.
I might remark that it is vain to imag­
ine that one can keep the system for impor­
tant match games and not bother to use it at
other times. One must train oneself to use it.
The questions now follow. The student
might copy them out on a sheet of paper,
and keep the sheet standing up facing him
when playing over master games, on which
he should practice the system.
The questions or self-commands are
given in italic type, and explanatory matter
in regular type. Of course, full explanations
can only be found by reading previous ar­
ticles in the series.
TH E SYSTEM
(I: My turn to move.}
1. What are all the moves I have to con­
sider?
This may seem a strange question to
ask first, because it is usually unanswerable
at this stage. lt is very useful, however, if the
choice is clearly limited to two or three
- 79 -
possible moves, as you may be able to
"spot" a commonsense way of choosing the
right move without following out the rest of
the system or going into much analysis. Or
there may be only one possible move, ap­
parently; in that event, look hard for some­
thing else you might do first, e.g., after 1. e4
Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. exd5 Nxd5 4. Bc4 Nxc3. Now
don't impulsively play the apparently forced
recapture 5. bxc3, but first 5. Qj3!, which
gains White a bit of advantage. Most play­
ers would see this move if they looked for it,
but 95 percent of players would not look.
In most cases, the question is supposed
to remain incompletely answered for the
time being, to be returned to after Question
5.
2. How has his last move changed the
position? What are his threats? What are his
objectives?
If you have carried out a full reconnais­
sance while he has been thinking out his
move, the first part of this question enables
you to bring it up to date. The other two
parts are also important. It is obviously vital
to be aware of any threats. But if there are
no actual threats, don't leave it at that. Still
try to fathom your opponent's objects in
playing the move. Capablanca, in an inter­
view, attached the utmost value to this.
Don't forget, of course, that if you see a
threat, your first reaction should not be to
search for a defense to it but rather for a way
of ignoring it.
3. Complete your reconnaissance ifnot al-
ready done:
a. material;
b. � positions;
c. weaknesses and strengths;
d. development;
e. Where could either side break
through?
In counting material, notice such things
as "two Bishops," As on opposite colors, ft
 The Search for Chess Perfection

majorities. (11: I am considering a certain move.)

Notice everything you can about the 1. Visualize the move as though made,
positions of the \tls-is either exposed, or firmly.
does it suffer the reverse disability oflack of 2. Does it leave me vulnerable to any
flight squares? combination?
Weakness are: weak fts, weak squares,
confined pieces, a generally cramped game. (m: It is his move.)
Strengths are: larger space or terrain, 1. Make a reconnaissance, as described
greater mobility, well-posted pieces, com­ in (I), to be completed when he has made
mand of central squares. his move.
To compare development, count the 2. Visualize the position after this or
number of moves needed by each army to that likely move, and proceed as in (I).
complete its development. Credit one tempo
to the player whose turn it is to move. We
have written several times on the value of a TH E SYSTEM I N BRIEF
tempo in the opening-roughly, it may be (I: It is my move.)
rated at a quarter to a third of the center ft , 1. My moves.
and up to half a flank ft . 2. Changes? Threats? Objects?
Breakthrough points after, say, 7. e4 e6 3. Reconnaissance (a, b, c, d, e).
2. d4 d5 3. e5 are f5 for White, and c5 and f6 4. Combination (a, b, c, d, e)?
for Black. Both players' plans in the open­ 5. Plan?
ing often hinge on such points. 6. My moves.
4. Have I a good combination? To help in
this, lookfor possible combination motifs: (11: If I do this ...)
a. geometrical; 1. Visualize.
b. nets; 2. Combination?
c. jump moves;
d. zugzwang; (m: It is his move.)
e. stalemate. 1. Reconnaissance.
Of course, (d) and (e) apply only to 2. Visualize.
endgames. ft promotion is omitted for sim­
plicity, as being always obvious where it is The skeleton system is the one to use in
present at all. actual play. It is assumed that you have so
5. Ifnot satisfied that the answer to (4) is mastered the system that the various points
yes, what is my best plan? omitted spring rapidly to the mind.
For this, you use the reconnaissance.
What are all the weaknesses and strengths Conclusion
of each side? How can I best exploit his I believe that the system as given above
weaknesses, establish my strengths, elimi­ will so commend itself to most players that
nate my weaknesses, and reduce his no further remarks in support of it are nec­
strengths, or do as many of these things as essary.
possible?
Now return to (1).

- 80 -
 His Writings

THAT ISOLATED d·PAWN

We all hear a lot about the "isolated d- ft ", but even today there are not many players
who know much about it.
In the first place, why only the "cl-pawn"? Why doesn't the "isolated e-pawn" get its
share of abuse? Simply because an that occurs so rarely. It involves the advance and
exchange of the f- ft of both armies-an unusual occurrence in the opening. The King's
Gambit and allied openings are played rarely, and when they are, Black usually keeps his
f- ft at home for fear of exposing his 'it'.
The "isolated cl-pawn", on the other hand, arises frequently-and not only from
Queen's Gambits. It is well worth a special study. We refer the reader to Nimzovich's
chapter on the subject in My System.
In a single article it is hopeless to attempt to cover the whole subject, and just now I
am going to deal only with the most difficult case (not discussed in Nimzovich's chapter
referred to). That is, the case where the player fighting against the "isolated cl-pawn" has
not yet developed his '/l¥'s .ll .
The particular case that inspired this article was the game between F.L. Vaughan
(White) and WJ. Greenfield in the New South Wales Championship. The opening was a
Caro-Kann, but the same position could have arisen in a Queen's Gambit. The moves:

1. e4 c6 The same position can easily arise from

2. d4 d5 the old-fashioned Queen's Gambit Declined,
3. exd5 cxd5 which is still seen in master play: 7. d4 d5 2.
4. c4 e6 c4 e6 3. Nc3 c5 4. e3 Nf6 5. Nj3 Nc6 6. Bd3
5. Nc3 Nf6 dxc4 Z Bxc4 cxd4 8. exd4 Be7, etc.
6. N£3 Nc6 Theoretically the opening is favorable
7. Be2 Be7 to Black, for he has the Queen's Gambit
8. 0-0 0-0 Accepted (itself a playable opening) with a
9. Bg5 dxc4 valuable move in hand, White having
10. Bxc4 moved his 'it'-.ll twice. But if Black is to
demonstrate even a slight advantage, he
(Black to move) must display great finesse. In the present
example, Black actually obtained a losing
position after the following moves:
10. h6
11. Bf4 Bd6?
12. Ne5 Nxe5
13. Bxe5 Bxe5?
14. dxe5 Nd7
Black has now eliminated the "isolated
cl-pawn" altogether-a course which would
have been excusable if he had thereby

- 81 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
caught up in development, but he is actu­
ally further behind than ever. It was his 11th
move, plausible enough, that started him
on the downward path. This suggests a car­
dinal rule:
Whenplaying agaimt an "isolated d-pawn ':
avoid ...Bd6.
The reason for this rule is not only that
...Bd6 releases the pressure on the "isolated
d-pawn" itself, but that it makes it harder to
establish a piece (a blockader) on dS.
Inexperienced players will need this
explained. The "isolated d-pawn" is not in
itself weak, as a rule, until the endgame.
Until that stage, it is rather the square just in
front of the "isolated d-pawn" that is weak.
The opponent seeks to occupy it with a
piece, which will be powerfully posted be­
cause it cannot be hit by a ft . Before he
succeeds in doing this, he must be con­
stantly on the lookout for d5, by which the
isolated ft might be dissolved. He must
always be sure that he has some good reply
to d5.
On all these counts, it is important to
keep the line from d8 to dS unobstructed.
Passing the first moves without com­
ment ( 10... h6 11. Bf4), let us now try to find
a better 1 1th move for Black. The "routine"
move would be 11... Nb4, for the purpose of
preventing d5 and shortly occupying dS
with a 4). All very fine if Black's '?tf-.il was
already developed at b7! It is such easy
positions that one usually sees in books.
Then Black, by . . .Nb4, obtains an impreg­
nable position and usually works up gradu­
ally to a winning one.
Here, however, Black has the double
problem ofrestraining the "isolated d-pawn"
and developing his '?tf-.i}.. If at once 11 ...
Nb4 12. Ne5, he finds that 72... b6 would be
answered by 13. a3 Nbd5 14. Nxd5 Nxd5 15.
Nc6! Q,moves 16. Bxd5 exd5 17. Nxe7f Q3e7;
and White has forced Black to plug dS with
a ft , and has obtained not only equality but
- 82
a little advantage.
It seems, then, that 77. . . Nb4 is not
good; Black should evidently retain his pres­
sure on the "isolated d-pawn" for the mo­
ment, thus preventing Ne5.
Consider, then, 11... b6.
This is a fairly good move, as 12. d5
can be refuted by 12... Na5! White, how­
ever, has a subtle answer in 12. a3! Bb7 13.
Ba2! Black cannot now play . ..Nb4, so that
the threat of dissolving the "isolated d-pawn"
by d5is "on." If 13... RcB, 14. Rcl (the threat
of d5is better than its execution here). Black
is faced with the problem of what to do with
his '?tf. Of course ...Nd5 at once allows White
to exchange 4)s and plug the key square
with a ft -still worse now because it would
obstruct Black's fianchetto .i}..
We conclude that the fianchetto by
... b6 has certain disabilities, and this ex­
plains why in this type of opening Black so
often prefers to fianchetto by . .. a6 and ... b5
(where the latter move gains time by hitting
a ,il/c4). This way of fianchettoing gives
Black more space; as we shall see, the possi­
bility of . .. b4 is useful, for one thing.
Now let us try (after 10... h6 and 11. Bf4
in the diagram) 11... a6. We've got "some­
thing" now.
If White tries 12. a3 as he did against
... b6, Black comes at him with 72... b5 13.
Ba2 b4!! 14. axb4 Nxb4. Black then has the
position he wants (see diagram).
By playing ...a6, ...bs, and ...b4, Black
has obtained a satisfactory position.
-
 His Writings
The dS-square is completely controlled,
and his ¥fJ is ready to develop.

So it appears that if 77... a6, White

should prevent ... b5 by 12. a4.
But once White has played a4 Black
can plonk his 'iJy-4:) onto b4 without fear of
a3, e.g., 11... a6! 12. a4 Nb4! 13. Ne5 b6! (see
next diagram). In this, if 73. a5? (to stop
... b6), Nc6! (back again) and wins the i ( 14.
Qg4 Bd7). White's 'iJy-� is better posted (e.g., if
... 4:)b4, '/Jyb3 threatens �x/6!), so Black
li � � .t.& - ��� permits ds. The "isolated d-pawn"
� �
%%"'�tf '11'�%� disappears, but the resultant position
� �
tji}jii;ij i "/0"y� � "t'��""'{�
%%{':' -- -!���0.j�''00' is favorable to Black.

� -�%-
�.ft -- �
��?'·�
jt. ��'� �- '�� %%% True, this permits White to dissolve the
�- %%�%'% "-��%'"'
-%?i",;-�"U�� .ft �
"isolated d-pawn" by 13. d5 Na5 14. Ba2
exd5 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 76. Bxd5 Bb7 JZ Bxb7
@ - '� %� - - ':�%� Nxb7; but the situation of White's Alh4 is
,, ,
�� � §� now slightly disadvantageous, in that White
Similar to the previous diagram, i n that is forced to lose time in some way, either by
the black 4::l/b4 cannot be driven away a tempo-losing exchange (Bxe7) or by re­
by a3. Both ds and Nc6 are prevented. treating. White's is are more disjointed
than Black's, and therefore weaker, so that
We conclude that 77. .. a6! is the right Black has the advantage, though it may be
move and enables Black, in any variation, slight. Against the plausible line 18. Q:dB
to reap a slight advantage from the "isolated BxdB 79. Bg3 Bf6 20. Bc7, Black replies
d-pawn". simply 20... b5! with clear advantage.
Now, going back again to the diagram, This line would have been good also
suppose that in reply to 10... h6! White against 17. Bf4 (as played), but the shade of
plays 77. Bh4, more logical than Bf4. difference would prevent Black from achiev­
This does not affect the position vitally. ing more than equality.
Black's best is still 77.. . a6! But after 12. a4 After studying all these subtleties with
Nb4 White has a good move in 13. @3!, care, and making sure that he understands
threatening to give Black doubled- is by the underlying principles in every case, the
Bxf6. reader will at last master the "isolated cl­
So in this line it would be better for pawn" problem. He will know how to take
Black not to play 12... Nb4, but simply 12... advantage of the "isolated d-pawn", and
b6! how to exploit the opponent's errors when
he has an "isolated d-pawn" himself. And in
playing over master games, he will be able
to learn more and to criticize intelligently.
Compare now the ordinary Queen's
Gambit Accepted, and see how White can

- 83 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
utilize the extra tempo if Black isolates his From this we conclude that if the player
d- ft . 1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 e6 5. with the "isolated d-pawn" has a big advan­
Bxc4 c5 6. 0-0 cxd4!? Z exd4 Nc6 8. Nc3 Be7 9. tage in development, the "isolated d-pawn"
Qs2! is not a real weakness. It is only where there
Stronger than 9. Bg5. It threatens Rd1, is something like equilibrium that the "iso­
after which d5 becomes more menacing, lated d-pawn" can be proved weak. One
and if 9. . . Nxd4 10. Nxd4 Qfd4 White ob­ tempo can mean almost the difference be­
tains a tremendous attack either with 11. tween victory and defeat.
Rd1 or Nb5.

THE PURDY MYSTIQUE

In 1983 a small publishing firm
in Australia called Castle Books
published a terrific book: "The
Correspondence Chess Career
of a World Champion."

I don't think very many readers

or players can have any sense of
what it is like to be the world
champion of anything let alone
chess!

In early 1998 Thinkers' Press

will republish this book in a new
forma� algebraic notation, and
reedited. We are extremely excited about all the Purdy projects,
and thank effusively Ralph Tykodi for rekindling the interest I
once had in reading the best annotations I have ever come across
in my 30 years of reading chess literature. (Our cover will be
different.)
Bob Long, editor

- 84 -
 His Writings

COMPENSATION FOR A PAWN

The average player must often be puzzled when an annotator tells him that "White
has full compensation for the ft sacrificed"-or, contrariwise, "White's compensation for
the ft is insufficient."
What considerations lead a reliable annotator to vote one way or the other? That
depends on the type of position. The verdict may sometimes be based on purely
positional considerations. Usually, however, such considerations must be supplemented
by analysis.
The problem is very important, for it is one that a player himself is set in nearly every
game he plays.
More puzzling still is such a statement as ''And White has some compensation for his
pawn."
"Some," i.e., partial compensation. What is partial compensation? Suppose a player
is a ft down, but two tempi ahead in development. He may then be said to have partial
compensation; yet if his opponent has no weakness in his position, the chances are that he
will not be able to utilize his two tempi, and that the player with the ft plus will before long
bring about equilibrium between the fighting forces, so that his ft plus should win.
In such circumstances, the "partial compensation" is theoretically nothing. But in
practice it means something: it means that it needs only a slight error by the player with
the ft plus to turn the "partial" or unreal compensation into complete or real compensa­
tion-for instance, speaking generally, the loss of one further tempo should do the trick. As
over-the-board chess contains about ten percent of errors even among pretty strong
amateurs, and say 20 to 40 percent among ordinary club players, the value of "partial
compensation" is obvious.

The following diagram is a position 1

that would have come about in the game
McNabb-Burry in a New Zealand Cham­
pionship had McNabb answered Burry's ft
sacrifice correctly. In annotating the game,
I said, "And we arrive at an endgame in
which Black's compensation is not suffi­
cient."

White to move.

Incidentally, the position shows how

an endgame can begin before the opening
is finished; neither side has completed its
development. Black is already one tempo

- 85 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
ahead, and as White must now lose a tempo The simplest way of ensuring a square
in saving his c- ft , Black is actually two for the imprisoned !J. is 2. f5, but the text
tempi ahead. But when we consider the �s, conforms more to general rules.
we notice a point in White's favor: his � 2. ••. Rfe8
has already a flight from the back rank, and 3. Kh2
can develop. Against ...Bxg2f.
There is also a point against White. His 3. .•• Kf8
ft /f4 obstructs his '{t{-!J., which therefore 4. Be3!
may have difficulty in developing without The validity of this depends on a tacti­
the expenditure of a further tempo by f5. cal point. Otherwise, f5 would still be nec­
Also, the advanced fts may themselves be essary.
regarded as slightly weak, though this is 4. ... Bxe3
offset by their �'s ability to defend them at Actually better is 4... Bc6, but it is clear
g3 (developing himself at the same time). then that White had brought about approxi­
On the whole, Black's advantage might be mate equilibrium in position, so that his
assessed at "between one and two tempi." It ft + should win.
is not enough. With careful play, White 5. Rxe3 Rd2
should soon restore positional equilibrium 6. Rael!
and ultimately win. The point. Black cannot take the ft
And here let me state (for the first time) and must play 6... Bc6 Z Rxe8f BxeB, when
a general chess theorem of great impor­ 8. Re2 ruins his game completely.
tance: Now change Diagram 1 into Diagram
Where one side is only slightly superior in 2 by giving Black an extra tempo-his '{t{- )::i
development or mobility, and the inferior side has already at d8:
no organic weakness, the weaker side should be
able to restore equilibrium.
In other words, the natural tendency is
towards restoration of equilibrium rather
than the increase of a slight advantage where
that advantage is not, in its nature, lasting.
If the "weaker" side has a ft +, as here,
the "weaker" side should in such circum­
stances ultimately win. Let us now make a
few more moves.
l. c3 White to play.
1. Bb3? would be bad, for it terribly
handicaps a piece to be used for the defense Black's total advantage should now be
of a ft , and it is of primary importance to between two and three tempi. Can White
increase, rather than diminish, the mobility hold the position now? Let us try.
of the pieces. That is elementary. Of course, 1. c3 Rfe8
1. Bd3? would be worse still ( 7... Bxd3 2. 2. f5
cxd3 RadB forcing a white )::i into a menial Now the only way, as 2. Rel would be
station at once). met by ... Bxg2f. Now White threatens to
1. Rad8 gain a tempo by Bg5, and again it seems
2. Rel impossible to prevent White from getting

- 86 -
 His Writings
his pieces developed safely. If Black's � as good for him as Diagram 2. It is not.
had a flight square, i.e., if Black had played 1. c3 Rfe8
... h6, he could win by 2 ... Bxf5; but that now 2. f5
fails, thus: 2 ... Bxf5? 3. Rxf5 Re7f 4. Kh2 What else? If 2. Kh2, ...Bd3 3. Bxd3
Rdd7 5. Rd5! Rxd3 4. f5 Re2.
The same trouble occurs if 2 ... Bd3 3. 2.... Re5!
Bxd3 Rxd3 4. Bf4 Re2. Now 5. Rfe7! And the f- .ft. proves a weakness, be­
In Diagram 2, make the slight alter­ cause deprived of its support. If 3. f6, ...gxf6
ation of giving White a .ft. /h3 instead of g4. 4. Rxf6 Rd7f 5. Kh2 Bd5!
Thus Black had insufficient compensa­
tion in Diagram 3, but not in Diagram 2,
though in both positions his advantage in
development was the same. The difference
in Black's favor could be found only by
analysis. This only goes to show that gen­
eral rules, however useful, can never be
more than a rough guide. Otherwise, of
course, amateurs could play as well as the
World Champion.
White to play. The general rule that two tempi ahead
are doubtful compensation for a .ft. , but
As White's .ft. position has improved, three tempi practically always full compen­
one would expect Diagram 3 to be at least sation, is worth remembering, nevertheless.

- 87 -
 The Search for Chess Peifection

TRANSITION FROM
THE OPENING TO MIDDLEGAME
The transition from opening to middlegame, while not inherently a more difficult
stage of the game than others, is one in which most players feel their deficiencies very
keenly. For it is here that they take the plunge from known paths into the jungle.
After having started with a cut-and-dried strategical aim-development-they have to
find a new aim, and that aim depends entirely on the position.
But stop a minute! Have you really completed your development? What about that
� 's )::! still on fl/f8? He's not doing anything there, and you can't open the f-file. You say,
"Oh, but there's no good file to put him on." What about the cl-file? "But my own pawn
is in the way on d4/d5; what could the Rook do on d l/d8?"
The answer is that he can't do anything. But the idea is to place him in the position
of maximum readiness; to be more specific, place him on the file that is most likely to
become open. For example, in the Queen' s Gambit Declined a good player with White
knows that Black is bound to want to play ... c5 sooner or later, so that he can look forward
to the cl-file becoming open in the fullness of time. Therefore White usually plays his �'s
)::! to d l ; the other )::! has normally gone to cl, because the c-file already becomes
openable after the move c4 against ... d5.
As a general rule, the player who gets his )::! s ready for the future, restraining himself
from premature attack, is very wise. Time and again you will see masters break this rule,
but it is best not to break it yourself without a clearly good reason. Don't break it just
because there are no open files.
Certainly it does sometimes happen that the opening makes no good places for the
)::! s . In the Giuoco Piano, for instance, with the 4)s on c3/c6/f3/f6 both sides are blocked
from playing either d41d5 or f4!f5. One player has to undertake the business of opening a
file up for himself and his opponent, and that is why, in such an opening, the first move
ceases to be an advantage. Prefer an opening that makes the provision for a ft exchange
in the center (as nearly all openings do).
Well, let us suppose that you really have developed your )::! s, or else you have a really
good reason for interrupting that development; in other words, the middlegame may be
said to have started.
The thing to do now is to discover a good strategical aim. Is it? No, any reader who
has paid any attention to my effusions in the past will know that the first thing at every
move is a look round the board for any possibilities of a combination (a forcing line of
play), and if any appear, to examine them to see if any of them is sound.
For a combinative possibility may arise at any time. Your opponent is a fallible
human being like yourself, and although his position may look strategically quite good,
his last move may have some hidden flaw, punishable by a bold coup like .Q.x ft t .
And the gain possible by a combination is almost unlimited. By a combination, you
may win a � or force mate; by a plan, you cannot hope to gain more than a tiny plus.
- 88 -
 His Writings
6. backward development.
COMBINATION MOTIFS
Any ofthe following nine things should Strengths are:
inspire you to look for a combination: 1. well-posted piece;
1. Exposed � 2. greater terrain;
2. Castled � without a protecting 3. greater mobility;
piece. 4. control of center.
3. Any undefended unit.
4. Forkable units.
5. Masked battery (e.g., possibility of AIM
discovering "check" to ¥11 with a .§). Your plan may have any or some or all
6. An enemy piece without a retreat, of the following four objectives:
or with only one retreat which can be cut 1. Taking advantage of enemy weak-
off. ness(es).
7. Big pieces on same rank, file, or 2. Establishing your own strength(s).
diagonal. 3. Removing your own weakness(es).
8. Pinned unit. 4. Removing enemy strength(s).
9. A tied unit, e.g., piece protecting This looks rather involved. But in prac­
another piece. tice, only one or two of the four items listed
are likely to crop up in any given position.
Any ofthese things will, if some mecha­
nism for taking advantage of it happens to
exist, be much more important than a posi­ EXAMPLE
tional weakness such as an isolated ft . An example must needs be disappoint­
Among good players, the existence of ing-one would need a great many to illus­
such possibilities is rather the exception trate all the points. However, the following
than the rule, but woe betide him who should be of some little help.
overlooks the exception. We take the 29th Game of the Ale­
khine-Capablanca Match of 1927.
WEAKN ESSES A N D Capablanca-Aiekhine

STRENGTHS 1. d4 d5
Assuming that combinative possibili­ 2. c4 e6
ties are wiped out, you have to make a plan. 3. Nc3 Nf6
The first step in planning is to examine the 4. Bg5 Nbd7
weaknesses and strengths of each side. 5. e3 c6
6. Nf3 Qa5
Weaknesses are: 7. Nd2
1. weak squares; The reason for this interruption of de­
2. weak fts; velopment is Black's threat of .. .Ne4.
3. ft moved in front of castled � 7. ... Bb4
'
especially the g- ft ; 8. Qc2 dxc4
4 . confined pieces; A quite voluntary loss of time, in re­
5. generally cramped game; turn for which Black has the satisfaction of

- 89 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
In the 1 1th Game, Capablanca had
fianchettoed by means of Be2 and Bj3 with
the idea of avoiding the slight weakness that
g3 creates. The text move is a little better,
but the subtlety need not concern us here.
The point to notice is that White takes the
trouble to fianchetto at all, when he could
develop in one move on an apparently
more effective diagonal (Bd3). The rule for
development in close games is:
Post your pieces where they will become
useful ifthe enemy makes a breakthrough in the
center.
The beauty of this scheme is that it
cannot fail; for if the enemy is deterred
from breaking through by your move, that
is itself a gain, as you retain command of the
center.
Here, Black is bound to break through
sooner or later by ...c5; he will not try to
force ... e5, as White could prevent it. There­
fore White sees the light fianchetto diago­
nal as though already open. What we said
before of a :El: developed on a partially
closed file applies equally to the � here.
12. Bd7
13. Bg2 0-0
- 90 -
14. b4
An interruption in development such
as we warned the student against-unless he
has a really good reason. Here White has a
good reason. Before Black plays ... c5, White
wants to make him open the light diagonal
further by playing ... b6.
14. ... b6
15. 0-0 a5
Virtually a developing move, as it
makes the ¥/1's :El: potentially effective on its
original file.
White's problems now are tactical
rather than strategical. There is a simple
threat to attend to. The obvious 16. b5would
fall into a trap, as 16... Rac8would get White
into serious trouble with three pieces ex­
posed on the openable c-file. In accordance
with the correct method of dealing with
threats, White first seeks a way of ignoring
the threat, with an attacking move.
16. Ne5! axb4
1 7. axb4 Rxa1
18. Rxa1 Rc8
If 18... Bxb4, 19. Nb5! (a combination)
forces an advantage. Black now threatens to
obtain a solid defensive position with ... Be8.
There is an obvious plan to foil this, requir­
ing only one move.
19. Nxd7 Qxd7
Black takes this way in order to block
the long diagonal with ... Nd5. The key to
the position now is the weakness of Black's
¥/1-side fts. It is just a question of the best
means of turning them to account.
20. Na4 Qd8
21. Qb3 Nd5
22. b5! cxb5
23. Qxb5
And the weak ft is a big handicap to
Black. Against superb maneuvering by Ca­
pablanca, Alekhine found it insuperable.
 His Writings

WHEN ATTACK IS THE BEST DEFENSE

Counterattack on King

Dr. E.H. Staples, of Boorowa, writes:

Am pleased to see you are coming round to the idea that chess has a lot in common with
military strategy.... One thing I have always believed in, in chess, as in other things, "Counter
attack is the best defense." (I understand you do not endorse this maxim. Perhaps it is a case
of "not always.") I believe in it partly for psychological reasons, and after all, psychological
considerations are important both in war and chess.

This excerpt will serve as a peg on which to hang a little chess instruction, if nothing
else. In the A. C.R. of November 1939 we wrote:

The aphorism, "The best defense is attack," is absurd if regarded as a general truth. When
faced with the threat of attack, a good chess player does not depend on aphorisms. He takes
stock of his position and decides whether to employ defensive, counterattacking, or "prophy­
lactic" tactics.

This old saw, "The best defense is attack," sacrifices exactitude for effect. Our
correspondent will see that we agree with him if we put his thought to the shape of the
following maxim: Play defensively only when necessary. This is not for psychological
reasons. It is a law of struggle. But psychological reasons may sometimes lend it added
weight.
Before dealing with counterattack proper, we must warn the inexperienced against
confusing it with "cross-attack." If a ft , say, attacks a piece, and the opponent in reply
makes an equivalent attack on an enemy piece, he is indulging in a "cross-attack." In
general, this is an elementary error, for if both players have equivalent reciprocal threats,
the advantage lies with the one who has the move. Unless the "cross-attack" has some
ulterior purpose, it should be avoided; instead, the threatened piece should move.
Now for counterattack proper. To be of any use, a counterattack must be either:
A. Aimed at an objective of superior value to the objective of the original attack (e.g.,
counterattack against '11 in answer to 'l!'1-sider).
B. Or, if aimed at an objective of equal value, must get home first (e.g., reciprocal
attacks against 'lls castled on opposite wings).
C. Or, if aimed at an objective of inferior value, must be assured of getting home well
before the original attack, and of drawing enemy force away from that attack (e.g., 'l!'1-side
or central counterattack in answer to threatened attack on '11) .

- 91 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
mate draw, the idea being that White's gain
EXAMPLE OF "A" of space on the �-side ought not to be
An attack on the wing remote from the decisive-or at least Black hopes not.
enemy '31 is the most vulnerable to counter­ This sort of thing is evidently anath­
attack, and is therefore seldom embarked ema to our correspondent, and it is equally
upon by good players unless they think so to us. In ElAjedrezEspanol, October 1934,
themselves pretty well impregnable in other Dr. Tartakover analyzed the variations at
parts of the board. length, and proposed that in spite ofWhite's
Such an attack may have for its object apparent impregnability on the '3/-side Black
either the creation and advance of a passed should go "hell for leather" at him.
ft (a "majority" attack) or merely the gain­ Tartakover developed his theme with the
ing of space. In the latter case, even a ft following, apparently a purely imaginary
minority may be advanced, as in the game but one which will well repay study.
Carlsbad Attack in the Queen's Gambit The article was never published in English
Declined. This may come about after the as far as we know.
following moves: 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 12. a3
Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e3 0-0 6. N£3 Nbd7 7. Merely a temporary measure to sup­
Rc1 a6 (the Argentine Defense, so called port b4-played by Capablanca. Other play­
because of its adoption by both players in ers have suggested 12. Rh 1, as the a- ft
the famous Alekhine-Capablanca Match, wants to go to a4. Tartakover would still
Buenos Aires 1927) 8. cxd5 exd5 9. Bd3 c6 reply as in the text.
10. Qc2 Re8 11. 0-0 N£8. 12. ... Nh5!
A point of this is to avoid the simplifi­
cation produced by ...Ne4, as Black wants
plenty of pieces for his attack on White's '3/.
13. Bxe7 Qxe7
14. b4 g5!
15. Bf5
A very reasonable simplification.
15. g4
1 6. Ne5 Qg5
1 7. Bxc8 Raxc8
Because the ft position in the center is 18. Na4
fixed for a long time, White is justified in Tartakover mentions that 18. Ne2 would
embarking on a �-side push to gain space, display more circumspection, but would
starting with b4 and a4 (after which the renounce the initiative.
possibility of a break by b5 always hangs 18. f6
over Black). 19. Nd3 Ng6
What should be Black's policy? 20. Nb6 Rc7
White's '3/-side has no ft advanced to 21. a4 Nh4
provide a target for an assault, and it has 22. b5 Kh8!
been customary for Black, after freeing his Black must continue to build his coun­
game a little by exchanges provoked by terattack carefully, for if 22. .. Nj3f, simply
...Ne4, to continue placidly trying to free his 23. Kh 1! and Black must retreat.
game a little more, with a view to an ulti- 23. bxc6 bxc6

- 92 -
 His Writings
24. Nb4
Or 24. Nf4 Nxf4 25. exf4 Q::f4 26. Nxd5
Nf3f!! 2Z gxf3 Qg5! 28. f4 Q::d5 with a
superior game for Black (Tartakover). [Ed.:
Master Ron Wieck points out an error by
Tartakover, viz. 28. Ne3! wins. If28. . . gxf3t,
then 29. Kh1.]
24. ... Rg8
And Black threatens ...Nj3f.
25. Khl Rcg7
Again threatening ...Nf3.
26. Qe2 g3!!
And if 2Zfxg3, ... Q::g3!!This may work
even if the enemy has advanced no ft in
front of his castled et;.
27. f4 Qf5!
28. h3
If 28. Q_d3, ...gxh2 is sufficient. If 28. e4,
...gxh2!! 29. exj5 Ng3f, etc.
28. ... Qxh3t !!
Black has such a concentration offorce
that whatever White did would allow some
winning sacrifice.
29. gxh3 g2t
30. Kh2
Wins against other defenses are quite
easy and should be worked out as an exer­
cise.
30. gxfl=Nt
3 1. Rxf1 Rg2t
32. Qxg2 Rxg2t
33. Khl Ng3#
Of course, this brilliant imaginary
game, though logical from start to finish,
proves nothing, nor would it be possible
ever to demonstrate that Tartakover's idea
was or was not sound. Such considerations
do not matter in practical chess. Ideas are
what matter. The player who has a good
idea and gets a chance to execute it is likely
to win, other things being equal.
The important thing about this example
is to see how Black was able to develop an
attack on White's et; without any organic
weakness in that quarter. The only weak-
- 93 - -
ness was a shortage of pieces, which, after
all, is more important. A more balanced
game would have developed had White
played 18. Ne2 instead of 18. Na4.
Students of the opening will notice that
Tartakover's idea enhances the merit of the
Argentine Defense ( Z .. a6in reply to Z Rc1
in the Pillsbury Attack, Orthodox QG.D.).
Note that the move ... a6is not wasted,
because after White has played b4 and a4 in
this system Black plays ... a6 in any case, so
as to answer b5with . axb5, thus avoiding a
. .
weak ft at a7.
King-Sider Countered by Queen-Sider
We have seen a "i;Y-side attack by White
countered by a ct;-side attack. Black made
no attempt to defend his i;Y-side. There was
no need. White's objective was the unambi­
tious one of gaining space. White could be
allowed to achieve that in full provided
Black could achieve something elsewhere.
Quite different is the problem of an­
swering an attack on one's own et;. If the
attack has any force at all, it stands to reason
that counterattack (unless against the en­
emy et;) cannot be a complete answer, sim­
ply because mate wins. Some protective
moves will be necessary. The problem is to
discover an effective defensive plan requir­
ing the minimum number of moves, so that
as much attention as possible can be de­
voted to counterplay.
Let us assume both ct;s are castled on
the ct;-side. Your counterplay will be either
in the center or on the i;Y-side. For prefer­
ence, of course, the center. Counterattack in
the center can be combined with defense
on either flank. Also, counterattack in the
center can readily be turned into attack on
the attacker's own et;.
Strong players rarely embark on any
flank attack unless they have the center
either blocked or well controlled. In that
ev,�nt, the counterplay has to be on the
 The Search for Chess Perfection

'l;¥-side. Pillsbury-Tarrasch
The objective of a 'l;¥-side counterat­ Q_GD-Orthodox Defense
tack may be any of the following:
a. To create and advance a passed ft , 1. d4 d5
as in the example to be discussed. 2. c4 e6
b. To wreck the opponent's ft posi­ 3. Nc3 Nf6
tion with a view to having an endgame 4. Bg5 Be7
advantage ready-made after ending the 5. Nf3 Nbd7
enemy's attack. 6. Rcl 0-0
c. To gain mobility for one's pieces, 7. e3 b6
e.g., opening of c-file and doubling of �s 8. cxd5 exd5
therein, followed by seizure of the seventh/ 9. Bd3
second rank. If 9. Bb5 (Capablanca's move), ...Bb7
10. 0-0 c6! and Black has a fair game, though
If the defender does not try for coun­ his 'l;¥-.ll is imprisoned for some time. The
terplay at all, but overprotects his )tl-side, text move is still considered White's best by
the attacker may use his initiative to switch many.
his attack to some other quarter. The war 9. Bb7
analogy is obvious. 10. 0-0 c5
Let us be quite clear before proceed­ 1 1. Re1
ing. When one's )t1 is attacked, and the A "mysterious Rook move" played to
enemy )t1 is not itselfvulnerable, counterat­ discourage Black from opening the e-file.
tack cannot possibly be an adequate de­ White has no time for such a finesse; prob­
fense. But counterattack must be linked with ably best is 11. �2, or perhaps 77. Bb 1.
defense if possible, and as soon as possible. 1 1. ... c4
The ideal number of defensive moves is the Black voluntarily releases his pressure
minimum necessary, but it is fatal to fall in the center, thus leaving White free for a
below the minimum, so that a slight amount )tl-side attack, but at the same time creating
of overprotection (remember, your )t1 is the a 'l;¥-side majority and so preparing 'l;¥-side
target) is a good fault. What exactly is the counterplay.
minimum necessary has to be left to the 12. Bb1 a6
player's judgment, which is developed Preparing ... b5 to get his counterpush
mainly by studiously playing over published ready before White gets going.
games. 13. Ne5 b5
As an illustration of the foregoing, it 14. f4 Re8
would be sacrilege to pick any game but Preparing his next move for protection
Pillsbury-Tarrasch, Hastings 1895. Those '
of his castled )tl, at the same time develop­
who know this game "back to front" will be ing.
saved the trouble of playing it over, and 15. Qf3 Nf8
need just read through our notes. Frequently a valuable protective move
Pillsbury's )tl-side attack was handi­ for a castled )tl. Compare its mobility on
capped throughout by an early loss of two this square with that of the � previously.
tempi. Tarrasch's counterattack on the 16. Ne2 Ne4
'l;¥-side was completely adequate, but Pills­ White has momentarily withdrawn a
bury got home. How did it happen? piece to transfer it to the )tl-side, so Black
- 94 -
 His Writings
leaps in and forces a simplification to end using the move to protect your � and
his cramp. retaining the threat of the ft capture, you
17. Bxe7 Rxe7 make the enemy withdraw a piece to pro­
18. Bxe4 tect the ft .
The A is useless to White with the long 31. Ncl
diagonal permanently obstructed. Thus the counterattack has accom­
18. ... dxe4 plished an essential objective, the withdrawal
19. Qg3 f6 of a potential attacking piece. Unless a coun­
Black continues to try to weaken terattack succeeds in this, it is normally a
White's potentialities on the �-side. He failure.
pushes away a well-posted 4), and guards 31. c3
well in advance against f5f6. 32. b3 Qc6
20. Ng4 Kh8 33. h3
Again defensive; the threat was obvi­ White must start a pawnstorm to re­
ous. There were other parries, but a perma­ new his attack.
nent one, as the text move is, was much the 33. ... a5
best on principle (unpinning the g- ft ) . As White's pawnstorm needs several
21. f5 Qd7 moves for its execution, Black has time for
22. Rf1 Rd8 similar activity on the "'JJ-side.
No one has fathomed just what Tar­ 34. Nh2 a4
rasch had in mind here. 35. g4 axb3
23. Rf4 Qd6 36. axb3 Ra8!
24. Qh4 Rde8 Black sees his way to win the b- ft and
Making ready against Nj2 and Nc3. win with two advanced united passed fts.
25. Nc3 37. g5 Ra3
Apparently a loss of time, but White is 38. Ng4
concerned to obviate the counterstroke
... Qg4. � � ���
25. ... Bd5 �%��4)� ��
%� --- �?2:ir r
26. Nf2 Qc6
� �� �� � �%'"% �
The object of the fourfold attack on the
�%C% �Af&45�
ft is achieved: simply to get the black "IJJ
��%p%"" <�%%'·· ·,i
.ft --.. -�?..1 ·'/§-��" .ft
-�-�
�
where it can't bite. This difficult part of the r.. «

�� �
�
game was never explained by annotators.
27. Rf1 b4
� �:
� """ �
�' l
t
L.r<

Note that Black launches his counterat­

tack only when he has all his pieces posted 38. . .
. Bxb3?
in readiness for �-side defense. At the eleventh hour, Black fails
28. Ne2 Qa4 through over-finessing. It was not really
29. Ng4 Nd7 necessary to embark on deep calculation to
Against Nxf6. discover whether the text move was play­
30. R4f2 Kg8! able. The correct reasoning was:
The threat of the ft capture is, as usual, 1. After 38... Bxb3 39. Nxb3 Rxb3, I
stronger than its execution. By taking the ft (Black) will have lost one of my �-side
you give the attack free rein, whereas by defenders-the A. This will certainly im-

- 95 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
prove White's chance of pushing his attack case, the counterattack cannot possibly be
through. sufficient-some defensive measures are nec­
2. If I give up the Exchange by 38 ... essary.
Rxb3 39. Nxb3 Bxb3, I retain the Bishop, still We are now to see a flank attack coun­
bearing on my �-side, and White's attack is tered by a central attack. When counterat­
more likely to be stopped. In that case, the tack in the center is possible, the flank at­
two .ft.s must win despite the loss of the tack breaks down almost automatically, even
Exchange. though made against the �. That is the
Black, however, worked out by dead general rule, and it is so well-known nowa­
reckoning that he could hold up the attack days that good players do not begin flank
even after the text move. Such calculation is attacks unless they have established control
always unreliable, as an attack so often has of the center or unless the center is well
some hidden resource hardly fathomable blocked by .ft.s (e.g., 7. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5).
under a time limit. We can, however, find examples in
In a nutshell, Black's mistake was to master play if we go back to the days before
strengthen (unnecessarily) his i!i'-side coun­ the principle had been discovered. Take the
terattack at the expense of his �'s safety. fourth game of the Anderssen-Morphy
39. Rg2 Kh8 Match of 1858. We start from the begin­
40. gxf6 gxf6 ning, because it is interesting to see how,
41. Nxb3 Rxb3 even in the opening, Anderssen was firmly
42. Nh6 Rg7 bent on a �-side attack.
43. Rxg7 Kxg7
44. Qg3 t! Kxh6 Anderssen-Morphy
A grim awakening. Black must take the Ruy Lopez: Morphy Defense
4:), as Qg-Bfwould win the )==! . But even now
he may hope to escape, as 45. Rf4 would 1. e4 e5
allow perpetual check. White's next move 2. N£3 Nc6
is the one that makes the finish memorable. 3. Bb5 a6
45. Khl!! Qd5 4. Ba4 Nf6
46. Rgl Qfl 5. d3 Bc5
47. Qh4t Qh5 6. c3 b5
48. Qf4t Qg5 7. Bc2
49. Rxg5 fxg5 The imaginative Anderssen already has
50. Qd6t Kh5 in mind the attack on the point h7 which
51. Qxd7 c2? actually comes to pass.
Presumably an oversight due to fa­ 7. ••• d5
tigue, shock, etc. After 51... Rbl f 52. Kg2 The average player will more easily
Kh6White must play accurately to win. learn to play commonsense chess from the
52. Qxh7# games of Morphy than any other player.
The present writer played over Morphy's
Flank Attack Countered in Center games before he even met an opponent,
We have seen a i!i'-side attack coun­ and we commend them to all who find
tered by a �-side attack; in that case, coun­ modern games too complex to understand.
terattack alone was sufficient; and a �-side Steinitz objected to the text move because it
attack countered by a i!i'-side attack; in that left some .ft. weaknesses. But Morphy

- 96 -
 His Writings
thought it worthwhile for the sake of freeing
his game-and that is a lesson which the
average player should take well to heart.
8. exd5 Nxd5
9. h3
Again based on the motif of \tl-side
attack! Anderssen reasons that if he allows
...Bg4 and then drives the ,il to h5 by h3,
Black will have a � to defend his \tl-side.
Morphy rarely made such moves, be­
cause he realized intuitively the importance Now White really threatens Bxh6. Also,
of rapid development. he has set a clever trap. White wants Black
9. ... 0-0 to play 18... Bb3, when follows 19. Rc1. If at
10. 0-0 h6 once 18. Rc1, simply 18... Ne7, when 19.
In order to play . . .Be6 without having Bxh6 gxh6 20. Q:h6 fails because of 20...
to fear Ng5-a precaution frequently taken Nf5!But if Black's � can first be lured to b3,
as a matter of routine even today. this last resource would be impossible.
1 1. d4 exd4 What is Black to do? He could, it is
12. cxd4 Bb6 true, parry White's threat by 18 ... Ne7. But
13. Nc3 Ndb4 Morphy finds a much better move.
14. Bb1 Be6 18. ... Bd5!
Black could have taken the ft , but it Counterattack in the center! Nearly 70
would have given White the opportunity he years later, Nimzovich stated the general
wants, to start attacking. So often a weak ft principle that centralization was the normal
is better left as a burden to the opponent! method of forestalling or defeating a \tl-side
15. a3 Nd5 attack.
16. Be3 If now 19. Bxh6? ...Bxf3 20. gxj3 Nxd4
,

If 16. Nxb5, ...Nf6! [Ed.: In the event of completely smashes the "attack." Or if 19.
16. . . axb5?, White creates a double attack with Nxd5, ... Q:d5 20. Bxh6 gxh6 21. Q:h6 Ne4
17. Qs2.} with the same effect. Note the great power
16. ... Nf6 of the centralized pieces as compared with
17. Qd2 Re8 the pseudo-attackers on the wing.
Obvously White can start an attack by 19. Ne5 Qd6!
18. Bxh6. Black cannot prevent this, but he Black could "win a ft " by 19... Nxe5
is so well situated centrally, especially after 20. dxe5 Rxe5, but 21. Bxb6 cxb6 would
the text move (seizing the open file), that he render it of no account.
knows White's attack would not succeed, 20. Qc2
e.g., 18. Bxh6!? Nxd4 19. Nxd4 (not 19. Qg5 Now White has his long-sought attack
Nj5!) Q:d4 20. Qg5 Nd7 and the attack has on the point h7. He could have played Qj3,
broken down. but prefers to force Black's hand by threat­
18. Rd1 ening Nxd5, etc. If Black accepts the offered
ft , he must permit White's ¥11 to enter at h7.
20. Nxd4!
2 1 . Bxd4 Bxd4
22. Nxd5 Qxe5

- 97 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
23. Nxf6t Qxf6
24. Qh7t Kf8
Black can easily stand the check at h7,
after all. It is well to remember that it is
nearly always harmless if the g- ft is pro­
tected, as here. White's attack collapses like
a pricked balloon. Centralization has de­
feated it quite effortlessly.
25. Be4 Rad8
26. Kh1 Bxb2
27. Rab1 Rxd1 t
28. Rxd1 Qxf2
29. Qh8t Ke7
30. Qh7
And Black could now have cut short
White's agony by 30... RdB!, as 37. RxdB
would lead to mate. Observe how all
Anderssen's ingenuity was wasted, because
he was all the time isolating what is now
known as a leading principle of chess strat­
egy: that a flank attack must fail if the oppo­
nent stands better in the center.
WH EN COUNTER­
ATIACK IS WRONG
When we presented our three-part ar-
tide on "When Attack Is the Best Defense,"
(thepreceding article), we promised to cap the
series with an article on "When Attack Is
Not the Best Defense"-this is it.
We do not attempt to show all the
possible circumstances in which counterat-
tack is wrong. Naturally, it must always be
left to a player's own judgment whether he
will rely wholly or partly on counterattack.
These articles can do no more than mold
the player's judgment.
There is a general case, however, for
which counterattack is against principle;
and that is the case where the attack is in the
center.
That follows at once from the principle
(already stated) that a flank-attack should
- 98 -
fail if the opponent can counterattack in the
center.
In the 1941 New York State champion­
ship, grandmaster Reuben Fine violated the
rule just given. Fine's counterattack was
exceedingly plausible; yet is was wrong, as
he himself pointed out afterwards.
The diagram shows the position after
White's 16th move, j3.
Fine
Reshevsky
White threatens to secure a mobile
pawn-center by e4. Black has an obvious
parry which develops a piece at the same
time.
16. ... Rfe8
17. Ng3
White again threatens e4. Black can
again parry the threat, improving the posi­
tion of one of his pieces at the same time.
That is quite different from a purely defen­
sive move which does nothing to improve
one's striking power.
17. ... Ne6!
Of course 77. . RadB would not pre-
.
vent e4 at all. The text-move does: for ex­
ample, 78. e4? dxe4 79. fte4 Nc5!-and Black
wins a ft .
18. Re1! Rac8!
Black develops his other .§ . Quite right,
as 79. e4 is still defeated as in the last note-
try it out. Do not make a defensive move
unnecessarily.
 His Writings
White's possibility of starting an attack by
30. Qf5. Command of the center nearly
always gives a good chance of successful
flank attack.
30. ctdl cth5
31. g3 g6
Black plays this weakening move for
fear of f4!5 which would give White an
overwhelming command of space-all based
on White's command of the center.
32. f4 f5
33. ctf3 Rd8
34. g4 N8g7
35. gxf5 Nxf5
As 35 . . . gxf5 would leave Black tied
So far Black has played perfectly, each up.
time stopping e4, a move which if it could 36. Ng4 Rf7
once be played safely would give White a 37. Nf6t
clear initiative. Black should now have per­ And by thus establishing a � in the
sisted in that sound policy by 21 ... Red8!, enemy camp, for which Black will probably
with a balanced position. have to give up a .§ , White demonstrates a
Instead, Black decides to permit White's clear advantage.
advance in the center and to rely on coun­
terattack in the c-file. That plan is so ex­ Precisely this position will of course
ceedingly plausible that it is highly instruc­ never occur in the student's own play. Nev­
tive to follow it out and to see how it fails. ertheless, the memory of how Fine tried
21. ... cth3 such an apparently strong counterattack
22. Nf5 Rc7 against a central push-and failed-should
Doubling on the open file-certainly be a valuable guide to the student when
the most mobile position for Black's .§ s. dealing with any kind of central operation
But sometimes it may pay better to hamper at all.
the enemy's pieces rather than to give rein
to one's own.
23. e4 Rec8
The issue is now clear: White's central
attack offset by Black's complete control of
an open file on the flank.
The. complete
24. Rd3 cta4
Not ... �2 ??Why? R.eshevsky.. Fine tame
25. e5 Ne8 appears as Game 5 1 in
26. Ne3 cth5
"C.J.S. Purdy's Fine Art
27. Rd2 cth3
28. Rd3 cth5 of Annotation Vol. 5" •••

29. Rd2 cta5 to be published.

Black fears to repeat ... @3 because of

- 99 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

THOSE "TWO BISHOPS"

The "two Bishops" are the reason for the old advice not to be too ready to exchange
a 1i for a � in the opening. Beginners naturally find this advice difficult to understand
when, at the same time, they are told that the A and � are approximately equal. The
point is, however, that the exchange of 1i for � early in the opening will deprive you of
"the two Bishops" while leaving your opponent with them. If, however, one A on each
side has already been exchanged, it does not matter about parting with the other, and an
exchange must be judged on its merits.
Before smugly congratulating oneself on the possession oftwo As, or before gleefully
playing for the possession of them, there are two questions to be asked:
1. Are they both mobile?
2. Has the enemy a very powerful � ?

Considering the first question, remember that a A cannot b e mobile if the squares on
which he moves are clogged by his own fts, and those fts are blocked. Perhaps the chief
disadvantage of an isolated ft on d4/d5 is that it considerably enfeebles the 'l!¥-A by
obstructing both the long diagonals which intersect on that square. A couple of lis like
best of all to see no ft of any sort on e4, d4, e5, or d5. On the other hand, one can't pander
to these dignitaries to the detriment of one's forces as a whole, and the value of a pawn
center is well known.
The second question is equally important. A ft -supported, unassailable � on e6/e3
or d6/d3 is well known to be so powerful that it usually pays the enemy to give up a § to
get rid of him (provided a ft is obtained into the bargain). It follows that such a � must
be stronger than any A-barring freak positions. So if you have two As and the enemy has
such a � you can write the two As off, as one will have to be used to exchange off the �.
'
That is, unless you yourself have a � for the purpose.
A ft -supported, unassailable � on e5/e4 or d5/d4 or f5/f4 is usually not quite as
strong as on e6/e3 or d6/d3-except on f5/f4 against an exposed �. But much the same
principle applies: the � usually has to be got rid of, so if you have two As and no other
minor pieces you are likely to have to part with one A.
But positions arise where, even though the enemy's �s do not appear to be well
placed at the moment, they can get the upper hand of the two As. The following opening
play from the New South Wales Championship of 1930, which showed the high strategical
ability of M.E. Goldstein, is a remarkable case in point.

M.E. Goldstein-Purdy 4. Bg5 Nbd7

5. e3 Be7
1. d4 Nf6 6. Nc3 0-0
2. Nf3 e6 7. Rcl
3. c4 d5 Thus we arrive at the "normal posi-

- 1 00 -
 His Writings
tion" in the Queen's Gambit Declined.
7. ... b6
Old-fashioned, though not by any
means bad. The noncommittal ... c6 is usu­
ally preferred.
8. cxd5 exd5
9. Bb5
Capablanca's move.
9. Bb7
10. 0-0 a6
11. Ba4 c5
This was the "book" move until my
suggestion of transposing with 77 ... RcB was
adopted. Mterwards, I suggested an alter­
native in 70. .. c6instead of 70. . a6. The final
.
verdict has not been given.
12. Bxd7!
This was original here. White breaks
the old maxim about not making a volun­
tary early exchange of A for ltl.
Chess players may be divided into three
classes: those who don't know the prin­
ciples, and are therefore very weak; those
who know the principles, and are less weak;
and those who know how weak the prin­
ciples are, and are strong.
12. ... Qxd7
Not 72 ... Nxd7 73. Bxe7 Q!e7 74. dxc5
Q!c5 because Black then has ( 1) an isolated
d- ft ; and (2) a A obstructed by it.
13. dxc5 bxc5
Black now has the "hanging pawns,"
which are often well described as "both
weak and strong." They are weak because
they need pieces to protect them, and strong
because they form a phalanx that controls a
lot of the center. If it were Black's move, he
would have a good game with his two As,
but it is White's move, and a certain tactical
possibility turns the scale the other way.
Hence the fallacy of judging a position on
its general appearance without looking to
see if the side whose turn it is to move has
some special opportunity.
14. Na4! Qb5
- 10 1 -
White had a double threat: a fork and a
ft capture.
15. Bxf6! gxf6
White has parted with his other A.
Evidently wisely, as he wrecks Black's �­
side in compensation. True, there is danger
of Black building up an attack per medium
of the opened g-file if permitted, but he will
not be permitted.
16. Nh4!
Truly a remarkable position. White has
both ltls in their traditionally worst situa­
tion (edge of the board), and Black has the
traditionally powerful two As, and yet White
has the advantage. Black's disabilities are
six weak fts and a weak �.
16. Bc8!
17. Nc3! Qxb2
18. Rc2 Qb7
19. Nxd5
And now the point. Black cannot even
retain his two As, White's ltls having be­
come so menacing. The sequel was slightly
amusing: 19... Kh8 20. Nxe7 Qxe7 21.
Qh5 Be6, and now the plausible 22. Rxc5?
White should have been content with 22.
Q!c5, getting a superior endgame, for now
Black had an opportunity-which he missed­
of turning the tables and gaining a winning
advantage by 22 ... Bg4! 23. Qj5 RfdB!
One cannot too frequently point out
the moral that the price of success in chess is
eternal vigilance. On this occasion, how­
ever, Black missed the chance and White
went on to win.
 The Search for Chess Perfection

MORE ON THOSE TWO BISHOPS

Almost every other time he plays through an annotated game, the student will come
across some glib remark about "the two Bishops." The purpose of this article is simply to
tell him what it all means if he is a beginner, and to clarify his ideas on the subject if he is
a little more advanced.
When you say a player has "the two Bishops," you nearly always mean that he has
them and his opponent hasn't-the poor fellow has to struggle along with a .Q. and '£), or
two d£)s.
It is easy enough to see why the two .Q.s should be strong. The chief weakness of a .Q.
is that it commands squares of only one color. If its fellow .Q. is on deck, each covers up the
other's weakness. A less obvious strength is that two .Q.s never overlap. Neither of them is
ever wasting its strength in commanding squares held by the other. Like a good doubles
pair in tennis, they never clash.
In an endgame where you have only one .Q., you try to keep your fts on the opposite
calor, in order that .Q. and fts may command the maximum number of squares between
them. With two .Q.s, obviously you do not have to worry about that.
Just how good are two .Q.s? This depends largely on two main factors:
( 1) whether they have or can get open diagonals;
(2) what possibilities the enemy has of exchanging them.

The first factor is obvious. In a very blocked position, the two .Q.s can easily be
inferior to two d£)s. You don't have to be a master to see that when two .Q.s are shut in they
are below par in value.
The second factor is also easy to understand. The exchange of one of your .Q.s means
the end of the team, so if the enemy has several minor pieces, and you have to avoid
certain moves because they would mean the exchange of one of your .Q.s, your two .Q.s
cannot spring around with the same freedom as when the enemy's minor pieces are all
gone.
An astonishing illustration of the power of two .Q.s when free from exchange was
provided by the game Crakanthorp-Woinarski. Here both sides had two E(s, and the
other pieces were two .Q.s versus ¥tt . The side with the ¥tf was unable to win. Suppose that
side had possessed three minor pieces (say two d£)s and .Q.) instead of two El s. Then the
great possibilities of exchanging off one of the enemy .Q.s would have made the win
absurdly easy.
What value can we give to two mobile, unswappable .Q.s? Certainly they would very
rarely be worth a Ylt-but it is safe to say they are worth a El and '£), say a ¥tt less 1-112 fts.
Cheron, in his Traite Complet d'Echecs, quotes Teichmann as saying, ''A Rook and two
Bishops are as strong as two Rooks and a Knight."

- 1 02 -
 His Writings
This appears to mean that the two forces for ft ) plus a considerable positional ad­
can actually oppose each other on equal vantage, and should win ultimately.
terms. As the enemy has a � the As are Having warned the student against
'
not completely "unswappable," so that thinking the two �s are always strong ipso
Teichmann's claim goes slightly further than facto, we re-warn him that they usually are
mine. a distinctly valuable pair. It is nearly always
If the enemy has a A, the value of the good play to sacrifice a tempo in develop­
two As goes down more than if his only ment in order to secure them. An example
minor piece is a � because the A's threat is White's play against the Nimzo-lndian
'
to exchange is harder for a A to evade. Defense to the d- ft .
But supposing the enemy does not fully 1. d4 Nf6
realize the importance of playing for the 2. c4 e6
exchange. Then the two As may retain 3. Nc3 Bb4
their maximum value. 4. Qc2 d5
An excellent illustration is provided by 5. cxd5 Qxd5
the Wallace-Gundersen game. 6. e3 c5
7. a3 Bxc3t
A.E.N. Wallace-G. Gundersen 8. bxc3
Or 8. �c3. White has given up two
tempi altogether, because he has made three
nondeveloping moves-his 5th, 7th, and 8th­
while Black has made only one, his 7th.
Actually, Black has a level game, as his gain
in development compensates for the depri­
vation of benefit of clergy.
The player of the black pieces, how­
ever, must be wary of giving up two clear
tempi for the �s, for he is already behind in
Black played 17 Qe7, thereby miss­
••• development and may get suffocated be­
ing his chance. His material advantage of fore his As can blossom out.
the Exchange ( � for A) is purely an illu­ A case in point was the Crakanthorp­
sion while White has the two highly mobile Gundersen game in the New South Wales­
As. Victoria Match of 1923.
Therefore Black should have played in
the position diagrammed 1Z.. Be7!For ...Bf6. S. Crakanthorp-G. Gundersen
This would not absolutely force the ex­
change, but if White's �-A has to leave its 1. d4 d5
good diagonal it comes to the same thing. 2. c4 e6
The phrase "two mobile Bishops" implies 3. Nc3 c5
that the As have or can get just the diago­ 4. N£3 Nc6
nals they want. 5. Bf4 Nf6
True, after 7Z .. Be7White can win a ft , 6. e3 Be7
but with his attack gone, his own �'s expo­ 7. dxc5 Bxc5
sure would become fatal. Black would then 8. Bd3 0-0
have a slight material advantage (Exchange 9. 0-0 Nb4

- 1 03 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
A very common maneuver. The oppo­
nent usually makes a withdrawal with his
1 1. Qxd3
One may say that Black has lost only
two clear tempi, i.e., with his 9... Nb4 and
70... Nxd3, both nondeveloping moves.
However, notice that White has developed
his Y/1-.Q. in one move, whereas Black will
need two moves to develop his satisfacto­
rily, e.g., ... b6and ... BbZ So White has really
gained three tempi in development since
the game began, and this, with his original
move ahead, should mean a win. It did,
very rapidly, thus: 11 dxc4 12. Qxc4 Be7
.•.

�-.Q. to evade the exchange. Crakanthorp 13. Bc7! Qe8 14. Nb5 Nd5 15. e4 a6 16.
sees a possibility, however, of overwhelm­ Nd6 b5 17. Qb3 Bxd6 18. Bxd6 Ne7 19.
ing his opponent by sheer weight. Rc7 Qd8 20. Rd1 Ng6 21. Qc2 h6 22.
1 0. Rc1 ! Nxd3 Bxf8 Qxf8 23. Rcl Ne7 24. Qc5 resigns.

THE PURDY MYSTIQUE

There is something almost undefinable about Purdy's writing... I

get excited even when I proof his body of work because I am
learning something (and it's not always about chess) in the process.
It might have been that Cecil had a way of conveying useful
information which strong players often took for granted or were
unable to write down. While there are many good writers on
chess today most are not willing to go out on a calculated limb to
give us the necessary insight for real improvement.
Purdy's examples were first class. They were thought out,
apropos, and not necessarily from his own play yet, always stored
in his own memory banks for future use.
He didn't have the benefit of chess analysis machines yet his
own combinative flair was always present. Always look for com­
binations was his motto.
When I read his notes to Fischer-Stein 1967 I was captivated.
The same was true for Reti-Alekhine 1925. How can people play
chess like this? Purdy could too, see Game 49 on page 302 ofthis
book. It is unbelievable... so were his writings.
Bob Long, editor

- 1 04 -
 His Writings

ROOK AGAINST TWO MINOR PIECES

Very few players are confident in struggles of dissimilar forces, e.g., � against minor
pieces, or ¥11 against � and minor piece ( .ft.s on both sides).
Undoubtedly the key to correct strategy in such struggles is a true knowledge of the
average relative values. Without knowing the average relative values, you cannot even
begin to judge the special relative values in the position before you.
And the textbooks are usually vague. Take the subject of this article, the case of �
versus two minor pieces. It is usual to say that a minor piece (A or 4J) is worth three .ft.s,
and a � five .ft.s. In that case, a � plus .ft. ought to equal two minor pieces. But the books
go on to tell you that two minor pieces are worth � plus two .ft.s. This, again, is grossly
misleading as a general statement, for in an endgame the )"! and two .ft.s normally win!
The true facts are:
In the opening, two minorpieces (excluding two Bishops) are normally equivalent to Rook and
two pawns.
In the endgame, two minorpieces (excluding two Bishops) are normally equivalent to Rook and
one pawn.

As the endgame approaches, l"!s and .ft.s increase in value. The simplest way of
expressing the facts arithmetically is to say that the )"! equals five .ft.s at all stages, but a
minor piece equals three and a half .ft.s in the opening and only three .ft.s in the endgame.
Observe that the .ft.'s value goes up, and the � 's value goes up with it, so that its value
in .ft.s is roughly constant. On the other hand, the minor piece's value stays the same; but
it is worth three and a half opening .ft.s, but only three endgame .ft.s.
Where does the endgame start? For these purposes it starts when the forces are so
reduced that direct mates are ruled out and .ft. promotion becomes the grand objective.
This answers very simply the question as to why the .ft.'s value goes up.
The )"! 's value goes up because of its new possibilities of (a) coming safely into mid­
board, and (b) penetrating the enemy camp and attacking .ft.s from rear or flank.
We can now formulate general rules of strategy for playing with � against two minor
pieces or vice versa.
1. Ifyou have Rook (with or without extra pawns) against two minor pieces, play for an
endgame.
2. Ifyou have two minorpieces against Rook, and are a pawn or pawns down, or have equal
pawns, avoid exchanges as much as you reasonably can.

You may remember we have so far excluded the two As from our valuations. We can
best get an idea of their effect by taking an example. At New York 1924, the game Yates­
Reti, a Caro-Kann, reached the position now diagrammed.

- 1 05 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Reti endgame.
Probably it is fair to say as a general rule
that in the opening, ifthere has been no previous
exchange ofpieces, two minorpieces should hardly
ever be given up for Rook and two pawns; that if
one enemy Knight has been exchanged off, the
exchange is more likely to be a fair one; while if
one enemy Bishop has been exchanged off(or can
be), the two pieces could always be yielded with­
outfear. Ifthere have been two exchanges, includ­
ing an enemy Bishop, then the Rook and two
Yates pawns would be rather the stronger combination,
other things being equal. This would be because
Black apparently regarded Bxe6 as a ofthe betterpossibility ofreaching an endgame.
threat, for he now played 11 Nd5, which
... Whether the player giving the .§ and
Alekhine criticized. Alekhine states that Bxe6 two .ft.s is left with the two �s or not is of
is "only an apparent threat," for supposing more than usual importance, because the
it to be White's move in the diagram, 72. two �s in such circumstances are a greater
Bxe6fxe6 73. f!3e6f Rj7 (forced) 74. Ng5 Bj8, advantage than normally. The reason is
etc., gives Black "a good game," as Ale­ simply that the enemy, being two minor
khine says and as anyone can soon verify. pieces down, will usually have little chance
White gets .§ and two .ft.s for � and to force an exchange of �s. Normally, where
4::1 , but his position is most awkward. What each side has an equal number of minor
causes this? Is it his minus of one tempo in pieces, the possibility of a future exchange
development? Hardly, for if we put his a-.§ decreases the two �s' value.
on d l , say, thus putting him ahead in devel­ The two �s will be dealt with more
opment instead of behind, his position will fully in a special article on them alone. For
still be awkward. The student ought to verify just now, the following rule will serve.
this by experiment. We must conclude that When the enemy has no minor pieces, two
White's main trouble is Black's terrific horde mobile Bishops are worth at least a pawn more
of minor pieces. The ¥!!! and .§ s cannot than the normal value oftwo minorpieces, either
assume aggressive roles or they will merely in middlegame or endgame.
become targets for minor pieces, but par­ Where the enemy has one or more
ticularly the two �s. To prove that this is so, minor pieces, so that there is some possibil­
imagine in the diagram that White's � ity of one of the two �s being exchanged,
were at f4 instead of at home, and it were the superiority would usually be less than a
White's move. Then, after 72. Bxe6fxe6 73. .ft. , ranging down to half a .ft. .
Qfe6f Rfl 74. Ng5 Bj8 (the moves already Obviously it makes a difference if, in
suggested) White could play 75. Bd6!, forc­ the process of exchanging the pieces for the
ing an exchange of �s. Thus, 75... Bxd6 76. .§ and .ft.s, one side gets a weak .ft. or an
Nxfl Bxfl 7Z Qfd6 and now White must be exposed �. But if the .§ -loser gets the
conceded at least a level game. His ¥!!! is safe exposed � it may not hurt him much, for
on dark squares, and Black has to guard the opponent has given up two attacking
against permitting too many further ex­ pieces and is not likely to be ready at once
changes, as White would have the better to take advantage of the exposure.

- 1 06 -
 His Writings
ENDGAM E
The relative values in the endgame are
well summed up by Fine in Basic Chess
Endings:
In this ending, two pieces are approxi­
mately equivalent to a Rook plus one
pawn. When there are a number of pawns
on the board, two pieces plus one pawn
versus Rook always win. With even pawns,
the ending will usually be a draw, but the
two pieces win more often than the Rook.
Rook plus one pawn versus two pieces is
usually a draw. Rook plus two pawns
always win.
In all this, we must understand two ,ils as an
exception.
Read that again carefully, especially
the third sentence. It indicates that nor­
mally the value of the two minor pieces is a
little less than � and one ft , rather than a
little more. Even with no difference in fts at
all, observe that the � succeeds in drawing
as often as not, and sometimes will win!
These times are when the � 's side pos­
sesses a "remote passed pawn" and the
opponent has terribly weak fts.
Now that we know the high value of
the � in the endgame, we shall read with
some surprise the following note by Dr.
Tarrasch in the Book of the St. Petersburg
Tourney of 1914, concerning the dia­
grammed position from the first game be­
tween Capablanca and Lasker. It is Black's
move.
- 1 07
Lasker
Capablanca
"Black," writes Dr. Tarrasch, "cannot
avoid material loss. He has the choice be­
tween 1.. . Bxd2 2. Rxb3, leading to a struggle
with the Exchange down (,il and '£'1 against
� and '£'1), and 1 BeSt 2. Rxc5 Nxc5 3.
•••
Nxc5, leading to a struggle of � against A
and 'tl. With excellent perspicacity Lasker
chooses the second alternative, much the
more favorable to Black."
This last sentence leads the reader to
think that as far as material was concerned,
there was nothing to choose, and that it was
Lasker's superfine judgment that decided
him. Actually, it was a clear choice between
almost certain defeat-Exchange down
should lose, even with all the fts on one
wing, as a rule-and an assured draw.
Why "assured"? Because all the fts are
on one wing. Here is a general rule.
Where there are pawns on one wing only,
the advantage of one pawn or its equivalent is
normally insufficient to win.
Many students will find this article of
great help, even though space for illustra­
tive examples is lacking.
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection

MINOR PIECES FOR A ROOK

There is very little in the chess literature on the difference in value between two
minor pieces and �-other than very brief observations.
Reuben Fine deals with the endgame values very informatively in Basic Chess Endings
(BCE), but the only exposition of the relative values at varying stages is-as far as we
know-in the Australasian Chess Review ofJanuary 1944 (see the preceding article).
The main facts are:
1) In the opening, two Minor Pieces (excluding two �s) are normally
equivalent to � + two fts, '1\vo �s, � + 2-1/2 fts,
2) In an end-game with fts but no additional pieces bar the 'if)s, the
superiority of the two Minor Pieces (excluding two �s) over the � is less than one
ft, For two mobile �s, add nearly a ft.

So the difference in value (except for two �s) decreases by more than a ft as
exchanges proceed!
The � has least worth in the opening because he is hard to develop. To induce the
enemy to give up two pieces for � and two fts is usually fairly good business in the
opening.
But the biggest jump occurs with the last exchange of pieces just before the ending
described in 2) is reached. In other words, add even one piece to each side and the minor
pieces's faculty for combining with other forces will appreciably increase their value.
Indeed, Fine says in Basic Chess Endings:

"Three pieces versus two Rooks (equal pawns) is normally a draw, but in favor of the
pieces because they have more play."

That is true for two �s and <t, the only combination that Fine gives by way of
illustration. Two <i:ls and � are not quite so good; but even if they are barely equal to two
�s in an endgame, that shows that the third piece strengthens its fellows by appreciably
more than the endgame value of one minor piece (three fts). In other words-and this is
the great point to remember-
it and <tl or two <ts, without other pieces, are usually a poor team. The two
Minor Pieces are much better in combination with at least one other piece.
In BCE, Fine makes the following statements which do not quite tie up.

A) "In the ending, two minor pieces are approximately equivalent to Rook and one
pawn."
B) "Rook vs. two minor pieces (equal pawns) will usually be a draw, but the two pieces
will win more often than the Rook."

- 1 08 -
 His Writings
If the difference were really about equal Ozols-Crowl
to a .ft. on the average, Fine would have to Q,ueen 's Pawn (Chigorin Defense)
say the ending is usually a win for the
pieces. Clearly, a draw might occur fairly 1. c4 e5
often; but a win for the � would be so 2. Nc3 d6
infrequent as to make the second clause of 3. g3 Nf6
B) a manifest understatement. 4. Bg2 c6
Which statement is slightly out, A) or 5. d4 Qc7
B)? Probably both-i.e. A) slightly overstates 6. e4 Nbd7
the value of the pieces, whereas B) slightly By transposition, we are in the Chi­
overstates the value of the � . All of Fine's gorin or Old Indian Defense to the Queen's
other remarks and his illustrative positions Pawn. It is more cramped than the King's
would tie up better had he changed A) and Indian (W-.11 in fianchetto) which gives
B) to Ax) and Bx). Thus: Black opportunities of counterplay with
Ax): Substitute our Proposition 2) at ...exd4 at some stage, a line which here
the beginning of this article. would only result in worse cramp.
Bx) : � vs. two minor pieces (exclud­ 7. Nge2 Be7
ing two As) with equal .ft.s ( .ft.s on both 8. 0-0 Nf8
wings) ends in a draw or in a win for the two 9. b3
pieces with about equal frequency. The � Or h3 and Be3.
may win in very favorable circumstances. 9. Ng6
10. Bb2 Bd7
Fine goes into these circumstances in 11. Qd2 Rd8
detail in BCE. 12. Rad1 Qc8
One cannot, of course, reduce chess to 13. £4! Bh3
arithmetic. In all this, we are speaking in As White did not choose the h3 line on
averages. Weak .ft.s on either side, badly move 9 (after which he could have met
placed pieces, and so forth, are likely to ... �Bwith Kh2), it was logical to permit this
turn the scale; but nevertheless, a knowl­ swap. Although his light squares are weak­
edge of the average values is a necessary ened, White gains time and gets great con­
starting point for forming ajudgment in any trol of the board.
given position. 14. f5! Bxg2
Even masters occasionally stray 15. Kxg2 Nf8
through not fully appreciating the sharp 16. Qe3 Ng4
drop in value the .11 and 4J or two 4)s suffer An ingenious bid for freedom.
with the transition from mid-game to end­ 17. Qf3 h5
game. Here is the game Ozols-Crowl from 18. h3 exd4
the Australian Open tourney in which Ozols 19. hxg4 dxc3
threw away a fairly comfortable win by 20. Bxc3 hxg4
exchanging Y!Js. We give the whole game. 21. Qxg4 Ng6
Ozols played the first half in his best vein, 22. Rh1 Rg8
making his lapse all the more remarkable. 23. Qf3! Ne5
Crow!, never noted for his endgame play, 24. Qf4 B£6
played this ending with great skill. 25. c5! g5
26. Qcl! d5

- 1 09 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
27. Qb2 Qc7
28. exd5 cxd5
29. Rhel d4
Bold tactics in difficulties. Black opens
lines to expose White's 'it', Black's 'it' being
exposed anyway. If now 30. Bxd4?, then
30... Qs6f starts ruffianly behavior.
30. Nxd4! Qxc5
3 1 . Nf3 Rxdl
32. Rxdl Ng4
33. Relt Ne3t 40. Ke3
34. Rxe3t Qxe3 To avoid simplification try 40. f6f. For
35. Bxf6 Kd7 example, 40. f6f Ke6 47. Nd3 Kj5 42. Ke3
Rh5 43. Nf4 Rh 7 (if .. Rh2, then a4 helps
.

dddP
White) 44. Kd3 with better winning chances
for White than in the game.
� � g � Rxf5
� ���� it � '� 40.

:li:li���)
�� � �
41. Nxg4
42. Nf2
43. g4
Ke6
b6
Rd5
�, , � �
�' ������� 44. Nd3
45. Nf4t
Rd7
Kd6
46. Ke4 Ke7
36. Qd4t? 47. g5 Rd6
Time pressure obviously. Yet, even in 48. a4 Kd7
clock trouble, it was a strange choice. Ozols 49. b4 Rc6
cannot have realized what a task he was 50. Kd5 Rd6t
setting himself. He could have safely played 5 1. Kc4 Rc6t
36. Ne5f even if he only had a few seconds 52. Kb5? a6t!
left (time limit: 36 moves in 2 hours), and This forces a draw. The interesting point
that must win with care. For example, 36. is that, according to Kruger, it was generally
Nxe5f Kc8 3Z Qs2t Kb8 38. Nxflg4 39. Ne5. assumed at the time that if White had not
White has all he had before, and a passed slipped with 52. Kb5? he could have won.
ft +. This is further evidence that the two pieces
36. ... Qxd4 are overvalued even by masters. The possi­
37. Bxd4 g4 bilities are too numerous for demonstra­
Most adjudicators would adjudicate this tion; but we have tried over several lines
position as a win for White-and probably and compared the resulting positions with
correctly so. Yet the fact that Ozols did not some given by Fine, and our conclusion is
win is evidence of the difficulties inherent that a draw would be the correct adjudica­
in the position. tion even had the white 'it' gone elsewhere.
38. Ne5t Ke7 53. Kxa6 Rc4
39. Kf2 Rg5 54. Ne2 Rxb4
55. a5 bxa5
56. Kxa5 Rbl

- 1 10 -
 His Writings
Easy now- its on one wing only. In 59. gxf6 Ke6
addition, White's W is out of play. Drawn
57. Nc3 Rf1 A mine of instruction.
58. Bf6 Rxf6

Purdy Library of Chess

Each volume of the Purdy Library is a stand-alone selection of material from the
published writings ofCJ.S. Purdy. There are 72 articles of a general nature (41 in
item 2 and 3 1 in item 7) which amply illustrate the theme Purdy returned to time
and again. The Library contains more than 800 annotated games. Included is
Purdy's 10 Hours series of articles on the openings (item 6), and it has his thoughts
on the end-game (item 9).

Published Titles
1. Guide to Good Chess, 1 1th edition, 1996.
2. CJS. Purdy: The Search for Chess Perfection, 1997.
3. How Purdy Won: The Correspondence Chess Career ofa World Champion,
1 983, presently out of print. .
4. CJS. Purdy 's Fine Art of Chess Annotation and Other Thoughts Vol. 1: 100
Annotated Games, Purdyisms, The Purdy Player, 1992. Limited stock.

Titles Under Consideration (all in algebraic notation)

5. CJS. Purdy Annotates the World Championships: Alekhine-Euwe I, 1935;
Alekhine-Euwe 11, 7937; Fischer-Spassky I, 1972. (An all-in-one-volume
reissue of Purdy's books How Euwe Won, The Return ofAlekhine, How
Fischer Won).
6. CJS. Purdy 's "Starter Set" Opening Repertoire. An edited version of the
series of articles The Openings in 10 Hours plus material on the Colle
System.
7. CJS. Purdy 's Fine Art of Chess Annotation Vol. 2: 1 20 Annotated Games
plus 3 1 Articles and Studies.
8. CJS. Purdy 's Fine Art of Chess Annotation Vol. 3: Purdy on Purdy, Annota­
tions to 70 over-the-board games of CJ.S. Purdy and to 30 games of
John Purdy, Purdyisms (revised), The Purdy Player, The Road to
2000 (How to Become an Expert).
9. CJS. Purdy on the End-Game.
10. CJS. Purdy's Fine Art of Chess Annotation Vol. 4: 200 Annotated Games
( 1 5 Championship, 40 Master, 145 Australia and New Zealand).
1 1. CJS. Purdy's Fine Art of Chess Annotation Vol. 5: Annotated Games from
1 938-1945 and 1976- 1979.
1 2. CJS. Purdy: Caissa Remembers. Articles on the History of Chess, Obituary
Notices for 14 Chess Masters (appreciation of each master's chess
career plus a few of the master's best games).

- I l l -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

WEAK PAWNS AND WEAK SQUARES

By far the most important thing about weak its and weak squares is not to overrate
their importance. Always the main difficulty in chess is to estimate the relative importance
of different factors, and this is where the books often fail the student.
I have seen a player give up a piece rather than submit to a very bad it formation
round his w-side-castled w (isolated doubled its on f2:f3/f7:f6 and it on h2/h7!).
This player had read a book or two, and he had acquired a horror of such a it
position. But the big question was, what could his opponent do with it? Unless the
opponent could at once institute a crushing attack, almost anything was preferable to
giving up a whole piece (or it may have been a piece for a it -the same applies). As there
was no immediate attack, the drawbacks to the position were relatively slight. Indeed, if
the player himself was ahead in development, he might have time to get his W to h llh8
and his �s doubled on the g-file, and become the attacker himself.
I recommend the student to turn up the game Klass-L. Steiner, 1946, in which Klass,
as White, deliberately allowed Steiner to give him that position because in order to do so
Steiner would have to exchange one of his two As for a .:£). Steiner, who had previously
had a fairly safe it plus, found himself too poorly developed to make the slightest use of
White's "weakened" w-side, and was left with an insecure game.
This preamble will serve to remind the student that a theoretical weakness must be
assessed according to the advantage, if any, which the opponent can take of it.
If no immediate advantage can be taken, that does not mean no advantage can ever
be taken.
An endgame weakness matters in the middlegame, because the opponent knows that
you don't want an endgame and can harass you by inviting exchanges.
Once again, however, let us keep a sense of proportion. The books rightly stress the
importance of weak squares and isolated and backward its because such weaknesses are
lasting. You cannot easily get rid of them. But the books do not emphasize that, even so,
such weaknesses are of smaller account than the purely evanescent weaknesses of pieces,
e.g., a "loose" (undefended) piece in an exposed situation, a Yf1 on the same file, rank, or
diagonal as her W, or a piece with insufficient means of retreat and therefore liable to be
caught in a "net."
Such disabilities can usually be rectified in one move; but if it is your opponent's
move, that vital one move is lacking, and you may lose a piece-whereas even the weakest
weak it is rarely a worse evil than losing a it .
We have all noticed the moderate sort of positional compensation a strong player is
satisfied with for a it minus. Naturally, still less compensation is needed for a weak it or
a weak square.
Mter these necessary warnings, let us now examine this question of weak its and
weak squares, for I know that many players have only very hazy notions about them.
The most familiar type of weakness is the isolated it , i.e., a it that has no fellow it

- 1 12 -
 His Writings
on either adjacent file. Of the same ilk is the
"backward" .ft. . This .ft. has a fellow .ft. on at
least one adjacent file, but the fellow is in
front of it, and the "backward" .ft. is pre­
vented by adverse weather conditions from
moving up into line with it. This .ft. is to all
intents and purposes isolated, i.e., it cannot
be supported by a .ft. if attacked.
That is the obvious disadvantage of a
weak .ft. : that it may need the protection of
pieces, whose freedom of action is thus
restricted.

The weakness is seldom very serious

unless the file on which the .ft. stands is
open onto it. I do not say simply "open,"
because by definition a .ft. cannot possibly
stand on an open file; an open file is one
unoccupied by a .ft. (it can have a crowd of
pieces on it, but is still open). But if all that
part of a file in front of a weak .ft. is clear of
.ft.s, it means that enemy t!s can easily bear
down upon it, and thatusually makes all the
difference.
In an endgame this factor is much less
important, because t!s can then hop about
more and are likely to attack the .ft. from
flank or rear; or else there are no t!s at all.
In either case, the "weak" .ft. is really weak,
irrespective of the other occupants of its
file.
So a weak .ft. is specially to be de­
plored in an endgame.
The question of weak squares is inex­
tricably interwoven with that of weak .ft.s.
Note that a weak square or weak point
(same thing) is also called a strong point­
for the opponent.
A weak square, just like a weak .ft. , is
one which cannot be guarded by a .ft. . In
other words, a piece can occupy it without
fear of being driven off by a .ft. . 4)s are the
specially good pieces for occupying such
points.
Look now at Diagram 1.
Here we have the famous "isolated cl­
pawn". This almost always refers to a .ft. on
the fourth/fifth rank, i.e., at d4/d5. If on d3/
d6 as in Diagram 2, the weakness is consid­
erably greater, and if on d5/d4 it is often
less.
This is easily explained.
A plan to gain a weak .ft. outright is
usually not feasible of execution, and there­
fore bad. The normal use to be made of
weak .ft.s is to put pressure on them to tie up
the opponent's pieces.
Even in the endgame this is the main
use of weak .ft.s, and a very big use it is.
But in the early stages, as a rule, not
much tying up can be done in this way.
More certain of success is the policy of
taking advantage of the weak square or
squares just in front of the .ft. . For if the .ft.
itself is isolated, i.e., there is no fellow .ft. on
an adjacent file, the same applies to the
other squares on the file. Thus, in Diagram
1, a white 4J on d4 would be very well
posted. This d4-square is known as the
"blockade" square (Nimzovich), since a

- 1 13 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
piece there completely blockades the weak
.ft. . Nimzovich showed how the blockade of
a single .ft. might exert a cramping influ­
ence on a whole army. And the blockading
� at the same time radiates power from the
blockade square. The � should, however,
have the support of a .ft. .
So the routine play in Diagram 1 is 1.
Nb5! This � can then be posted on d4,
secure in the knowledge that if he is ever
exchanged, another � will take his place. If
not a � ' there should at any rate always be
some piece ready to recapture, rather than
a .ft. ; for once the square d4 is plugged with
a .ft. , obviously the two opposing isolated d­
fts cancel out. Not altogether-for the new
.ft. on d4/dS acts as a support for a � on eS/
e4, and then the question is, which player is
ready to post a 4J on his eS/ e4? That player
should have the initiative, other things be­
ing equal.
In Diagram 2, Black is much worse off,
for now the blockade square is in his own
camp; a 4J on dS in Diagram 2 will be a far
worse thorn in Black's side than a � on d4
in Diagram 1.
An even more important aspect is that
a .ft. /d6 is a worse obstruction to Black's
pieces than the one on dS.
- 1 14 -
In Diagram 3 the same square (dS) is
still weak, even though it actually can be
protected by a .ft. ; for .. c6 will leave Black's
.
.ft. on d6 weak-not as weak as if it were
completely isolated or backward, but obvi­
ously weak all the same, since it can only
attain security by going to dS, and White
may be able to prevent that. Therefore a
white � is well posted on dS, if only to
induce ...c6.
The position of Diagram 3 commonly
arises in the Ruy Lopez, through Black,
sometimes more or less under compulsion,
playing ... exd4, and thus giving White the
major share of the center. It is in general
slightly disadvantageous to Black unless, in
his turn, he can prove White's .ft. on e4 also
weak.
Next we come on to the important
question of moving .ft.s in front of the castled
�. The beginner is told to keep them un­
moved, and then sees that experts move at
least one of them in almost every game they
play!
 His Writings

ON CASTLE WALLS
This article was to have been entitled, "Moving pawns in Front of a Castled King,"
but as that is too long for the page we have commandeered a half-line from Tennyson
which serves our purpose equally well.
With all the vast literature there is on chess, it is remarkable how easy it is to find new
subjects. One would think that since at least one player castles in nearly every game of
chess played, someone would have ere now written an article on the lines of the present
one, but to the best of our knowledge nobody has.
To simplify discussion, we shall deal at first only with 'if;-side castling, adding a
section on �-side castling near the end.

lt All Depends
We are all familiar with the time-honored advice not to move fts in front of a castled
'if(. Rigid adherence to this rule would be about equivalent to imposing on oneself the
handicap of ft and Move at the very least. If we had a dollar for every player who has
been mated through not moving a ft in front of his castled 'if;, we should be enormously
wealthy.
Everything depends on circumstances. To move one of the fts of the castle wall may
be extremely helpful; to move another may be suicide. Again, moving it one square is
usually far less risky than moving it two squares. It is vitally important whether your
opponent has castled or can castle on the opposite wing. If so, a break in your castle wall
is likely to be so much the more dangerous, because the opponent can embark on a
pawnstorm without spoiling his own castle wall.
The first six diagrams illustrate the six different ft moves in front of the castled 'if;: h4,
g4, f4, h3, g3, f3.
On h4 gram 1, from a game Koshnitsky-Purdy in
the Australian Correspondence Champi­
1 onship, it was the best move on the board.
For that to happen, its attacking effect must
be more important than the weakening ef­
fect on the player's own position.
With few pieces on the board, a ft is a
proportionately greater fighting unit than in
a crowded middlegame; and Koshnitsky, in
his efforts to draw with a ft down (they
were successful), had to make use of every
White has played M! available unit of force. With his 26. h4!, the
move just played, White threatens h5 fol­
The move h4 after 'if;-side castling is lowed either by h6 for a mating net or else
usually nothing short of insane, but in Dia- by a ft exchange reducing the black �'s

- 1 15 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
security. get rid of a pin. Almost always, the correct
If Black's � were nearer the �-side, treatment of a J1 which pins a � on f3/f6 is
Black might be able to turn White's sortie to first to drive it to h4/h5 by h3/h6, and then
his own advantage; but it isn't, and he can't. think. It is extremely useful to know that in
The move also has some defensive an emergency you can end the pin by g4/g5,
value, in that White's � now has two flight but that move should not be made except as
squares (g2 and h2) instead of only one-a a last resort-unless it gains material. As
decided asset. may be seen from Diagram 2, the squares
f3, f4, h3, and h4 are all left indefensible by
Strength of Unmoved f-Pawn its, and there is great scope for enemy As
And here note an important general on the long dark and light diagonals.
rule. White's it position in Diagram 1 is
almost the ideal one for a � shelter in a Yk­ Onf4!?
versus-Y!/ ending-with or without other
pieces. We say "almost" because from a
purely defensive viewpoint it is better to
have the h- it on h3 than on h4. But the
main features of the shelter are the un­
moved ft on f2 and the ft on g3. The ft on
f2 prevents check on the rank, while the it Diagram 3 is a familiar sight. The ad­
on g3 prevents checks on the file. And if vance of the f- it often opens up possibili­
driven to g2 and then checked diagonally, ties for the castled § .
the � can escape perpetual check by going At the moment the only square seri­
to h2. ously weakened is e3, but one must reckon
No other shelter is 'just as good." Don't on having to play Khl in answer to a diago­
be fooled by substitutes. Imagine the re­ nal check, and afterwards h3 to avoid mate
verse it chain (h2, g3, f4) and howl with on the back rank. The square g3 will then
laughter. Or Diagram 3 or 6. Another leaky be weakened.
shelter consists of its on g2 and h3 (Dia­ Thus one may say that f4, while it can
gram 4 with the f- it flicked away), for it is be very strong, is often risky; if one's attack
highly vulnerable to perpetual check. is unsuccessful, the move may contribute to
The main thing to remember is that against one's own downfall.
a Oyeen an unmoved Bishop-pawn is a great
blessing. On hJ (Often Good)

On g4 (Worst of All)

�:'!
'�
�.§i �.i
..
Diagram 4 is a position that is usually
quite safe. No squares are immediately weak­
Diagram 2 shows a position almost ened, as g3 is still protected by the f- it . The
always miserably unfavorable to the castled � gains a valuable flight square at h2.
�. It usually arises through overanxiety to Trouble arises only if:

- 1 16 -
 His Writings
(1) the enemy can castle on the other able.
wing and can advantageously rush down
...g5 and ...g4, opening an avenue for an Long Castling (0-0-0)
attack on the 'it>;
(2) the enemy can advantageously sac­ 7
rifice a piece by taking the .ft. on h3.
As a general rule, one can at least say
that if h3 hits a piece away-so that one can
play it without losing a tempo-it is nor­
mally a good move. Castling on the i;f"-side, sometimes de­
scribed as "long castling," is usually less
secure than short castling for two reasons
(see Diagram 7):
5 1. The point a2 is defenseless.
2. The point c2 is protected only by a
King.

The first drawback can be remedied at

Diagram 5 is in general a very bad one
unless there is a A in fianchetto, and in that
case, provided the A cannot be exchanged
off, it is usually a very strong defensive
position! Without the said A, the weaken­
ing of f3 and h3 is often fatal.
This explains why masters make such
strenuous efforts to exchange off enemy
fianchetto As. A pawnstorm against such a
position by ...h5-h4 is often tempting, but is
usually futile unless the fianchetto A can
first be liquidated.
On J3 (Sometimes Bad)
6 give mobility to the castled .§ .
the cost of one tempo by Kb 1, but not the
second (it would be ludicrous to castle on
the �-side and then play both Kb1 and
Rc1). Therefore, before castling "long" one
should investigate whether the weakness of
c2 is likely to tell.
Once having castled "long," the points
for and against moves of the a-, b-, and c- .ft.s
are the same as those for and against moves
ofthe corresponding .ft.s after short castling,
with these main differences:
a. The move a3 does not create a flight
for the 'it> unless he moves to b 1.
b. The move c4 is wholly weakening,
unlike f4 after 'it>-side castling which may

�,:
� ��-
� L.�
Diagram 6 shows the f- .ft. moved one
square-usually to support the e- .ft. . This
formation has the same objection as Dia­
gram 3. If White has a .ll on dark squares
and the enemy has not, it is usually pretty
safe; but if the opposite state of affairs pre­
vails, it tends, of course, to be highly vulner-
A Teasing Problem
One often finds it necessary or desir­
able to create a flight for one's castled 'it>,
and has to decide between h3/h6and g3/g6.
From what has been said, it is clear that
h3/h6 will nearly always prove the better
move, but here is a position which shows
how teasing the problem can be. It oc­
curred in the radio match between Austra­
lia and France. M.E. Goldstein (White) had

- 1 17 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
to move in Diagram 8 against R. Daniel.
White to play.
White has reached one of those posi­
tions in which nothing very progressive can
be done, so that one may as well do some­
thing that is certain to be necessary sooner
or later-here, make an escape for the �.
The routine h3has the objection that Black's
� runs on dark squares; also, White's � if
'
ever driven to h2, would no longer protect
f2.
Thus Goldstein was led to play g3,
despite the weakening effect on his light
squares. Was he right? It is hard to say.
Many players would select h3, and not g3
unless obliged to later on.
A third possibility was Rfe 1 followed
by Kfl. This is often well worth consider­
ation if an endgame is in sight; but the
enemy may be able to make something out
of the exposure of the �.
We do not attempt to reach any con­
clusion. What we have done is to point out
the general issues involved to assist players
when similar problems arise in their own
games.

TO TAKE OR NOT TO TAKE

The beginner frequently declines a sacrifice merely because he thinks his opponent
"must have something up his sleeve," even though he himself cannot see it. That is no way
to play chess. If the position is too complicated for you to work out, the following
considerations will prove helpful.
1. If the piece or pawn offered can play a part in the attack if not taken, always take
it if you cannot see a clear objection.
2. This is more likely to obtain where the unit sacrificed is a piece than where it is a
pawn. To decline a piece is usually more dangerous than taking it, but this is not true of
fts-except advanced passed fts.
3. Where the Exchange is offered ( .§ for � or 4)), much depends on whether the .§
is mobile. It is often bad to give up a mobile � or 4J and ft for an immobile .§ , despite
the small gain in material.
4. Where the material offered is "lf1 for !'( and piece, and you are winning, make sure
you haven't a stronger move before accepting, as this small advantage is deceptive and the
game is often drawn.

- 1 18 -
 His Writings

HOW TO AVOID TRAPS

A player of average strength asked us how to avoid traps in the opening. We gave him
four rules.
1. Move nothing beyond the fourth/fifth rank till all your pieces are developed
(except a ft , if it hits a piece or takes something).
2. When Black, develop your �-A at e7.
3. Avoid h3/h6 or a3/a6 unless it hits a piece.
4. Castle as early as possible (first making sure the enemy hasn't a quick mating
attack starting with Bxh2f!Bxh7f).

These rules will not enable you to play masterly chess, but they will avoid almost all
the stock opening traps. If your judgment tells you to break a rule in any particular
instance, break it.
Rule 1 stops you from playing Bb5/Bb4, often a good move but a fruitful source of
trouble. Yes, it forbids the Ruy Lopez, but the Lopez is a pointless opening unless backed
by much study.
An example of Rule 2 is 1. e4 e5 2. Nj3 Nc6 3. Bc4. Here either the Two Knights
Defense (3 ... Nj6) or the Giuoco Piano (3 ... Bc5) is risky without study, whereas the
Hungarian Defense (3 ... Be7) is comparatively safe. See Modern Chess Openings.
Once your development is completed, forget the rules. No rules will enable you to
beat a better player. But they can show you how to avoid trouble in the early stages.

LOPEZ SUBTLEnES AND STEAMROLLERS

Although I have written over a million words on chess, I do not remember ever
having written much about ft majorities in the middlegame. My reason in days gone by
was that Nimzovich's My System was so widely read that there was not much need. But for
years this book has been out of print, and we must reprimand Messrs. G. Bell and Sons for
giving priority to reprints of other books, seeing that My System is the most important chess
work of the century. That Nimzovich carries his system to excess is of little consequence;
he discovered and brilliantly expounded basic chess truths.
Another thing I have been meaning to do for some time is to give a few thoughts on
the Ruy Lopez. Znosko-Borovsky's article in our December 1946 number was admirably
provocative, but was clearly a piece of special pleading. In this article I shall not answer
Z-B directly, but merely give an idea of some of the subtleties of the Ruy Lopez from
White's viewpoint.
I can accomplish both objects by discussing the extraordinarily interesting opening
play in the game L. Steiner-B.Y. Mills, Australian Championship, Adelaide 1946-47.
Steiner lost the game from a superior position, but what we are concerned with is the
first part of the game; how Mills acquired an inferior position and why it was inferior.

- 1 1 9 --
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Purpose of the Lopez
The Ruy Lopez cannot guarantee
White an advantage, but neither is it a suit­
able subject for ribaldry, as the popular
Znosko-Borovsky implied in the final para­
graph of his article.
Admittedly, it is a bad opening to adopt
against a stronger player. Its virtue is that it
avoids any favorable simplification and sets
all kinds of positional problems for both
sides. This will be very clear as we proceed.
L. Steiner-B.Y. Mills
Ruy Lopez-Steinitz Defense
1. e4 e5
2. N£3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nf6
The Berlin Defense, now used mainly
to transpose favorably into the Steinitz De­
fense. Here we quote R.F. Combe, the Scot­
tish master and 1947 British Champion.
B.Y. Mills, by the way, is the grandson of a
Scottish champion, D.Y. Mills, who played
for Great Britain in eight matches against
the U.S.A., ending up at Board 3 Qust below
Blackbume), and never lost.
Combe, commenting on 3 Nf6 in .•.
one of his own games (B. C.M., January
1947), writes,
Though it may be heretical to say so, I
cannot affirm any faith in the Ruy Lopez
as an effective line of play for White.
Almost any defense can be developed
satisfactorily, although Black's usual re­
ply, 3. . a6, tends to obscure the deficien­
. As Black has not been forced into an
cies of White's Plan.
We do not agree with the "almost any,"
but we do think the defense adopted here is
good, and certainly simpler than 3... a6.
4. 0-0 Be7
The more usual way of transposing
into the Steinitz is 4... d6 5. d4 BdZ The text
- 1 20 -
may have a virtue in giving White less
option, since an immediate 5. d4 would be
met by 5... exd4 with ... Nxe4 a threat. Mills
had evidently given the matter plenty of
thought; he told me beforehand that he
intended to play this line.
5. Rel d6
6. c3
More usual is 6. d4 Bd7and now mostly
Z Nc3, but sometimes Z c3 to avoid the
simplifying line Z .. exd4. As Steiner intends
the latter, he plays c3 first, thus avoiding
... exd4 even on Move 6. We called this line
"theoretically ineffective," meaning ineffec­
tive according to "book theory," but that
means very little. Mter all, "theory" main­
tains that Black should obtain a satisfactory
game in any event, and the question here is:
can Black equalize more easily against en­
ergetic moves that obey the elementary
principle of quick development, or against
a subtler line which foregoes development
in order to keep Black's game restricted? In
practice, the answer is that an opponent will
usually find more difficulty with the less
familiar line.
And we should remind new readers
who have not studied our old A.C.R. ar­
ticles that "opening theory" in chess really
means "fashionable opening practice." In
spite of the vast literature of chess, there is
still no real opening theory. Analysts are
constantly making new discoveries which
upset current ideas.
6. ... 0-0
7. h3
early ...Bd7, he could now answer d4 with
. .. Bg4, or ... exd4 and then ...Bg4; and in the
Lopez White should never permit that. One
is tempted to say that the necessity for this
loss of time condemns White's sixth move,
but play on to Move 10.
7.
.•. Bd7
Again virtually preventing d4, which
 His Writings
would enable Black to exchange off two To see how little Black's "development"
pairs of minor pieces and thus eliminate the helps him, note that his position would be
restriction, e.g., 8. d4 Nxd4! 9. Nxd4 exd4 10. far easier with his �-� still undeveloped,
Bxd7 Q3d7 71. cxd4 d5 72. e5 Ne4 73. Nc3f5! for he could then play .. .d5 with a clear
with a good game. Therefore, to prepare d4 advantage! As it is, he could play it as a .ft.
White must lose another tempo in remov­ sacrifice, as in the Marshall Gambit, but
ing his �-�. here White's A/fl affords additional pro­
8. Bfl! tection to the �-side, and h3 is already
played; we doubt if even Harry Klass could
get away with it.
Black has various continuations which
should be adequate.
One is 8... Re8 9. d4 Bf8!, and if 10. d5,
...Ne7. If then 71. c4, ... h6 12. Nc3 Nh7! and
Black can enforce .. .f5 with the better game.
But White could forestall this with 12. Nh2!
himself, and if then 12 ... Nh7, 73. f4! 0r, in
this, if 12 ... g5, then 73. g4 and both players
Combe's opponent also did this, though would get <tls to their respective f5/f4-
in a different variant: 5. NcJ d6 6. d4 Bd7 7. squares. White could try to keep the �-side
Re1 exd4 (the line Steiner avoided) 8. Nxd4 blocked and hope to make something of his
0-0; and now 9. Bfl. But Combe's note to extra space on the �-side. It would be fair
Bfl could apply in either case. Combe writes: to say "equal chances."
Or, again, the Kecskemet System, with
Tarrasch' s recipe-to profit by the sup­ 8... Be8 followed by ...Nd7, ...Kh8, and .. f6.
posed advantage ofgreater "lebensraum." But neither of these plans tries to make
If this line is really best, it shows that b5 is anything of Black's plus in development;
too sensitive a spot for the King Bishop, more logical was the one adopted by Mills,
and Black has here revealed this fact by which was to answer White's coming d4
the simplest of developing moves. with ... exd4 and then ... d5. Th is does not
mean complete freedom, but Black's pieces
While we admire Combe's wittily pre­ will look less silly than at present.
cise style, seen also in the first note we 8.
... h6
quoted, his reasoning is questionable. The Black had to choose some move which
opposing argument is that the � has al­ could be of use in the coming position;
ready accomplished good work at b5, in originally we thought ...Be6 better, but as
inducing Black to adopt a restricted posi­ we shall see, the move played is excellent.
tion. It is now justified in moving away to 9. d4 exd4
preserve that restriction. White now reaps the reward of his
Note that White has not lost two tempi sacrifice of time. He acquires a strong .ft.
with Bb5-fl, but only one, because in re­ center. In chess, one does not sacrifice only
turning home the A has not undeveloped material. Here White has sacrificed time for
itself, but merely moved to another square space, i.e., has retarded his own develop­
where it is still developed; for it obstructs no ment in order to keep Black restricted.
other White piece and is in play. 10. cxd4 d5

- 12 1 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Stop a moment to see what Black would
play if White had omitted h3:naturally 70...
Bg4 (even though this .il has previously
moved once). White's center fts then be­
come weak as well as strong. Thus we see
that White's h3 was not a mere forced loss
of time through a transposition of moves,
but a strategical necessity in White's plan of
keeping Black cramped.
1 1. e5 Ne4
12. Nc3 Nxc3
In such positions one plays usually .. .j5
if possible, but obviously not here. Black
could play 72 ... Bf5 73. Bd3 (best) Nxc3 74.
bxc3 Bxd3 (or ... Qj7) leading to the same
position as in the next note.
13. bxc3 Be6
Far simpler was 73... Bf5 at once, al­
though, as we shall see, it does not necessar­
ily save a tempo. White could not reply 74.
c4?because of ...Nb4.
14. Bd3 Qd7
15. Bc2 f5?
Black's one and only mistake, but a
very serious one. He could have played
75... Bf5, and the extra move of this .il is
balanced by White's extra move with his
(Bc2). Black would come out with essen­
tially the same position as he could have
obtained by playing ...Bf5 on Move 12 or
13. Mills thought 75... Bf5 would lose a ft ,
but Steiner pointed out that after 76. Bxf5
03f5 77. @3 �6! there is no .ft. to win. "An
easy game for Black" (our verdict, not
Steiner's) might be improved by substitut­
ing "equal" instead of "easy," the latter be­
ing rather meaningless. Is a balanced chess
position ever "easy"?
Mter 75... Bf5! 76. Bxf5 03f5 a better
line for White might be an attempt to mobi­
lize his 'it'-side starting with 77. Nh2. Then
77. .. Na5 78.f4 (say) �6 79. Q,d3 (or Qg4)f5!
This last move is most important, in order
to prevent White's .ft.s from turning into a
steamroller byJ5, but it should not be played
- 1 22 -
too soon-certainly not till White has moved
his <t\, else he could play exf6 and step into
e5 at once, as in the game.
Note that in all these variations the
move . .. h6 is quite good for Black, as it
absolutely prevents Ng5 or Bg5 at any stage.
16. exf6 Rxf6
17. Ne5 Nxe5
18. dxe5 Rff8
The "Steamroller"
White's advantages in this position are,
first and foremost, his 'ift-side majority of
fts-he threatens to obtain a steamroller of
fts with f4, g4, and f5, which would turn
Black's pieces into a lot of weak-kneed
crocks-and secondly, his command of the
mating diagonal b l-h7. In all this, the main
trouble for Black is his .. . h6. After 'iff-side
castling, it is usually safe enough to move
the f- ft or the h- .ft. (one square), but not
both of these fts, as a "hole" is created at
g3/g6. This is why Black's 15th move was so
harmful. Mills, of course, realized it was
harmful, but it was the only alternative to
what he thought was the loss of a clear .ft. .
In the diagram, picture Black's .ft. still
on h7. The steamroller threat is then much
milder, as Black can wait for f5 and g4 and
then play ...g6. Black would have time to
initiate 'l;¥ -side counterplay.
PAWN DEVELOPMENT
Note carefully that White's advantages
which we have just detailed are structural,
 His Writings
i.e., lasting. Black's partial compensation
lies solely in his plus of two tempi in piece
development. I say "piece" because, where
an advancing ft majority is involved, the
passed ft and its adjacent supporting ft
can be counted as fighting units, so that one
can introduce the conception of ft devel­
opment; and in that, White is well ahead.
Moreover, Black cannot readily turn his d­
ft and c- ft into a steamroller, because his
d- ft is not yet a passed ft ; to make a
steamroller, he would have to advance all
four of his fts on the 'l;Y-side and play . .. b4-
a very slow process for which Black has no
time, because White's operations include a
mating threat at h7.
Again, in the middlegame the most
effective steamroller is one that can assist an
attack on the enemy �-
In the endgame, of course, the more
remote a passed ft is from the enemy �
'
the better.
Pseudo-Development
The student taught from infancy to
respect the principle of quick development
of pieces may ask in horrified tones: is
Black's plus of two tempi to count for noth­
ing at all?
I reply that, especially if there is no
open file for E!s, there is always a danger of
a plus in development silently stealing away.
If one cannot increase it-the ideal-it is
usually best to try to exchange it for some
more lasting advantage, or to destroy some
advantage of the enemy. Suppose you are
two tempi ahead and merely try to keep
them, then you may be like the man who
tries to follow the subtle ironical counsel of
Gilbert:
Take a pair ofsparkling
eyes . . .
Take and keep them-if
you can.
- 1 23
You will be beaten by Father Time, if
nothing else, and so in chess; a plus in
development tends to decrease in value as
development on each side progresses. It is a
simple statement of ratio-that to have two
pieces out to your opponent's none is more
advantageous than to have eight pieces out
to your opponent's six. But there is more in
it than that; if your opponent has an advan­
tage in space, and there is no open file (as in
the game before us), you will not be able to
develop effectively and may end up with
eight ineffectively developed pieces; then
you can do nothing much, and your oppo­
nent can effectively develop his other two
pieces and have a clear advantage.
WHEN AlTACK IS
TH E BEST DEFENSE
But the second part ofmy answer is: an
advantage in development can always, or
almost always, be used somehow.
In the position diagrammed after
Black's 18th, Steiner tried for too much.
Wishing to control the mating diagonal com­
pletely, he played 19. g4, because he wrongly
thought he could stand Black's counterat­
tack (19... Bc5).
But if 79.f4!, again, not a "developing"
move, be it noted (i.e., not piece-develop­
ing), Black is on the brink of a precipice.
White threatens g4, acquiring the dreaded
steamroller, all the more deadly because of
the additional threat of Qj3.
Desperate ills demand desperate rem­
edies, hence my idea of answering 79. f4
with 79... Bc5f 20. Kh2 g5! This guards the
mating square h7 with the 'l;¥ and, above all,
nips the steamroller in the bud (if an editor
cannot mix his metaphors, where is our
much vaunted freedom of speech?).
With the simple 79... Bj5 (after 79. f4)
Black could eliminate the mating threat (2 0.
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Bxj5 Rxj5), but then after 20. g4 Rjj8 21. f5! to allow a draw. But 20. @5 Bj5 21. e6! Bc5f
the steamroller floats in full bloom.
The plan based on .. .g5 offers a ft and White's turn to be brilliant, with 24. Q!h6!
exposes Black's '1;, and these are very good
substitutes for the advantages White has to
give up, but lines are opened so that Black's
advantage in development has at least a
chance of making itself felt.
I thought at first that Black might be
able to get satisfactory counterplay in all
variations, but my analysis was one-sided;
in some variations, Black does get "brilliant
counterchances," but if White plays with
care, attending both to defense and attack,
he can show a clear advantage.
Nevertheless, the risky counterattack
is Black's best chance. The old saw "The
best defense is attack" does not necessarily
apply if you are actually being attacked; but
it almost always applies if you are in danger
of serious cramp. The reason is that no
great precision is required to win against a
badly cramped game, since the time factor
ceases to matter much, but precision is re­
quired where the opponent has counter­
chances.
Some Difficult Analyses
After 1 9. f4
Before proceeding, I mention the im­
mediate 19... g5!? (my "second string"). In
reply, not 20. fxg5 because of the "brilliant
counter-chance" 20... Bxh3!!, for if then 21.
gxh3, ... Q!h3 22. Q!d5f Kh8 and White has
- 1 24 -
22. Be3! Bxe3f 23. Rxe3, and if 23. .. Q!'8it is
(Steiner). White gives up a piece but gets
three fts and an attack. [Ed.: Thus, 24. . .
Bxc2 25. Q!g5f Kh7 26. Q!d5, hence the three
fts; if25. . . Bg6, then 26. g4!; if25. . . Qg6, then
26. e7!]
So we return to:
19. f4 Bc5f 20. Kh2 (not Kh1, . . . Bxh3)
g5!
Now our main line ran as follows:
21. @5 Qg7 22. fxg5 Rf2 23. Bg6 hxg5
24. Bxg5 Bj5 25. Oj1.
Here we became over-exuberant with
25... Q!g6? 26. Q!d5f Be6 2Z Q!c5 RafB 28.
h4 Qs2 with a win for Black, but we missed
28. Re3! (Steiner), which breaks the attack
and leaves White with a win on material.
So Black must fall back on 25... c6 26.
Bxj5 Q!g5 2Z Be6f (forced) Kg7 28. Qg4
Q!g4 29. Bxg4 RafB (and if 30. e6, ...Rc2, as
31. e7? would just lose the ft ) . In his supe­
rior )":!s and White's weaknesses at a2, c3,
and g2, Black has fair compensation for the
ft . Steiner proceeds with 30. Rad1! Rc2 31.
Rd3 Rjf2 32. Rg3, when 32... Kh6 continues
the indeterminate struggle.
However, White can improve on this.
Instead of the obvious 23. Bg6, he can play,
more solidly, 23. Bd1!; and if 23... RafB, not
24. Q!h6 but 24. Bg4! (Steiner). If Black
exchanges (what else?), White's passed ft is
unblockaded, and White's position becomes
virtually impregnable (25. hxg4 is probably
White's best way to recapture, though Q!g4
is also good).
Going right back to Move 21 (after 19.
f4 Bc5f 20. Kh2 g5 from the diagram),
Koshnitsky suggested the simple 21. fxg5.
Then comes the sacrifice, 21... Bxh3! White
cannot accept, nor does the obvious 22.
@5 promise much (22... Bj5 23. Bb3 Bf2!,
and if 24. Rd1, ... Be4 and we believe Black
can draw in all variations); but the quieter
 His Writings
developing move 22. Be3! (Steiner) is suffi­ against 19. f4 than the desperate sortie dis­
cient to rob Black's counterplay of most of cussed? Well, a plausible move is 19... Qs6,
its force; then Black's exposed 'If becomes which certainly delays g4. White plays 20.
a very clear disadvantage, and White's e- lt Qf3. Then if 20... RadB(say), 21.f5!(Steiner),
is menacing. for if 21. . Bxf5, 22. Bxf5 g6 23. g4 gxf5 24.
.

To return to the diagram, although 19. gxf5 and the steamroller blossoms again. If
f4 is the sharper move, White's positional 24... Qg6t, 25. Qg4!
advantage is fairly clear if simply 19. Be3. So we say yes, Black's best chance is
Thus 19. . . Bf5 (our preliminary ... Qs6 has the risky line we suggested, and the chief
little point after 20. Rc 1!, suggested by morals are:
Steiner) 20. Bxf5 Rxf5 21. f4 Qs6 (and if 22. 1. Mter 'If-side castling, look for dan­
g4, .. .Rj7). When necessary to hold up f5, ger if you leave the square g3/g6 without ft
Black will play .. .g6 and probably double protection, especially if the enemy has his
§ s, in certain eventualities even threaten­ w-�.
ing ...g5. The steamroller can be halted, but 2. Consider the steamroller, how it
White retains a clear initiative which can­ grows.
not be wrested from him if he plays with
due care. An enemy supported passed ft on
eS/e4 is not necessarily strong at all. If, in
Nothing "Just As Good" the diagram, Black had a ft on fS, White's
In the position diagrammed after passed it on eS would be no menace; it is
Black's 18th, some students may still be only the advance of the supporting ft to fS
skeptical. Has Black really nothing better that makes a steamroller.

Wltil� we would never pr� to write as weD as

CedlPurdy, we do publish. our "Chess Gazette" ten
timea per year. If we b.ave one hnprovement over
Mr. Purely it is that we are on time (Cecll was
notorious for being late to the printer}!
-

Our eh.ess publication revieW$ and coqunents on all

thesbtff which. is SOLD to chess players: books, sets,
vid.., software� old t:hinp •d lot,$ more. It's been
published since 1980 and is mailed first Class.
...,

In l.the,prlee will go to �t{US�},,$23 (Canada),

$30 foreip; $.o Airma.iL �4
c

y�;c�ttanee to: ,
' ,

� · PO BQx l ·.��llp&�JA, 528f)� '

,' c
' ,
,c ,,

- 1 25 --
 The Search for Chess Perfection

THE TRUE ELEMENTS OF CHESS

Fifty years ago, the idea that combinations might be classified logically had never
entered anyone's mind. Writers concentrated on the positional side of chess, not because
they thought combinations didn't matter, but because no way of discussing them had been
thought of.
Thus, in any book dealing with positional play, you saw, and still see, notes like this
interspersed: "White cannot yet play Re7 because of 28... Bxh2f, " etc. Thus the writers
always tacitly admitted-even if they were not conscious of it-that every positional idea is
subject to combinative sanctions. When the tyro came to apply the ideas, he would find
himself overlooking combinations, and would wonder why the books were not helping
him as much as he hoped.
The writers, however, could do nothing about it. If a player kept missing combina­
tions, all he could be advised to do was to keep on practicing-or he might play through the
various combinations Uust given higgledy-piggledy) in excellent works such as Mason's
Art of Chess. You could either see combinations or you could not-just as you can either
juggle three oranges or you can't.
Then, first in German and later in English, came Emanuel Lasker, the thinker, with
his Manual, in which he showed that combinations could be classified according to the
kind of "motif' which gave rise to them. Lasker was followed by Tarrasch, the teacher;
although an old man in the last years of his life, Tarrasch rapidly absorbed Lasker's ideas
and turned them to his own ends in his famous book, The Game of Chess.
After studying the other articles in this series, most of my readers will now see fairly
clearly the difference between positional and combinative ideas. But some of them, I am
sure, would like to see it more clearly still.
Take, for example, an attack against the enemy <i1t. Here, the main positional
principle is just this:
Superiorforce conquers.
Thus, if you have four pieces posted for attack on a castled <i1t, and the enemy has
only three pieces on that wing (including the <i1t himself, who must be counted as a
defender), that's a rough indication that an attack on that wing may have a chance of
success.
But in any particular case, the actual possibilities and the methods ofprocedure must
be determined by calculation based on visualized moves.
A famous writer began a book with the proposition that the "elements" of chess were
force, space, and time. That is not true. Force, space, and time come into many things
besides chess; the things that go to make up chess must be the things that go to make up
the whole chess and nothing but the chess, and these are:
The units offorce, the 64points in which they operate, and the rules under which they
operate.
If we look into these rules closely, we shall find that all combinative ideas are based
directly on them-a thing never pointed out before, except by the present writer in 1938,
- 1 26 -
 His Writings
but less clearly then.
A huge majority of combinations, for
instance, are based mainly on that simple
little rule which we all take so much for
granted while appreciating so little of its
significance. This is Rule 4, clause iii (F.I.D.E.
Code):
"Thepersons shallplay alternately, one
move at a time."
See what a huge gulf this fixes between
chess and war, though chess was invented
as a war game-in the days when war was
comparatively civilized. In war, each side
just makes as many moves as it can, while it
can. The idea of fairness is ludicrous in war.
But a contest of pure skill has to be fair­
hence the artificial rule of moving in turn
and one thing at a time.
What do we deduce from this key rule?
That we should at all times be on the look­
out for an opportunity of placing our oppo­
nent under the necessity ofmaking two moves
at once, and should avoid getting into such a
jam ourselves. A vast majority ofgames of
chess are won and lost by the operation of
this rule.
Reuben Fine, in a praiseworthy effort
to simplify chess for the tyro, goes to the
length of saying, "All combinations are based
on a double attack." This is not true, but
what I want to emphasize just now is that it
would be true with "most" substituted for
"all."
There are four types of combination
that fall decidedly under the heading of
"double attack." They are:
1. "Geometrical" combinations (forks,
pins, skewers).
2. Discovered attack.
3. Desperado combinations.
4. Ties-our short term for combina­
tions based on a tied piece, i.e., a piece
defending another piece or defending, say,
the back rank against mate. Lasker called
them combinations based on the motif of
- 1 27
"function."
"Geometrical" Motif
Don't let "geometrical" worry you. It is
merely the term applied to any attack by a
single unit against two enemy units simulta­
neously. Very often, the three units con­
cerned stand on the corners of a triangle;
with a � the two forked units stand on two
'
corners of a regular octagon; and with a pin,
the three units stand in one straight line. A
pin may be regarded as merely a particular
case of a fork. The same applies to a
"skewer," which occurs when two pieces
are caught in the same line, with the more
valuable one in front-instead of in the rear,
as with a pin.
Picture a white )':! and a black � and
¥11 on the same rank or file, no obstructions,
)':! never in danger of capture. If the )':! is in
the middle, you have a fork. With ¥11 in the
middle, a pin. With � in the middle, a
skewer. But the effect is always the same:
double attack on the � and Y/1, even though
in two cases only one unit is actually enprise.
There is another and much commoner
kind of pin, where the front piece is not
attacked at all, but only pinned. This is
more of a "tie." We'll come to that.
Before passing on, let me give an ex­
ample of how easy it is to miss a fork more
than one move ahead. The diagram shows
the position just before the winner's final
move in the game Keres-Smyslov, 1948
World Championship, second round.
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Do you see any move here to induce
Black to resign? The solution is 2 Z h4! Bh6
(if 2Z .. Bxh4, 28. Qf4Bg5 29. Q3b8f) 28. Qg3
Kp 29. Bxf6 Rh7 30. @3f, etc.
Discovery Motif
Now for 2, Discovered Attack. Here
one piece unmasks an attack by an ally, at
the same time attacking something itself.
Discovered check is one case of it. This is
obviously a double attack.
Desperado Motif
That's easy. Now for 3, Desperado. To
show that a desperado combination is also a
double attack, let us take an example. See
the diagram below, which occurs after the
moves 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 dxe4
5. Nxe4 Be7 6. Bd3? Nxe4 7. BxeZ
¥ff is bearing on an enemy !! supported by
a �- No effect. All right, now attack the �
with something else. Now you have a double
attack, and it's effective. Your opponent
needs to move the !! to free the � and at
'
the same time to move the � from danger.
And again Rule 4(iii) inexorably bars him.
A piece may be tied (and therefore
vulnerable to a combination) in other ways
than by having to defend an ally. It may be
guarding a mating square, or a mating line,
or it may be pinned, e.g., A pins � to ¥ff
and then comes e5 hitting the � with great
effect, unless the pinning A can be driven
off before the blow falls.
There is no point in giving special ex­
amples of such everyday occurrences, but
here is a more subtle example of a "tie"
which I have never forgotten, because
through not seeing it I missed tying for the
Australian Championship at my first at­
tempt (Sydney 1926).

Purdy

Black plays Z .. Nxf2! This is called a

desperado combination, the � being the
desperado-he is doomed to die, so he sells
his life for a 1l: rather than give it away. It
amounts to a double attack on ¥ff and .Q..
Never mind that both the attackers (¥fi and C.L.R. Boyce
ltl) are en prise themselves. White can take After 22. N(e2)xd4
only one ofthem under Rule 4(iii). You could
not have a more striking example of the Two moves earlier, Black had em­
rule's importance over all others. barked on a combination which he had
now intended to continue with 22... bxa2!
Tie Motif 23. Nb3Rh8(threatening ...Rxb3). Now Black
No. 4, the Tie Combination, is essen­ saw that White would then play 24 Na 1, .

tially different from all the other attacks, and he reasoned that White would then
because one attack was already there and have a piece for two fts and a surely defen­
you merely add another to it. Suppose your sible position, seeing that Black himself is

- 1 28 -
 His Writings
not yet developed, while White has three
pieces tastefully arrayed around his '31 for
defense. So Black sadly played 22 Qxd4,...
with a poor game but at any rate getting
back his piece.
That was common sense, in its way,
but chess is a game of romance.
Black missed that, after the moves in­
dicated up to 24. Na 1, he could reply by
putting his ¥11 enpriSe with 24... Qs3!!1t gives
a forced win in all variations-which it would
have been unnecessary4 to calculate in ad­
vance, the move 24... Qs3 being so obvi­
ously strong once seen.
But that's the catch, to see it. And that
is what I have always concentrated on in
writing about combinations-what you
should look for in every position to avoid
missing combinations.
The double attack here is, first, the
masked attack on the mating square b 1, and
then the second attack on the tied or pinned
b- ft . By what kind of search would you be
likely to see, several moves ahead, a move
like this?
There are two different ways in which
the combination might be found, and I
suggest to each student that he pick the way
4 [Ed.: Ralph says that both Chess World
1948, p. 268, and the Hammond&Jamie­
son reprint give "unnecessary." He be­
lieves this word is required by the sense of
the sentence. Experience has shown that
H&J did little, if any, serious editing, of
the original articles. While I may be in­
correct in what Purdy wants to say, I
believe the word he should've used is
"necessary," especially in light of his fol­
lowing paragraph. That is, seeing some of
these combinations can be very difficult,
hence it is often necessary to do hard
calculation first. If, however, one is "lucky"
to find the right move quickly, then the
"hard" calculation becomes wmecessary.]
- 1 29 -
that appeals to him and employ it consis­
tently.
The first way would be the mechanical
one of looking at all moves that threaten
something (no matter how absurd-looking),
just as one looks at all checks and all cap­
tures. Thus, in addition to visualizing the
obvious 24th move ... Qj6, also attacking
the b- ft , you would force yourself to visual­
ize ... Qsz3 and ... Qs3, even though they put
the ¥11 en priSe.
The second way would be always to
look for any square, file, rank, or diagonal
under a masked threat of mate. Here, the
square b 1 is under a masked threat of mate
from the t'! , and that should immediately
suggest a sacrifice, since any material can
be given up for mate.
The second way is preferable, because
it is more logical. By forming such a habit
you would soon develop a valuable intu­
ition in attack. But perhaps one should em­
ploy both methods.
I have now dealt briefly with the types
of combination based on double attack.
They are the ones in which Rule 4(iii) is the
main ingredient, though actually it comes
into almost all combinations.
Note: Of course other board games
have the rule of alternate moving. The rea­
son that these other games do not have
combinations comparable with those of
chess is because the chess pieces have spe­
cial moves, and each piece a different one.
One result is that most attacks in chess are
nonreciprocal, i.e., the attacker attacks with­
out being himself en priSe to the thing at­
tacked, and this of course greatly multiplies
the combinative possibilities.
The special moves of the chess pieces
are part and parcel of all chess combina­
tions, whereas other rules come into some
combinations and not into others, e.g., the
rule that a piece cannot occupy or leap over
an already-occupied square.
 The Search for Chess Perfection

WHY A PAWN CENTER?

Don't be too puzzled by what the books say about the center. It's partly nonsense.
A � ' A, or Y/1 radiates more power from the center (e4, d4, e5, d5), and can be
rapidly transferred from there to any other part of the board.
But it is useless to put pieces in or near the center if they can be driven away, e.g., a
common blunder by raw beginners after 7. e4 e5 2. /4 exf4 3. Nf3 is 3 ... Bc5?
Then, of course, comes 4. d4 and Black must lose a clear tempo (move) in develop­
ment. Being already behind White, he now has a position so bad that, between two
masters, it would almost always mean defeat.
In the opening, all one can do is to push .fts forward into the center, which at any rate
gives you a free run of the space behind them and prevents your opponent from getting
too much central space himself.
Mere number of .fts in the center means nothing, however. Take these three
positions.

1 3

In the first one, White has a central .ft

2 majority of 2-0. In the second, he has nu­
merical equality. In the third, he has a mi­
nority.
But the first position is as good for
Black as for White, while the other two are
to White's advantage.
There is a simple test:
Have Ifilesfor my Rooks?
If I have, I am sure to have freedom for
my other pieces as well.
Applying this test to the first diagram,
we find that both sides have a fairly free
game. Black will ultimately develop his .§ s
on the c- and cl-files, where they will be

- 1 30 -
 His Writings
rather better placed than White's, since they
have the offensive. White's center fts are
targets.
In the second diagram Black has just
been induced to play ... exd4. This is called
"giving up the center," and you can see this
tells the story quite well. White has the run
of one file up to d5, and he can also develop
a !'! in the e-file without making it look
absolutely silly. Black, however, has only
one file on which a !'! could even pretend to
be developed. All this confers on White a
slight advantage (don't imagine that Black
is necessarily lost).
In the third diagram, White obviously
has the freer game. Black would stand bet­
ter if he were free to open up a file with ... c5.
Now we come to the part where the
books talk nonsense. What is the idea of the
King's Gambit ( 7. e4 e5 2. f4), the Queen's
Gambit ( 1. d4 d5 2. c4), the Center Game ( 1.
e4 e5 2. d4), and the allied Scotch Game ( 1.
e4 e5 2. Nj3 Nc6 3. d4)?
All these openings are characterized
by:
( 1) the advance of one of the two cen­
ter fts, followed by
(2) the advance of an adjacent jt .
The purpose of the adjacent jt is sim­ do to him by Ng5 (after 3 .. Nf6)..
the advantage of the move.
There are more subtle openings, such
as the Ruy Lopez, in which the push of the
adjacent jt is held for a long time in re­
serve.
For beginners, perhaps the most telling
point is this: if the possibility of develop­
ment of t'!s plays such a big part in opening
theory, how important it must be to de­
velop the t'!s as soon as possible.
And yet in "simuls" one still meets
such play as the following:
Mter 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc3 3. Bc4 (see
diagram), a tyro will often tamely push 3 ...
h6?
He wants to play out his 4::1 , and first
stops Ng5. He doesn't realize that in retard­
ing his development by one move he is
doing more damage than his opponent could

ply to produce the possibility of an ex­ As Ng5 is not yet threatened, he should
change of its (not necessarily at once). Thus simply develop his free A (at c5 or even
provision is made at the outset for the open­ e7), then move out his 4J to f6. And then if
ing or semi-opening of a file so that the t'!s White is mad enough to waste time playing
may be developed. Ng5, which would retard his own develop­
Fundamentally different is such an ment, Black can simply castle. This will
opening as the Giuoco Pianissimo: 1. e4 e5 completely protect his f- jt (for A and 4J
2. Nj3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. Nc3 Nf6. are worth more than a !'! and jt while
Neither side can now advance either other pieces are on the board).
its d- it or f- jt two squares, so that the
development of the �s will be long post­
poned. Thus, the "advantage" of the move Interlude in the Center
tends to disappear. The Editor,
In other words, the openings we looked Dear Sir,
at first are attempts to make something of Forgive me for being critical {We don't

- 131 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
forgive, we thank.-Ed.). Re "Why A Pawn
Center?" by CJ.S. Purdy.
Well, why a pawn center? No finer
example than the game Tarrasch-Ale­
khine, Pistyan 1922, Blumenfield Coun­
tergambit, can be found to support the
theory that there is something in a strong
center other than the development of
Rooks, which Mr. Purdy is so strong for.
Since this game, no attempt has been
made to accept the gambit. In the progress
of that game Tarrasch had plenty of
squares for his Rooks! I personally do not
think it is a good way to introduce a series
for novices, as the first article could be
very controversial. Far better would it
have been to state that "the object of a
gambit is twofold"-in the first place, e.g.,
King's Gambit, it opens up the f-file, on
which the h-Rook can be quickly devel­
oped {if accepted). In the second place, it
offers the possibility, after elimination or
exchange, of forming a STRONG CEN­
TER, whereas in the Queen's Gambit,
which after all is not a true or real gambit
since Black cannot take and keep the
pawn . . . (Our correspondent breaks off
here, evidently leaving us to fill in the
blank.-Ed.)
Even if the Giuoco Piano is funda­
mentally different (as Mr. Purdy contin­
ues), it can hardly be said that it is a good
continuation, viewed in the light of mod­
em chess conception. The move 3. Bc4
by White continues his development, to
be sure, but does not advance his posi­
tionally indicated attack against Black's e­
pawn. This, I think, explains why this
opening has pretty well disappeared from
tournament play. Whereas the Ruy Lopez
does, as Mr. Purdy will be well aware.
So I would say that the approach in
the article could very likely confuse the
novice just as much as the weight oflitera­
ture concerning pawn centers, and tend
- 1 32
to start him off on the wrong foot.
I sincerely hope you will accept my
notes in the spirit offered.
Yours faithfully,
J. Hibbert.
Our answer to the last paragraph is
contained in parenthesis in the first.
Mr. Hibbert's is more or less the voice
of the orthodox student who has read a
good deal about chess and is naturally in­
clined to rebel at having his icons shattered.
Let us deal first of all with the criticism
which is merely a misunderstanding. Since
this reader has misunderstood us, perhaps
others have. By the way, students would do
well to run through the article before pro­
ceeding-it is very short.
We were not writing on the relative
merits of openings. We simply picked out
the Giucco Pianissimo (both sides playing
Bc4/c5, both .i£)s to f3/c6, and d3) as the
opposite kind of opening to the King's or
Queen's Gambit, since in it there is no early
provision for developing �s.
It is interesting for average players to
know why some openings are in fashion
among the masters and some out of fashion,
but such knowledge will not improve their
own play. Any opening one is used to is a
good opening.
Our Test
The second criticism we answer is that
we began with something controversial. It
may have been controversial, but we be­
lieve that we are right. We believe that we
can best help beginners by simplifying the
problem of the center down to the problem
of developing �s. We said:
"There is a simple test (of whether a
central position is favorable).
"Have I.filesfor my Rooks?
"If I have, I am sure to have freedom
for my other pieces as well."
-
 His Writings
Our correspondent would like us to tion, i.e., placing of pawns, but rather on
have said, "It offers the possibility . . . of our general effectiveness there.
forming a strong center ... "

All right, what is a strong center? We
don't know anything vaguer in chess. For a
start, there is a general confusion between
the terms "center" and "pawn center." The
center, strictly speaking, is "the four squares
which enclose the midpoint of the board,
i.e., the squares e4, d4, e5, d5 for both sides"
(Nimzovich, My System). A ft center I have
never seen defined, but it is generally un­
derstood as consisting of one or more fts in
the center, the enemy having no fi in the
center, or he may have one if the "pawn
center" contains two, e.g., after 1. e4 e6 2. d4
d5 White has, temporarily at least, a ft
center (two versus one), and after 3. Nc3
dxe4 4. Nxe4 he still has a ft center (one
versus zero), Black's "center pawn" being
only on e6 and therefore not in the center
proper. Rather confusing, we agree. On the
other hand, after 3. exd5 exd5 we have equal­
ity of fts in the center, and it is not custom­
ary to speak of either side as having a .ft.
center then.
The thoughtful beginner may ask, why
should a ft center be strong? Why indeed?
Quite often, it isn't strong.
Nimzovich Lashes Out
As far back as 1913, in the Wiener easy for beginners. Are they now simply to
Schachzeitung, Aron Nimzovich was already be told, "That's bunk," and given no substi­
attacking prevalent notions about the cen­ tute? Our substitution is rough, but it is easy
ter. He then wrote:
If in a battle I seize a bit of debatable center, the other pieces are sure to have.
land with a handful of soldiers, without
having done anything to prevent an en­
emy bombardment of the position, would
it ever occur to me to speak of a conquest
of the terrain in question? Obviously not.
Then why should I do so in chess?
It dawns upon us then, that control of
the center depends not on a mere occupa-
Here we interpose, how is that effec­
tiveness to be measured? We have given a
very simple test, which even beginners can
apply intelligently. Namely, have we effec­
tive provision for developing �s?
For preference, the provision should
be on central or near-central (c-, f-) files. To
see this, play through again the correspon­
dence game Purdy-Goldstein Uune 1948,
Chess World). Here White allowed his oppo­
nent to double �s on the only open file, but
it was the b-file, which had little bearing on
the center. In an endgame, the �s would
have been strong; in the middlegame, they
were not.
Nimzovich went on to give several ex­
amples where one player had a ft center
and yet his opponent had the better control
of the center.
Again we quote Nimzovich:
''All this teaches us that by counting
the heads of the pawns in the center,
nothing, literally nothing, is gained."
Rescue from Chaos
Again, then, comes the question, what
are we to substitute? Counting heads was
and will be found reliable, and the reason is
always this: if the �s have scope in the
Test for Our Test
Now let us examine the game quoted
by our correspondent, Tarrasch-Alekhine,
Pistyan 1922.
1. d4 Nf6
2. N£3 e6

- 1 33 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
3. c4 c5 is due to the well-developed pieces behind
4. d5 b5 it. They are poised for a swoop. So don't
5. dxe6 fxe6 start driving a wedge into Bill Brown's posi­
6. cxb5 d5 tion next time you play him without having
7. e3 Bd6 support ready. A wedge without proper
8. Nc3 0-0 support is easily broken up, and then the
9. Be2 Bb7 would-be attacker's position often collapses.
10. b3 Nbd7 On the other hand, don't be scared.
11. Bb2 Qe7 Here is an example ofan early wedge that is
12. 0-0 Rad8 quite good:
13. Qc2 e5 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 d6 3. Nc3 e5 4. d5!
14. Rfe1 e4 Here the wedge can be further sup­
15. Nd2 Ne5 ported by e4 (if 4... Bf5, then 5. g3 and Bg2
first), and Black's undermining move, .. .j5,
is obstructed by his 'i£7-{), while ... c6will do
nothing worse than open the c-file for both
sides, White being left with the major share
of the board.
The notion of wedges goes rather be­
yond the question of mere .ft centers. In a
.ft center, the .ft or .fts merely guard impor­
tant squares. A wedge, on the other hand,
also acts as an obstruction. It tends to divide
On Wedges the enemy forces, i.e., it prevents them from
Black has more than a .ft center now. crossing readily from wing to wing.
Once a .ft gets into the enemy side of the Having once got on to the subject of
center, it acts as a wedge; the wedge is wedges, we give the rest of the game, with
doubly effective if on the square nearer the which Alekhine won a brilliancy prize, just
enemy castled 'i£7, i.e., on d5/d4 with en­ as an example of the effect a wedge may
emy 'i£7 castled "i;¥-side, or e5/e4 with en­ have. Then we return to the part of the
emy 'i£7 castled 'i£7-side, as here. In general, game which concerned the .ft center before
the defender cannot afford to ignore it. it became a wedge.
Either he must undermine its support (which One question? At what stage has White
cannot be done here because White has no had "plenty of squares for his Rooks"? Not
c- .ft left to attack the supporting cl- .ft ) , or for one moment so far has White had an
else he must challenge the outpost itself effective file available for a E\ . We had to
(with j3) or push past it lj4), a procedure mention this, as our correspondent makes
which also weakens the outpost's effect. such a point of it.
Unfortunately for White, either 16. j3 Now we finish the game:
or 16. f4 is too unsafe here, and that is why 16. Nd1 Nfg4
White has a losing game, e.g., 16. f4? exj3 1 7. Bxg4 Nxg4
e.p. 17. gxj3 Neg4!, a winning sacrifice. Or in 18. Nfl Qg5!
this, 17. Bxj3 Neg4 and again the attack wins. 19. h3 Nh6
Before we leave the diagram, let me 20. Kh1 Nf5
explain that the effectiveness of the wedge 21. Nh2 d4!

- 1 34 -
 His Writings
22. Bel d3 himselfbe sidetracked. Simply 5. Bg5!, mak­
23. Qc4t Kh8 ing e4 possible, keeps his grip. Instead, White
24. Bb2 Ng3t! chooses to barter his grip for a ft . This idea,
25. Kgl Bd5 too, was entirely sound, though not com­
26. Qa4 Ne2t mendable for players wishing to avoid diffi­
27. Khl Rf7! culties.
28. Qa6 h5! Annotators commonly attribute play­
29. b6 Ng3t ers' defeats to moves which were not bad at
30. Kgl axb6 all.
31. Qxb6 d2! 5. fxe6
32. Rf1 Nxfl 6. cxb5 d5
33. Nxfl Be6!!
34. Khl Bxh3!
35. gxh3 Rf3
36. Ng3 h4!
37. Bf6 Qxf6
38. Nxe4 Rxh3t
39. Resigns

Were You Right?

Now we return to the opening.
Tarrasch-Aiekhine
1. d4 Nf6
2. N£3 e6
3. c4 c5!?
4. d5!
The correct answer to Black's attempt
to usurp the initiative. White seizes the
chance of driving a wedge. This move would
not have been good against, say, 3... b6,
because the wedge would have been too
vulnerable. In general, the "wedge" move
d5 is good only if the enemy has already
challenged the d- ft with either ... e5 or ...c5.
For example, 7. d4 c5 2. d5! Or 7. e4 e6 2. d4
c5? 3. d5! An exception is where d5 hits a
piece, e.g., 1. d4 Nc6 2. d5!
4. ••• b5!?
Blumenfeld Countergambit. A ft is
offered for the purpose of undermining the
wedge.
5. dxe6
White, however, has no need to let
According to orthodox notion, Black
has what might be described as a "fearsome
pawn center." Its main strength, however,
lies in the fact that there is no open file on
the board. White's problem is simply to
open a file, preferably in or near the center,
or at least to threaten to-nothing more than
that. For this, it is quite obvious that White
must somehow contrive to play e4. As Black
can guard the key square with three units
(by ...Bb 7), White must also get three units
onto the square, or else play it as a ft
sacrifice.
For this plan, a logical first move would
have been 7. Nbd2. Alekhine suggested fol­
lowing that up with b3 and Bb2, delaying
the challenge in the center.
7. e3!
This, however, is also an excellent
move, probably the best. The trouble was
that Tarrasch played it as part of a wrong
plan.
7. Bd6
8. Nc3 0-0

- 1 35 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
The Real Crisis
This was where Tarrasch made a mis­
take-in our opinion his only one! He played
9. Be2? He should have played 9. Bd3! for
e4.
The objection-why play e3 first if e4
was the objective?-is superficial.
To have played e4 in one move would
also have involved an interruption in devel­
opment and would have meant returning
the .ft , e.g., 7. Nbd2 Bb7 8. e4!? dxe4 9. Ng5
Qf-5!
The idea of e3 for Bd3 for e4 is well
known to addicts of the Colle System.
In reply to 9. Bd3, Black could upset
White's immediate intention (e4) with 9...
c4. No matter. That move itself makes Black
vulnerable in a new place and renders e4
unnecessary. Mter 10. Be2 followed by cas­
tling, simply b3 forces open a file. And
Black's ... e5-e4 this time permits the .1£) to
take the central square d4. If 9... Bb7, then
70.Qs2 reinforces the threat of e4. True,
Black can prevent e4 by . ..Ne4, but again
this allows White to open a file (Bxe4, after
castling).
If (after 9. Bd3 Bb7 10. Qs2 as above)
10. . e5, 11. e4 d4 12. Nb 1 with a solid posi­
. sufficed to point the way to White's right
tion.
It is then the c-file which White's ,l'!s
can use, bearing on the backward c- .ft .
Black has a supported passed lt , but it is
completely blockaded. Of course Black still
has some compensation for his lt minus,
but nothing like what he obtained in the
- 1 36 -
actual game.
Finally, if 9 ... e5 ?, 10. Nxd5!
The Two Ways Home
Now there is surely no question that
White should have played for e4.
The question is rather this: Is e4 aimed
at Black's center .fts, or is it aimed at getting
freedom for White's pieces, including his
,!'!s?
The answer is that both paths lead to
the same place (e4).
Nimzovich would undoubtedly have
stressed the idea that it was important to
halt Black's "pawn roller"-see my article
"Lopez Subtleties and Steamrollers." Black's
three center is constitute a very powerful
"roller" indeed. Note how it came on. First
the three .fts abreast on c5, d5, eS. Then,
later on, the two abreast on e4 and d4.
However, a center lt roller is rather a
rarity. I wanted a general idea which would
cover any closed kind of opening position
at all.
My solution was this:
Play yourpawns in such a way as willgive
freedom to your pieces.
However, nearly every learner in try­
ing to accomplish this would forget about
his poor old ,!'!s. Even Tarrasch did that!
Instead, if the learner thinks always of
his .!":( s, he will find good squares turning up
for his other pieces anyway.
And even in the exceptional case of a
central .ft roller, and a case difficult enough
to baffle the great Tarrasch, I have shown, I
hope, that thinking about t':(s would have
general plan. Not necessarily 7. e3, 8. Nc3,
and 9. Bd3 precisely, but the general idea of
playing in some way for e4.
 His Writings

WHAT IS POSITION PLAY?

I have long been conscious of a missing link in chess theory. Just what is position
play?
Nimzovich rightly sneered at the old idea that every chess move was either "attack­
ing" or "defensive."
Well within the last quarter-century, this crude conception was still current. I well
remember a conversation I had as a schoolboy with the Yugo-Slav master, Boris Kostich,
on his visit to Australia in 1924. It was his last night in Sydney, and I asked him whom he
considered Australia's best player. "Viner," he said. Keeping up my bright chatter, I asked
where Viner's special strength lay-in attack or defense? But he brushed these words aside.
"He just seems," he said, "to have a better sense of position than the others"-and added
hopefully a few minutes later, as he waved me into a tram, "Well, try and improve." I
sensed vaguely then that the master and the amateur viewed chess from different planes­
as though the one were a bird and the other a fish.
I knew that Kostich, fluent though he was, could not have explained just what he
meant by a "sense of position." Evidently, as soon as one became a strong player one
automatically abandoned crude ideas without necessarily being able to put one's new
ideas into words. One became more intuitive oneself without necessarily being able to
explain chess to other people one whit the better. Vague phrases like "a sense of position"
would serve well enough among masters to convey what they all felt in common-felt
rather than knew.
The master thinks mostly in moves and is impatient of words. The amateur wants
words, because moves fog him. He lacks the master's mechanical ease and skill. To reduce
chess to words-that is a hard task. All the thousands of chess books have not quite
accomplished it.
Steinitz, Nimzovich exploit them in the endgame .... We are
What is position play? Steinitz, seeing inclined rather to assign to this plan of
that chess could not be reduced to the simple operation a very subordinate role .... There
concepts of attack and defense, saw posi­ are quite other matters to which the atten­
tion play as the "accumulation of minute tion of the positional player must be di­
advantages." rected, and which place this "accumula­
Concerning this, Nimzovich wrote as tion" wholly in the shade.
follows in My System: What are these things, and in what do
I see the idea of true position play? The
Another erroneous conception may answer is short and to the point: in a
be found among masters. Many of these prophylactic ....
and numbers of strong amateurs are un­ Position play . . . is an energetic and
der the impression that position play systematic application of prophylactic
above all is concerned with the accumu­ measures. What it is concerned with above
lation of small advantages, in order to all else is to blunt the edge of certain

- 1 37 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
possibilities which in a positional sense
would be undesirable. Of such possibili­
ties, apart from the mishaps to which the
less experienced player is exposed, there
are two kinds only. One of these is the
possibility ofthe opponent making a "free­
ing" pawn move.
What the other possibility is, Nimzo­
vich never clearly tells us; but as he goes on
to advocate the overprotection of strategi­
cally important points, one assumes that the
second possibility is connected therewith.
But it is not clear how the phrase "blunting
the edge or' could be properly applied to
this possibility.
Just here, then, Nimzovich's attempt to
put position play into words breaks down.
A little further on, Nimzovich says:
In the last resort, position play is noth­
ing other than a fight between mobility
{of the pawn mass) on the one side and
efforts to restrain this on the other. In this
all-embracing struggle the intrinsically
very important device of the prophylac­
tic is merely a means to an end.
Even this idea of position play is not
wide enough. It is one kind of position play
rather than position play in general.
Going back over these quotations, note
first of all that Nimzovich is not quite fair to
Steinitz in limiting his purpose (in accumu­
lating advantages) to the endgame. Some­
times the advantages might bear fruit ear­
lier. On the other hand, Steinitz's concep­
tion is too narrow, if only because it ex­
cludes the player trying to improve an infe­
rior position. The player is trying to lessen
or eliminate disadvantages, or reduce en­
emy advantages, rather than to accumulate
advantages. Yet he is playing positionally­
that is quite certain.
Nimzovich's idea that position play
- 1 38 -
consists in prophylactic measures is also too
narrow to cover position play in general.
Take any game of chess: nearly all the moves
will be positional, but there will be many of
these which cannot be called "prophylactic
measures" except by straining the language
beyond all reason.
In any case, we are in a sorry state if we
have to resort permanently to a metaphor
to explain position play. Nimzovich had a
fanciful mind, and, up to a point, his pictur­
esque notions help the student to under­
stand his ideas. They are all very well in a
book, where the author can devote plenty
of space to explaining his meaning. But for
a current expression that will make sense
even to players who have not read Nimzo­
vich, we must abandon metaphor and seek
some self-explanatory word or words in the
same category as "attack" and "defense."
It must not be a word that is merely a
substitute for "prophylactic." For, as we
have seen, that idea is too narrow. But it
should certainly be capable of including it.
The Solution
I believe I have found the solution. Try
it out on every possible kind of position
play, and you will find it satisfactory. This is
it.
Position play is the treatment of posi­
tions in which sound attacking play is not
possible, and purely defensive play is not
necessary. It means either strengthening one's
own position or weakening the enemy's.
"Strengthening" and "weakening" are
the simple words that sum up position play.
The word "weakening" is very familiar to
all chess students. The words "strengthen"
and "strengthening" are used very little,
and they could be used more with advan­
tage. The average player finds many moves
in master games which he cannot under­
stand; some of them, I am sure, would be
clearer once the student got hold of the
 His Writings
general idea that the master was trying to
strengthen his position.
In a note to one of his games with
Boleslavsky, Botvinnik says, "White is try­
ing to strengthen his position to the maxi­
mum." That, I maintain, is the comrnonsense
idea at the back of positional play in gen­
eral.
A military leader, at times when cir­
cumstances do not favor an attack, and, on
the other hand, he is not compelled to
concentrate on the defense of certain threat­
ened points, still has plenty of things to
keep him busy-improving lines of supply
and communication, fortifying various
points, and also planning air-raids and bom­
bardments, not necessarily as preparation
for a specific attack but simply to weaken
the enemy generally. Even in Caesar we
read such things as, "The Gauls have been
driven back, our troops busied themselves
in fortifying their camp."
When there is nothing you can accom­
plish by force and nothing you are forced to
do, what logical course can you possibly
follow except one ofthese two-to strengthen
your position or weaken the enemy's?
And yet the average player is rarely
guided by this simple idea. If he cannot
force something, and is not himself forced
to defend, he flounders about-looking, as
likely as not, for some "trap" to set. If the
opponent makes a certain silly reply, the
result will be delightful; but it may be that
some other reply will leave the trapper in a
worse situation than before. Thus, the trappy
move may have been positionally a bad
one.
Position play, unlike combination, is
not concerned with calculated lines of play-
1 go there, he goes there, I go there, he goes
there, and so forth. If your move is not
forcing, i.e., if it is positional, that is the
same as saying that the enemy has a fairly
wide choice of reply. Therefore your move
- 1 39
must be of a sort that will serve you well in
every possible eventuality. Developing
moves in the opening are always of this
kind.
How are we to select such a move? We
cannot do it by calculation-except that we
must, before playing any move, be sure we
are not inadvertently giving the enemy the
chance of a sound combinative reply. Apart
from that, we must rely not on calculation­
because there would be far too much for
any human brain to calculate-but on judg­
ment and knowledge.
This is where the playing over of mas­
ter games helps us particularly. They build
up in us something of the intuitive judg­
ment which guided the master we are fol­
lowing.
Emanuel Lasker
A writer who has said a great many
valuable things about both combination and
position play is Emanuel Lasker. Yet he
seems to equate position play to the busi­
ness ofplanning. Even if that were true, one
would then ask, planning for what? But is it
true? Plans are of course highly important
in position play, as a rule, but not invariably
necessary.
For instance, looking at a certain type
of position, any strong player will quickly
decide without making any plan that White
should play h3 to make a "blow hole" for his
'\t1. There is no specific threat, but the move
will free the t:ls from the task of guarding
the back rank. It is certainly a positional
move, but no plan was necessary. The player
has simply made the most strengthening
possible move.
Lasker, speaking ofthe gaps in Steinitz's
theory, writes:
Steinitz, after his advice to both the
attacking and defending parties, does not
speak of the strategy that a player should
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
follow who feels that he is neither the
attacker nor the defender. What plan has
the player to follow in a balanced posi­
tion? Of course, none with the immediate
intention ofwinning, none which embod­
ies the fear oflosing, none that would not
develop the pieces-these answers to the
query may be anticipated, but they are
not decisive. I should say that besides all
of the above he must play-to maintain
the cooperation of his pieces.
This is not convincing. Some positional
operations in balanced positions do not fit
into the idea very well, e.g., the removal of
a .ft weakness in your own position or the
attempt to induce the enemy to advance a
ft and thus create a weakness. On the other
hand, the simple concepts of strengthening
and weakening will include these ideas and
Lasker's idea of maintaining cooperation of
pieces as well. Moreover, the concepts of
strengthening and weakening apply to su­
perior and inferior positions as well as bal­
anced ones. That is important, because the
ordinary player is frequently uncertain as to
whether his position is superior, equal, or
inferior, on the whole.
Back to Nimzovich
Returning to Nimzovich, let us see if
"strengthening" includes Nimzovich's idea
of"prophylactic" play. A prophylactic might
be roughly defined as a drug or chemical
aimed at combating this or that particular
germ or virus which has not actually at­
tacked the subject as yet. In other words,
the subject is strengthening, in advance, his
resistance to a possible attack of some par­
ticular kind. So it is a strengthening not for
any eventuality, but for one kind of even­
tuality.
In chess this means that, from among
the numerous possible eventualities, the
player has selected that one or that kind of
- 1 40 -
one which it will pay him best to take ad­
vance measures against, say the enemy free­
ing move .. .j5. Not all positional moves are
like that. For instance, most developing
moves in the opening are rather a prepara­
tion for any kind of eventuality at all, either
offensive or defensive. Certainly if we can
pick out certain eventualities as specially
important to provide against, our play will
gain in precision; but it is not always pos­
sible to do this. But the pointjust now is that
a "prophylactic" move is, in fact, one kind
of strengthening move.
Let it be clearly understood that I am
not attempting to upset Nimzovich's con­
ception, but only to fit it into a wider one.
Following Nimzovich, a student might try
to make every noncombinative move a "pro­
phylactic," and become rather puzzled at
finding it not always possible to fit the idea
in.
In Guide to Good Chess I said, "Position
play is the art ofimproving your position in
small ways when no sound combination is
possible."
That is quite true. It does not contra­
dict anything I have said here. But perhaps
it lays emphasis rather on the strengthening
of one's own position than on weakening
the enemy's, whereas the emphasis should
be equal. It depends purely on the circum­
stances of any particular position which of
the two it is best to try to do. On the other
hand, the proviso "when no sound combi­
nation is possible" is one always to be borne
in mind. To make a positional move when a
sound combination was possible is a serious
lapse. One is then on a par with the tennis
player who has the opportunity for an over­
head kill and, instead, feebly puts the ball
back into play. That sort of tennis, and that
sort of chess, just doesn't make sense.
It is axiomatic that position play is
concerned only with small advantages and
disadvantages. Big ones, naturally, occur
 His Writings
only through forcing moves, i.e., combina­
tions. But because the great majority of
chess moves have to be positional, position
play is, taken all round, of roughly the same
importance as combination.
If we admit that position play means
strengthening our position or weakening
the enemy's, of course that does not enable
us to find the best positional moves. No, but
it must be a help to know what we should be
trying to do.
TH E SPIRIT OF
POSITION PLAY
This is a sequel to "What Is Position
Play?" That is an important article, and I
suggest going over it again.
The magazine presentation has this ad­
vantage over the book-that the author has
the opportunity of making amendments as
he goes along, whereas a book enshrines
everything its author writes for all time. He
may dearly wish to have changed some­
thing, but there's nothing he can do about
it. An omission in my article has been
pointed out by Mr. Edward Krisch of Cleve­
land, Ohio, and this has led me to nose out
a still more important omission. Mr. Krisch,
in an airmail of October 23rd, writes:
Dear Mr. Purdy:
The August issue of Chess World is at
hand; I'm intrigued by your highly origi­
nal article, "What is Position Play?" It is
the only articulate thesis on the subject
that I have ever read or even heard of.
Please don't judge me extremely pre­
sumptuous for suggesting that a third al­
ternative is possible rather than simply
two. Your rhetorical question on page
171-"What logical course can you possi­
bly follow except one of these two-to
strengthen your position or weaken your
- 141
enemy's?"
I suggest a third: maintaining the sta­
tus quo-thereby placing the enemy un­
der compulsion to move. James Mason
puts it neatly:
"Obliged to move, he will make that
move by which his position is least modi­
fied or disturbed-will stand as he is, until
he gets some idea of where he is going.
When he can find no good way to better
his situation, he will stop short of trying­
and wait for light. This his adversary's
very next move may furnish."
Psychological chess? Yes, and sound
logical chess! Since neither of your two
logical courses covers the foregoing, is
your solution 100% correct all ofthe time?
Yours truly,
Edward Krisch
There is no argument. Mr. Krisch is
quite correct. There are positions in chess
which are unimprovable, and at the same
time tenable-positions in which the best
play for both sides is to maintain the status
quo, and where if either party assumes the
initiative he should suffer for it, although it
may happen to be less risky for one than the
other. Naturally it is a part of position play
to judge such positions and to avoid activity
that may compromise them. A draw is the
result, unless one player is tempted into
indiscretion.
In such cases, whoever has the slightly
inferior position has the better winning
chances! For instance, I owed my win against
Bruno Strazdins in the 1949 New South
Wales Championship to his having the pref­
erable position at the adjournment. My only
sound play was to move a ):'! up and down
between f1 and f2, whereas he had a wide
choice of moves-and the two �s-hut could
not force an advantageous breakthrough.
Naturally I offered a draw, but he was
tempted into declining; and indeed, after
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
the breakthrough he could still have drawn is to weaken them as little as possible. "The
easily, but he pressed for a win, and lost. principle of defense," says Emanuel Lasker
somewhere, "is to make the smallest pos­
Amended Definition sible concession to the opponent."
We are here dealing with situations in In any event, it ought not to be pos­
which one can neither strengthen one's own sible to class every possible chess move as
position nor weaken the enemy's, but in undeniably positional or undeniably com­
which it is possible to maintain the status binative. Chess just isn't made that way,
quo. But there is a fourth and very fre­ and whatever definition you gave, you
quently occurring possibility-that you are would always find borderline cases.
forced to weaken your position. Only rarely
does this happen through zugzwang;it nearly An Illustrative Game
always happens because of an enemy threat At the end of my last article, I prom­
or capture. And yet your problem may not ised to go through a game to illustrate how
be one of pure defense, so that it can be said strengthening and weakening are the root
to belong to position play; examples will ideas of position play. Now I keep that
crop up. So I would amend my definition of promise. As you go through, see if it would
position play thus: be possible to fit the moves into Steinitz's,
Lasker's, or Nimzovich's definitions or de­
Position play is the treatment ofposi­ scriptions of position play, and you will find
tions in which sound combinativeplay is not that some would fit one or other of them all
possible. It means strengthening one's own right, but that many would not. And yet the
position or weakening the enemy's, or, if moves are positional. These great writers
neither course is possible, a minimum weak­ had in mind some aspects of position play
ening ofyour own position. rather than the whole of it. Probably it is
impossible to arrive at any form of words
If the minimum is zero, we have the which will fit every positional move like a
particular case instanced by Mr. Krisch. glove. At one time it was thought that ev­
While on the job, I have altered the erything could be defined; now it is sus­
first part, for I believe that the fundamental pected that hardly anything can be defined,
contrast is not so much between attack and except those things which are themselves
defense on the one hand and position play determined by definition, like a circle, a
on the other, but simply between combina­ geometrical progression, etc. Position play
tion play and position play. Attacking moves is complex and probably not absolutely
may be combinative or-as with the pre­ definable. But it should be possible to get
liminary it advances to open lines-posi­ near enough to it in words to assist players
tional. Again, a player may utilize a to get something of the real spirit of it, and
combinative point in selecting a defense. that is all that my attempt claims to do.
Thus, my new definition is more like Now here is the illustrative game, which
my simpler one in Guide to Good Chess. was played in the sextangular quadruple­
"Position play is the art of improving your round tourney for the Absolute Champion­
position in small ways when no sound com­ ship of the U.S.S.R., 1941. I make use of the
bination is possible." Only, here again, we voluminous and excellent notes by Reuben
have the failure to allow for positions that Fine in Chess Marches On, and the also excel­
must be weakened, and where the problem lent notes by Botvinnik in Championship

- 1 42 -
 His Writings
Chess. Yet I have an idea that even these two action is slightly limited by a threat.
great annotators have not plumbed the game 3. Nd2
to its depths, and I doubt if it is possible to A very controversial move. Botvinnik
do that with any highly positional game. would never be so foolish as to attempt to
demonstrate that it is stronger than the ob­
Botvinnik-Boleslavsky vious 3. Nc3, but the point is that at least a
French Defense case can be made out for its being more
strengthening-or, to put it another way,
1. e4 e6 less weakening-than 3. Nc3. The question
Are opening moves positional? Of is whether .ft. position or quick develop­
course. Very much so. For in the opening, ment is the more important, for 3. Nd2
very few moves are combinative. Is 7. e4 certainly hampers White's development.
strengthening? Naturally, since it contrib­ 3. ... c5
utes towards the mobilization of White's at The most aggressive possible move,
present imprisoned and therefore weak which virtually forces a disturbance of
forces. Both Tarrasch and Nimzovich agreed White's .ft. center, though not necessarily
that a cramped game was itself a weakness. immediately. Black says, in effect, "White
I know that Breyer, the apostle of "hyper­ has deliberately slowed up his development
modemism" -an ironic word, for the school (by obstructing a .Q.), so I can afford what I
was outdated long ago, though it made otherwise could not, an isolated center .ft. ,
valuable contributions-declared that after in return for which I get a slight start in
1. e4 "White's game is in the throes," but development."
this was a dramatic exaggeration ofthe kind 4. exd5
to which pioneers in thought have to resort Here White has the choice of strength­
in order to force people to take notice of ening his own position (by 4. Ngf3) or weak­
them, e.g., Bemard Shaw at one time. Ob­ ening-or trying to weaken-his opponent's.
jectively, Breyer's saying is nothing but an In general the tendency of modem chess is
obvious untruth. to choose the latter where feasible; there is
But for Black to answer 7. e4 with 7... something attractive about a fixed weak­
e5, while it may in fact be the most ness in an enemy position, and always the
strengthening move, can be objected to on hope that the rather intangible compensa­
the grounds that it leaves the traditionally tion of a slightly better development may
weak point f7 vulnerable-when it is consid­ dwindle away. Nevertheless, 4. Ngf3is often
ered that White has the first chance to at­ preferred.
tack it-and this is one of the arguments for 4. ... exd5!
1... e6, the French Defense. It is often impos­ Here is a case where Black is forced to
sible to say that one move is better than weaken his position slightly, either by sub­
another, but at least there is nothing about mitting to an isolated d- .ft. or (by 4... Q::d5)
these moves to upset the idea that each side making his � a target, which will enable
is trying to strengthen his position. White not only to catch up to Black in
2. d4 d5 development but to overtake him. You'll
These moves play themselves, as they find that after a few more moves White is
obviously effect the maximum possible 1-1/2 tempi ahead, and the .ft. Black can
strengthening of both positions. Now we win is regained without trouble.
have a position where White's choice of It is clearly not logical to accept such a

- 1 43 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
disadvantage without compensation merely Whether it is worth a tempo to avoid an
to avoid "complications." This way of han­ "isolated d-pawn" by 6... c4. There is a
dling the black pieces-"inferiority com­ strong note in M.C. 0. in which two varia­
plex" -does not pay in the long run, though tions are given after 6... c4 Z 0-0, one in
Fine sanctions 4... Q§d5. In the wide sense,which White is credited with a slight advan­
backwardness in development must cer­ tage and the other with only equality, al­
tainly be classed as a weakness. though in the second one Black is a tempo
5. Bb5t behind the first one! Obviously, one of the
verdicts is wrong, and the consensus seems
Having opened the e-file, naturally the
first consideration of both sides is quick to be that it's the second-in other words,
after 6... c4 White's position is slightly pre­
castling. Hence this check is very logical, as
ferred by leading practicians.
it moves a 'it'-side piece and prevents Black
from doing likewise. Thus it has a slightly 6. ... Bd6
weakening effect on the opponent and ful­ It is characteristic of the Russian mas­
ters to eschew a move that slows up devel­
fills the requirements of sound position play.
5. ... Nc6 opment-for instance, 3. Nd2 is not typically
A self-pin, but only temporary, and Russian at all. Apart from 6... c4, the text is
the only move. For Black must be ready to
based on the idea that the white ,il itself is
not ideally placed at b5. The alternative 5...
cope with Re 1, so that ...Ne7 is indicated, but
Bd7, though preferred by Fine, is another naturally the � must emerge first. This is
example of the "inferiority complex" policy where calculation of actual moves is neces­
with the black pieces. The text move is sary. White's threat of castling and then
more optimistic, and, in a sense, therefore checking takes precedence over other con­
more logical! Nimzovich says: "In chess in siderations.
the last resort optimism is decisive. I mean The superiority of 6... Bd6 over 6... c4
by this that it is psychologically valuable to
is deducible only from a very precise ap­
develop to the greatest length the faculty of
praisal of the position after the "isolated
being able to rejoice over small advantages."
d-pawn" is isolated, so let us go on to that.
Thus, Black is sorry that White has 7. dxc5
gained in the race to castle, but can secretly Overanxiety to isolate Black's d- ft
chortle over having induced White to place might have induced an amateur to play
a piece on the square where it is unlikely to
dxc5 before Black had moved his 'it'-.il.
remain useful permanently. That, of course, would have lost a clear
6. Ngf3 tempo, and Black's game would be appre­
ciably easier than now-indeed, thoroughly
comfortable.
7. . .
. Bxc5
8. 0-0 Nge7
The eighth moves on both sides are
obviously the most strengthening possible.
Like 2. d4 d5, they shriek to be played. But,
apart from forestalling Re 1 f, the develop­
ment of Black's JLJ/e7 has an important
bearing on the "isolated d-pawn" question,
A very subtle positional problem here! which I doubt if one player in a hundred

- 1 44 -
 His Writings
has ever realized. We'll come to that.
9. Nb3
Of course-assisting White's develop­
ment while retarding Black's-Black having
to move the .Q. again. Not necessarily, some­
one might say: Black could develop his Y!f
and protect the .Q.. But time would still be
lost, as Be3 would afterwards hit the YJ/.
9. ••• Bb6
Besides, when both players have both
their Bishops in a fairly open game, it is
usually well worth a tempo to preserve one
from exchange by a Knight
10. Be3
One of the most surprising positional
experiments in modem chess. The routine
positional play against an "isolated d-pawn"
is the establishment of a .:i)-assuming you
have one-on the blockade square d4, so
that here one would expect 10. c3 or per­
haps 10. h3, first eradicating the possibility
of a pin, since the �-4.) is wanted for the
support of his fellow on d4. The question is
whether such a blockade is maintainable
here, e.g., 10. h3 0-0 11. Nbd4 Bd7 12. Be3
(what better?) Nj5!
You'll observe that White's plan tends
to break down because Black can get too
many pieces onto the command of the key
square, d4. Hence the virtue of ...NeZ Bot­
vinnik's move is to remedy this right at the
start. Neither Botvinnik himself nor Fine
gives a very coherent positional explana-
- 1 45 -
tion of the move. Fine says that White "is
going to set up a majority of pawns on the
Queen-side." Botvinnik says that the move
"enables White to provoke the exchange of
the black Bishop, after which Black has a
weak d4-square."
The real point is that White, having
decided that a quieter attempt to control d4
is not quite satisfactory (see the analysis
above), is prepared to purchase that control
at the price of submitting to an isolated ft
himself.
It would be a great mistake to laud the
idea to the skies just because Botvinnik won
the game. In positional matters, common
sense reigns, and common sense indicated
that Botvinnik's idea is-just an idea. White
gets a grip on the dark squares, but his weak
e- ft should balance it; let people analyze
and analyze as they like-if you just hold on
to simple realities like this, you need not
fear shadows. Fine suggests that Black might
more safely have castled instead of ex­
changing As. However, if Black cannot
afford 10 . Bxe3 here, there is something
..
wrong with chess! That is quite a satisfac­
tory way to reason in many situations, and
often saves wasting time on vain cogita­
tions.
10. ... Bxe3
11. fxe3
Fine passes this move over, as Botvin­
nik himself did when first annotating the
game for Chess in the U.S.S.R. But in Cham­
pionship Chess, Botvinnik points out that by
playing this way he obtained "no tangible
advantage whatever" (p. 107), and that the
better play was 11. Bxc6f first, which he
played against Boleslavsky later on. Botvin­
nik also won that game, but for the sake of
substantiating the commonsense theory that
the game is even, I will digress and suggest
a method by which Boleslavsky might, it
appears, have equalized. The game in ques­
tion went: 11. Bxc6t bxc6 12. fxe3 0-0 13.
 The Search for Chess Perfection
12. Qd2
Pointless now is 12. Bxc6because of the
simple reply ...Nxc6 (previously answerable
by the pin Re1, recapturing the .Q./e3 with
the � ) . That's a tactical point. Anything
that belongs to calculation of specific forced
play-feasible when simple forcing captures,
checks, or threats are involved-is tactics.
You cannot get away from tactics.
White's grip on d4 is absolutely firm,
and he can attend to development.
After 1 4. Qc3 in the other game 12. ... Qb6
Once again, a move that shrieks-de­
This 14... RhB is passed by Botvinnik veloping while hampering White's devel­
without criticism. It delays Nc5 but only opment by a threat.
temporarily, and after 15. Rab l Re8 76. Nc5 13. a4 Bf5
(which Botvinnik did not play but says he The excellent move which Boleslavsky
ought to have), it is a slight but appreciable made impossible for himself in the subse­
handicap to Black that his A has to keep on quent game through his ill-considered 14. . .

its original diagonal to stop the fork by NdZ RhB already dealt with.
Worse still, Black is unable effectively to
answer White's b4 with ...a5, as he can if he Boleslavsky "Simplifies"
leaves the Y!J- )':! on its original file. There­ 14. Nfd4 Nxd4
fore, try simple development in the dia­ Players often make doubtful moves in
gram by 14... Bj5 15. Nc5 Rfd8 16. Nd4 Bg6. the interests of "simplification." To remove
Once Black's "bad" .Q. becomes a "good" an opponent's weakness is as bad as giving
A, like this, White has no further claim to yourself one. Botvinnik calls the move "a
superiority. One feels sure that Botvinnik positional mistake increasing White's supe­
himself would have no objection to taking riority." Fine says 14... Be4 was "far better."
the Black side. Furthermore, tournament We fear that students often get wrong im­
players sometimes deliberately avoid point­ pressions because writers use condemna­
ing out a player's first error (like 14... RhB tory words about errors that are really ex­
here), preferring to hoard up the secret for tremely slight. If we weigh up 14... Nxd4, we
personal use. Chess in Russia must be hard find two "pros": if White retakes with the
enough without telling your opponents all .ft , he can no longer occupy the "blockade"
you know. square d4 with a piece, nor can the isolated
To sum up, we have a case of a posi­ d- .ft ever be attacked frontally; in other
tional struggle. One position is not substan­ words, the "isolated d-pawn" becomes much
tially better than the other: it is rather a less weak; secondly, Black saves time by
question of which can make the most of the not having to move his A again. But there
good points of his own position and the bad are also two "cons": White's own weakness
points of his opponent's. This was so even is entirely eliminated; secondly, White's re­
in the second game referred to above, and maining 4) gets a fine post at c5. All in all, a
still moreso in the present game. small net gain to White.
1 1. ..
. 0-0 Besides 14... Be4, after which Botvin-

- 1 46 -
 His Writings
nik admits the game would be "almost even," up about, chortling gleefully that it had
there is 14... Bg6. If 15. aS, ... QJ7 16. a6 Ne5 enabled him to win an important game.
and the weaknesses on both sides balance. This was it.
15. exd4 "Where there is a completely open file,
and only one, it is no use trying to sidestep
it. The game must be decided on it, whether
you like it or not."
Of course, as with all generalizations in
chess, you could easily concoct a queer
position in which it would not apply, but it
will be found reliable as a guide. It enables
you frequently to shear through complica­
tions and arrive at the simplest and best
plan.
Capablanca coined an instructive term Here, in order to occupy the e-file Black
which is well worth remembering when must evict the -'l. So, try 15... a6. This is
dealing with ft positions. In this game, slightly weakening, certainly, but not nearly
before 14... Nxd4, he would have said that as weakening as conceding the open file to
each side had three "pawn islands," i.e., the enemy. Fortunately, there is a very
three different groups of fts. The middle simple proof that 75... a6 was better than
"islands" consisted, of course, of only one the text play, without going into a mael­
ft each. Now, after 74... Nxd4 15. exd4, strom of analysis: simply that Black did
Black still has three islands but White has play . . . a6 next move, when, as we shall see,
only two, as the middle island, the e- ft , it was obviously less effective. However,
joins up with the western island (now con­ just as an illustrative line, look at 75... a6 16.
sisting of four united fts). It is good to have Bd3 (if White tries Re7 as in the game,
two islands for winning purposes, as a single simply .. . axb5 7Z Rxe7 bxa4 in reply, and if
island is drawish, but three are a liability: then 18. Nc5, ... Qg6 with a relatively easy
their proprietor is vulnerable in three quar­ game) Bxd3 7Z Q!:d3 Nc6. Now let White
ters. play his most aggressive move, 18. Nc5, and
15. ... Rac8 suppose Black, avoiding all risks, simply
When first annotating the game Bot­ plays for a safe position, 78... Rfe8 19. Qf3
vinnik suggested 75... Qg6, but Fine consid­ Re7 20. c3 (if Q!:d5, ...Rd8) Rae8 (doubling
ers that White retains a clear superiority on the open file) 21. b4 Q!-8. Despite White's
after 76. Rf2! Be4 (Botvinnik's idea) 7Z Nc5 initiative on the i!Y-side, you will find he can
Rac8 18. c3. In Championship Chess, Botvin­ never do anything serious in the face of
nik passes over 15... Rac8 without adverse Black's command of the open file in the
comment. Yet I believe this was a crisis. center.
Boleslavsky's previous move has made his That Black has other playable lines
game difficult, but that only means that it is after 15... a6 shows that his game has eased.
easy to drift into disadvantage, not that 16. Nc5 a6
disadvantage is inevitable. This no longer accomplishes the ob­
I suggest that the diagrammed position jective aimed at. As so often in chess, Black
illustrates rather well a dictum in Guide to finds that his interpolation of quite a natural
Good Chess which a grateful reader rang me developing move ( ...Rac8) has marred his

- 1 47 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
chances. Capablanca tells us to "bring out to that, White's pieces in general, other
our pieces as fast as possible and put them than his en prise .Q., are better posted than
in the right places." Well, you'll find that asBlack's, especially White's 4) ; also, White
development advances, the rapidity be­ has obvious pressure-the black 4) is tied to
comes slightly less important, and selecting the defense of a .Q.-and finally, White's .ft.
the right places becomes slightly more im­ position is superior because White has only
portant. Black has developed a !! , but has two "pawn islands" while Black is burdened
got no nearer to placing a !! in the right with three. Against all these small inferiori­
place, the central open file. ties, Black can show no compensating supe­
17. Rae1 riority anywhere. All he can do is to make a
Played when Black can neither move strenuous resistance and hope White will
the 4) or protect it by ... Rfe8, taking the commit a slight inexactitude somewhere­
open file. And of course ... axb5 is no longer which White does, in fact, even though he is
playable now that the white 4) has moved. Botvinnik.
Thus Black must cede the open file entirely. 17. ... Rc7
Is Boleslavsky's game still tenable, or 18. Bd3
can Botvinnik push through to victory? Here Botvinnik devoted much calcula­
tion to 78. Bd7, finally discarding it. This
gets right into tactics-combination. The or­
dinary player is well advised to save time
on his clock by quickly playing the move
that must be good, rather than one which
leads to no clear gain and requires much
calculation even to show that it is not disad­
vantageous-advice easier to give than take!
Of course the exchange of .Q.s unties the
black 4) , but that cannot be helped; clearly
My opinion is that White now has suf­ 78. Be2 is not very good.
ficient pressure to assure a win; for this I 18. Bxd3
blame Black's 15th move, ... Rac8. 19. (txd3 (td6

m�t��f?A��t·· '�·�'���t'ta
Summing up positionally-wait a
� ���
minute, before you can sum up any position

-�����;��
"positionally" you must first examine any � � �

��;J- �fet�
forceful continuations: captures, checks, and
other direct threats. Otherwise you will prob­
�
�-�<��ft � � ft �-�
ably be wasting time. But here we can � Wi� :.»;;� Wi�
quickly see that 7Z .. axb51eads to disadvan­ �
tage ( 78. Rxe7, and if 78... Rxc5, 79. dxc5
�� �ZA Y�<
Q3c5f 20. Qs3), and all other violent moves " ,, ,��
can be dismissed quite quickly as unsound.
That means we can treat the position as a This has two worthy positional aims:
quiet, static one where positional pros and (a) to evict the white 4) from its strong
cons can be weighed up. post by ... b6 ( ... a5 first);
All right, what's the first great point? (b) to create a possibility, at any rate, of
That White holds the open file (e-file). Add challenging the open file by ... Re7 after

- 1 48 -
 His Writings
moving the �. No need to fear the "fixing"
move 20. a5, as that would be absolutely
refuted by ...Nc6.
As this article is on position play, we
shall not go into the complications of 19...
0Jb2. Suffice it to say that you'd expect it to
be too risky, and it is. A ft is too small a
compensation for such insecurity.
20. c3
Example ofapurely strengthening move
not necessarily a part of a specific plan. It
secures both the d- and c-pawn, and thus
makes White's piecesfreer generally. Ifper­
mitted, White mayfollow with a5 to estab­
lish the Knight firmly, thus strengthening
himselfstillfurther.
20. ... a5
White is now going to be forced to
move his � it seems. He must provide a
'
good square for it.
21. Qf3!
An example of combination interwo­
ven with position play. Not only is ... b6
delayed, but Ne6! is an immediate threat.
How would one most easily get onto this
possibility? I still think the most reliable
method is to run quickly through all the
aggressive moves on the board, no matter
how absurd. Thus you would be forced to
look at Ne6, from which it would be no great
step to think of Qf3.
21 . ... Ng6
This certainly seems more strength­
ening than ...Nc6, as it helps to protect the
castled t:3l and also guards both eS and f4
from White's �.
22. Re3 b6
The 4) 's reign is ended. But now White
retains his major advantage, control of the
only open file. That is traditionally decisive.
23. Nd3 Rd7
If . . Re7, 24. Rxe7 Nxe7 25. Re1 and
. 27.
White regains complete control of the file.
- 1 49 -
What now? Of course White's position
is much too strong for him to consider such
absurd woodshifting as 25. Ra 1 ?to save the
threatened ft . But I think most players
would content themselves with the simple
line 25. Ne5 Nxe5 26. Rxe5f6 2Z Re6, getting
ft for ft and remaining with a substantial,
but not crushing, positional advantage. You
must not expect an article to tell you how to
play quite as well as Botvinnik.
25. g3!! Rd6
If 25... 0Ja4, 26. h4 RfdB 2Z h5 NfB 28.
h6! is the idea. Botvinnik, refraining from
exaggeration-as we wish all chess writers
would-says it would then be "difficult for
Black to defend the many weak spots in his
position." All in all, the ft sacrifice seems to
give better winning chances than the more
conservative line indicated above. This is a
case of weakening White's t:3l in order to
weaken Black's more-positionally quite
sound.
26. h4 f6
27. Qf5!
Positional again. Instead of playing at
once h5, White first strengthens his posi­
tion; either Black will now accept the ft ,
and then the attack will come in more
strongly, or else the threat to the ft will end,
giving White a peacefully advantageous
endgame. However, the immediate h5 was
also good.
Qc8
28. Qxc8 Rxc8
 The Search for Chess Perfection
29. h5 Nf8 After 34. Ng2, say .. .Re6. Then 35. Rh7,
White is happier with the ¥11 s off, be­ and if 35... Re4 36. Rxb6 Rxg4, White would
cause now the exposure of his own � mat­ win because his majority of .ft.s is on the
ters very little. wing remote from the enemy �.
30. Re7 Rcd8 From here we are decidedly in the
To prevent the horror of two enemy realm of endgame technique. That's still
�s on the seventh rank. position play, it's true, but � endings are a
31. Nf4 R8d7 special field. I could continue to discuss the
moves from the strengthening and weaken­
ing aspect, but the article is already long
enough. For a real understanding of � end­
ings without too much labor, I recommend
Part Ill of Guide to Good Chess-this is a
genuine tip, not an advertisement.
However, I hate half-finished games,
and I think most players are the same, so I
give the rest fairly briefly.
34. Nxg6
32. g4 35. Nxg6 hxg6
Here Botvinnik's splendid positional 36. Rb7
intuition deserts him temporarily. He points Black had a specific drawing threat,
out that 32. Kf2 was better. And note its ... b5!
much more consolidating, coordinating-in 36. Kf8
short, strengthening-effect. The text move 37. Kf2 Ke8
gives his forces a dangerously separated 38. Ke3
look. With Kf2, everything would be linked.
32. Flxe7
33. Flxe7 g5!
34. hxg6
And here a rather serious error, as
Botvinnik admits. He should have kept the
4:)s on with 34. Ng2.

Endings with Rook and piece versus

Rook and piece are slightly more winnable
than Rook versus Rook, because there are 38. ... g5
such possibilities ofcoordination ofpieces. Fine says that the entry of White's � at
f4 would otherwise be decisive. But Botvin­
In � versus � , the cooperation of � nik-or rather his translator-tautologically
and � is often ruled out because a too dubs the text move "an unnecessary waste
venturesome advance by either � permits of time" and says Black should have played
a marauding raid by the enemy � . An 38... Kd8, which he implies would have
additional 4:), however, may guard a vital given good chances of a draw. If then 39.
square and permit the coordination of all Kf4, presumably ...Re6, and if 40. Rg7, ...Re4f
three pieces. 41. Kf3 g5 42. Rh7 (or 42. Rj7) Re6, and now

- 1 50 -
 His Writings
the white '1/ is held on the wrong side for tions, not deep "brilliancies." People persist
winning purposes. in misunderstanding me on this point.
39. Kd3 Re6 How did my definition of position play
40. b4 axb4 stand up to the strain? Any form of words
41. cxb4 Kd8 will come up against trouble in chess, and
42. a5 Kc8 all I claim is that my definition comes up
The trouble with ... bxa5 is that White against less trouble than any other yet at­
can afterwards attack the d- ft by Rb5. It tempted. I am sure those simple notions of
might have been the smaller evil. Had Black strengthening and weakening are funda­
not lost a tempo on Move 38, he could have mental, and will help many players in com­
driven the � from the b-file first, and then plex situations.
a5 could have been answered with ...bxa5 Run over the various crises:
safely. 1. With the surprising 10. Be3, Botvin­
43. a6 b5 nik purchased, as it were, some strength at
44. Rxb5 Rxa6 the cost of some weakness, i.e., he gained
45. Rxd5 Ral control ofthe dark squares (and the f-file) at
46. Rc5t Kb7 the cost of isolating his e- ft .
47. d5 Rfl 2. On Move 14, Boleslavsky made a
48. Rc4 f5?? slight error with 14 ... Nxd4. This exchange
The game ends with a curious blunder did strengthen his own position a little, but,
which Boleslavsky "prepared" during ad­ on the whole, it strengthened his opponent's
journment analysis, reckoning on 49. gxj5 a little more.
Rxj5 with a probable draw. However, White 3. On Move 15, Boleslavsky missed a
should win anyway, e.g., if 48... Rg1, 49. way of strengthening his position by secur­
Rd4. ing the single open file-always vital. In the
49. Ke2 Resigns sequel, Botvinnik won by dominating that
file.
Summary 4. After forcing a winnable endgame,
Well, that was an exceptionally posi­ Botvinnik, on Move 32, failed for once to
tional game, i.e., there were few, if any, play the strengthening move, and a follow­
combinative moves. Actually, both players ing error of endgame technique (Move 34)
certainly calculated out numerous combi­ gave Boleslavsky good drawing chances,
native variations before discarding certain which he let slip by the single error on
moves that we have barely touched on. So, Move 38.
just because we have discussed the game as The chess was of an accuracy rarely
an illustration of our ideas on position play, excelled. Any famous chess struggle turns
don't imagine that anybody can play good out to contain mistakes on both sides when
chess by principles alone. Combinations annotated as searchingly as this game has
must be watched-for and against-at every been.
turn. Don't forget, I mean little combina-

- 1 5 1 --
 The Search for Chess Perfection

AN AMAZING LESSON ON THE CENTER

Nimzovich in My System lays some stress on the fallacy of counting .ft.s in the center
to see who stands better there, but in actual practice we so often see a preponderance of
.ft.s in the center doing well for the possessor that Nimzovich's wisdom gets blunted in our
minds, and we are ready to fall into error. Perhaps everyone ought to brush up My System
every few years, but even in Nimzovich's own book you will find nothing to bring the
truth home to you as sharply as the really wonderful game I hereby introduce.
It was played in the world correspondence championship between the present
leader, Dr. Mario Napolitano, and the player who started as favorite, Dr. Edmund Adam.
It was Napolitano's only loss.
These two are colossi of the correspondence chess-playing world. Dr. Adam won the
correspondence championship of Europe when it was last held-before the war. Dr.
Napolitano crushingly won his section in the current world championship, the same
section in which international master Barcza only notched three draws in six games.
The winner's play has all the polish, precision, and depth that the best correspon­
dence play should have.
The comments are ours, but we have the benefit of Dr. Adam's own notes from
Caissa.
Napolitano (ltaly)­ ing his �- ,il strongly to c4. It is that last
Adam (Germany) move that Black is concerned to prevent; it
Sicilian Defense (in effect) would just make all the difference to White's
�-side attack. White's next move makes
1. Nt3 c5 the game essentially a "Sicilian."
2. c4 Nf6 6. e4 Nb6!
3. b4 Black's �-side is weakened in a sense
Napolitano's opening play is rich in by the 4:)'s flight, but White's attack is also
ideas, and in this tournament they have weakened: (a) for the reason mentioned; (b)
paid good dividends; this is his only defeat because White's e- .ft. will not have a 4:) to
so far. Here Napolitano aims at a Wing hit if it ever goes to e5.
Gambit in which his c- .ft. will be already at 7. d5
c4, helping him to command the center. Apparently very cramping, as it virtu­
Only by extraordinarily deep play-virtu­ ally prevents 7. .. e6 (8. Bb5f Bd7 9. dxe6!
ally impossible over the board-does Adam with a powerful attacking position). White's
refute the idea. game could easily become overwhelming
3. cxb4 against routine play.
4. d4 d5! 7.•• • e5!!
5. cxd5 Nxd5! This deeply thought-out return of the
Subtly stronger than 5. .. Qfd5, which .ft. looks almost suicidal by old-fashioned
White probably expected. White then con­ standards because of the huge preponder­
tinues with 6. Nbd2 and e4, afterwards play- ance of .ft.s granted to White in the center.

- 1 52 -
 His Writings
8. Nxe5 Bd6
9. Bb5t N8d7
Not ... Bd7, presenting White with "the
two Bishops" ( 10. Nxd7).
10. Nd3 0-0
11. 0-0 f5!
Black must do this before White plays
f4 himself with steamroller effect. Remem­
ber .. .j5 as the normal anti-roller move.
12. Bf4
A sad renunciation. White dreamed of
Bb2, but if 12. j3 to prepare that, ... Q!t4!
12. ... Qc7
If 12... Bxf4, the recapture threatens
Ne6.
13. Bxd6 Qxd6
14. f3 a6
Having immobilized White's center­
the chief need-Black now forces White to
develop Black's pieces for him.
If 15. Ba4?, Black wins the h- ft by an
obvious sequence.
15. Bxd7 Bxd7
16. Nd2 Rac8
Perhaps you'll admit without dispute
that Black has the advantage, but how do
you account for it? If you say he has it in
spite of White's "strong center," you land in
a complete morass. No, the truth is that
Black is stronger in the center than White,
though he has no fts there to White's two.
Indeed, if one of Black's fts were in the
center, say on e5 or d6, Black would not file. It did so to forestall the pin, ...Bb5.
stand quite so well. Complete absence of
fts in the center sometimes makes for great
- 1 53
freedom of movement, always provided that
if the enemy has fts there they can be
absolutely fixed, like White's here.
Let us turn now to Nimzovich's My
System, p. 160.
It dawns upon us then, that control of
the center depends not on a mere occupa­
tion, i.e., placing of pawns, but rather on
our general effectiveness there.... Certainly
pawns, as being the most stable, are best
suited to building a center. Nevertheless,
centrally posted pieces can perfectly well
take their place.
Obstruction! that is the dark side of
occupation of the center by pawns. A
pawn is by nature, by his stability, his, so
to speak, conservative spirit, a good cen­
ter building, but alas, he is also an ob­
struction.
Here, a different piece setup could eas­
ily make White's game superior. If instead
of one of his �s he had a dark-squared �
'
his deplorable weakness on the dark squares
would vanish. Yet note also that if Black's �
itself were on dark squares instead of light,
his game would be even better than it is.
And yet his light-squared � is far from
"bad," despite the white fts, because it can
get an excellent diagonal by going behind
them, as it were, with ...Bb5.
It is the fixity of White's fts that is his
trouble. Of course, as the board is now, a
phalanx ( fts abreast) could not be main­
tained, but one can see now that White
made an error in voluntarily breaking the
phalanx he once had; his Z d5 was wrong,
even if there was but one way, and a very
surprising way, to refute it.
17. Re1 fxe4
Well-timed, now the )"! has left that
18. fxe4 Na4
19. Nfl Qb6t
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
20. Khl
Forced; if Ne3, .. .Nc3 wins the e- ft .
20. ••• Qd4!
This move is curiously decisive. It
proves that White must have had some
more resistant 19th move, but there was
probably nothing to save him permanently.
Black now has two threats: firstly . ..Bb5
winning a piece(!) because the 4J has no
escape, and the support Re3 would be a
broken reed because of . ..Rxfl f; secondly, with overwhelming interest.
.. .Nc3 winning the e- ft . White is reduced to
a desperate throw.
21. d6 Nc3!
22. Qb3t Kh8
23. e5
Black would refute 23. Nxb4 by 23...
Nxe4!Philidor's Legacy, which is then threat­
ened starting with ...Nf2f, cannot be stopped
by 24. Rxe4, since then 24... fJ!a 1 wins,
while 24. h3 would lose after . . .Rc3! (E.A.)
[Ed. Note: But first 24. . . Nj2f 25. Kh2 as if
24. . . Rc3, then 25. Rxe4 fJ!e4 (25. . . Rxh3f
26. fJ!h3 fJ!a 1 27. fJ!d7 Rxf! f 28. Kh2 Rhlf
29. Kg3 Qs3f 30. Kf2 and nothing happens)
26. fJ!c3}.
23. •.. Qxd3
24. e6 Rce8!
If now exd7?, it's soon mate. And if 25.
Rd1, ... Nxd1 26. fJ!d3 Nj2 fregaining the ¥tl
25. Ng3 Qd2!
Threat . ..Bc6. If 26. Rad1 Nxd1 27. Rxd1,
the reply is 27. .. Rxe6! Everything dovetails.
26. Resigns.
Kmoch calls the game "a dream of the
Sicilian." Dr. Adam's other results in this
event have not done him justice. A bout of
ill health affected him, and he was a little
too daring in a few of his openings.

- 1 54 -
 His Writings

MORE ABOUT PAWN CENTERS

The books generally tend to exaggerate the value of a .ft. center as such. If a .ft. center
really hampers the enemy pieces, it is advantageous; otherwise not. Things that count
against a .ft. center are: (a) ample maneuvering space for enemy pieces, even though on a
wing; (b) a completely open file, which at any rate means freedom for � s; and (c)
exchanges of pieces, especially minor pieces. Real control of the center is always
advantageous, e.g., 4':)s posted there and not vulnerable to .ft. s. But a .ft. center does not
always guarantee such control; all one can say is that it usually helps.
Much of the talk about "attacking the center" or "challenging in the center" is
claptrap, in the sense that the main motive of such moves in the opening (e.g., ...c5, very
often) is not understood; it is simply to make provision for developing .§s. If .§s can
develop otherwise, such moves are often unnecessary.
This 70-mover from the Australian Correspondence Championship further illus­
trates how the value of a .ft. center can be almost nullified. As a game, its length is excused
by its sheer excellence. Rarely does one see a 70-mover entirely free from obvious errors.

K. Ozols-H. Klass 8. a3 b5!

Catalan Opening (in effect) The crisis. If Black permitted b4 with­
out a blow, White's command of space in
1. c4 Nf6 the center and one wing, taken together,
2. g3 e6 might give White a decisive advantage. In­
3. Bg2 d5 stead, Black himself takes the initiative on
4. Nf3 dxc4 the Yfy-side. If 9. Q3b5, ... Nxd4 10. Qs4 Bc6!
A move that forces the opponent's Yf1 and Black has sufficient freedom.
out is seldom bad. Watch how this little 9. Qd3 b4!
disability always mars White's position a Black is now saddled with the respon­
little. This is not to say that White's game is sibility of playing for ...c5 to eliminate a
inferior-just that there is "a little rift within weakness that might be fatal. But he knows
the lute" to give Black consolation in a he can enforce it. Meanwhile, he has gained
rather backward position. his objective-namely space, terrain, or fresh
5. Qa4t Bd7 air, a frequent strategical motif in top-line
6. Qxc4 Nc6 chess.
An idea favored by the American Mas­ 10. a4 Rc8
ter Kevitz-in place of the usual ...Bc6. With The first step. Incidentally, Black in­
"crude development," Black may have bet­ vites 77. Qg6?, when ...NbB would be a
ter chances of harrying White's exposed YfJ. sound .ft. offer. [Ed. Note: Purdy is referring to
7. d4 12. Q3a7 c5!}
Making it a "Catalan" (constituted by 1 1. Nbd2 Na5
the moves d4, c4, and g3, etc.). 12. b3 c5
7. ... Be7 13. Bb2 Bc6

- 1 55 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
14. 0-0 0-0 Of course 30. Qg l ? is too cramping. Note
15. Racl Qb6 that White, not Black, is in danger of cramp.
16. e4 Rfd8 30. ... Bxa4
As yet White's ft center consists of the 3 1. Qc8t Kh7
e- ft only, since the d- ft can be liquidated See note to 18th.
whenever Black chooses. And the e- ft , 32. Nc4 Qc6
though it does a vital job in guarding d5, is 33. Qxc6 Bxc6
a target for pieces. White can seek only to 34. Ne5 Bb5!
hold the position. Black has the initiative. Fine play. White has no time to take
Note that conditions (a) and (b) are both the f- ft , because then ...Nd7-b6-a4, seeming
satisfied-inasmuch as the c-file can be a slow maneuver, cannot be stopped and
opened any time either side chooses. The would force White to yield his ¥/1-..Q. for the
one thing favoring a ft center is that all the passed ft . White's next move looks fair
pieces remain on the board. enough. Who would dream that it could
17. Rfd1 Bb7 bring him into serious trouble?
18. h3 h6 35. f4 Kg8
White's h3 was on compulsion. White
must move his ¥/1, and wishes to continue
defending the b- .ft. to avoid tying his <tl.
Black's ...h6 was a far-sighted provision of �� ��'
����-���
��� ��ii��� u�U -
sanctuary for his � against check on the
�%�"!-t%'"%�
back rank, made at a moment when the
time factor is not vital-White being unable �����j���
�?if"%

� ��
-��

.�"
to do anything much.
19. Qe3
20. Rc2
Ba6!
c4!
� · ��� �
�
This leaves White in undisputed pos­ It looks now as though White should
session of the ideal ft center ( .ft.s on e4 and have no difficulty at all in drawing by sim­
d4), but Black gains a passed ft on the ¥11 - ply developing his �. However, it is not
side and additional maneuvering space easy. Ozols probably looked at such lines as
there; also, he forces some exchanges. The 36. Kgl Ne8! 3Z Kf2 (not 3Z Bf! Bxfl 38.
remote passed .ft. of course is the main Kxfl Nd6 39. Nc6 Kj8. For if then 40. Nxb4,
factor. Black wins two fts for one. Or if 40. e5,
21. bxc4 Nxc4 ...Nc4 wins off hand.) Nd6 38. Ke3,f6!
22. Nxc4 Rxc4 From this it appears that White had not
23. Rxc4 Bxc4 yet quite realized on Move 35 that his posi­
24. Rc1 Ba6 tion contained the seeds of danger. He
25. Nd2 Rc8 should at once have started "developing"
26. Nb3 Rxclt by 35. Kgl! to be followed by Bfl, surely
27. Qxcl Bb7 drawing. Probably Ozols was playing to the
28. f3! a5 score-that old tempter-and fishing for com­
29. Kh2 Bc6! plications rather than equality. He now plays
30. Nxa5! the move evidently prepared by his 35th; it
A resource not available had White is to open up for his As. It also gives him a
played Qs3 on Move 28 to protect his e- ft . passed ft , but, being in the center instead

- 1 56 -
 His Writings
of remote, a vulnerable one. The li, having got the .ft. a step fur­
36. d5 exd5 ther, resumes its all-purposes defensive post.
37. exd5 Bc5! Not 59. . b2 60. Ba2 b7=Q. 67. Bxb7 Nxb7
.

38. Bf3 Ne8! because of 62. Nc6ffollowed by ...Ne7 and

39. Kg2 f6 ...NgB, making the win an arduous business
40. Nc6 Nd6 at best.
41. Na5 Bb6 60. Bxb3 Nxb3
42. Nb3 Kf7 Now comes the last phase: turning the
43. g4 Ba4! piece plus to account. It still needs care,
And if 44. Nd2 ?, .. .Be3. with so few .ft.s left. White's W must be
44. Bdl Nc4 forced away from its f- .ft. .
45. Bel Ke7 61. Nc2t Kc5
Very elegantly, Black carries out the 62. Ne3 Bh5
procedure of "changing the blockaders." 63. Nfl Nd4
The W will be able to blockade and assail 64. Ke4 Ne2!
the .ft. simultaneously, which the l£'1 can't. 65. Ne3 Nc3t
Black's passed .ft. is too remote for White to 66. Kd3 Nd5
reciprocate. 67. Nfl Bf3!
46. g5 Kd6 68. h4 Bg2
47. Na5 Bb5! 69. Ng3 Kd6
48. gxh6 gxh6 70. Kd4 Ne7!
49. Nb3 Be3! 71. Resigns
Before winning the .ft. Black forces an After 77. h5, . .Bc6and it's zugzwang, the
.

exchange, reducing White's drawing chanc­ great bugbear of ltls and Ws who, if al­
es. Two checking lis can be very annoying lowed to refrain from moving, could often
to a player trying to win. laugh superior foes to scorn-highly benefi­
50. Kf3 Bxcl cial to the facial muscles.
51. Nxcl Kxd5 The game is a fine example of sus­
52. Bc2 Nd6 tained accuracy by Klass combined with
53. Kg4 Be8 strategy of a high order. Going through the
54. Bb3t Kd4 longer games of the Botvinnik-Bronstein
55. f5 Nc4 match, could you match this one for excel­
56. Kf4 Nd2 lence? Probably not. This exemplifies the
57. Be6 Bh5! truth about correspondence chess: the play­
58. Na2 b3 ers may not be so good, but the chess is
59. Nb4 Be8! often better.

- 1 57 - -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

COM BINATION VERSUS PLANNING

Ortvin Sarapu, champion of New Zealand and joint champion of Australasia for
1952, wrote a most helpful series in the New Zealand Chessplayer entitled, "Ortvin Sarapu
Coaches."
The July 1953 issue contains No. 4 of the series. Here Sarapu mentions a system
which he credits to the famous Soviet grandmaster Levenfish, also famous as a writer and
analyst.
It is a system for evaluating a position: simply compare each white piece with its
opposite number in the Black camp. With the permission of the NZ. C.P. we crib the
article holus-bolus.
avoidance of obvious blunders and gives
direction to your efforts to discover what
you must do to improve your position.
"Its disadvantage is mainly that you
have a limited ration of time on your clock,
but you can do a lot of 'work' during the
opponent's thinking time.

Kings
"We start with the Kings. It is clear that
(Sarapu takes over ...) the white King is dangerously placed. He
has no move and is "x-rayed" by the black
Judgment Queen's Bishop. He is guarded mainly by
"First we examine the situation for ma­ two pawns.
terial. "On the contrary, the black King is
"White has Rook for Bishop and pawn, safe, far from any threats. An endgame
but Black has two powerful Bishops. So advantage for Black is that his King is closer
material is about equal. to the center.
"Second, we come to the more impor­
tant part-to judge the positional advan­ Queens
tages and disadvantages. "The white Queen protects the weak c­
"The system of comparing every piece pawn and the weak square £2, but she pins
and pawn individually with its rival comes, the Knight. The Queen cannot move much
as I know, from old grandmaster Levenfish, without allowing ... Nj2f or ...Nxc3. There­
who drew a match 5-5 with Botvinnik in fore she is tied to defensive tasks.
1937. "Black's Queen protects her weak f­
"The system's advantages are that it pawn and is unguarded; also she is indi­
helps you to get a correct or nearly correct rectly attacked by the white Queen. But she
understanding ofthe position, tojudge which can move and improve her position with­
player has the better chances. It enables out incurring disadvantage.

- 1 58 -
 His Writings
"Our 'diagnosis': both passively placed. one of them. This is the only, but strong,
White King's Rook and Black Rook
"The King's Rook has pressure on the
f-pawn, but is pinned to defense of square
f2, so his mobility is limited.
"The black Rook is actively placed,
close to the center, has pressure on White's
weak c-pawn and on the weak King-side,
but is unguarded.
"We give the black Rook superiority.
White Queen's Rook and Black's
Queen's Bishop, King's Bishop Pawn
"The Rook is undeveloped, can be de­
veloped in one move, but remains passive,
and Rd1 will lose the Exchange after ...Rxd1.
"Black's Queen's Bishop controls two
center squares and 'x-rays' White's King.
Its power will increase when the black
Knight moves. The f-pawn is backward and
under pressure, also it would be hard to
improve its position.
"At present the Bishop is stronger than
the white Queen's Rook: another plus for
Black.
The Other Two Bishops
"The black King's Bishop controls the
long open diagonal and bars the white King
from moving. In cooperation with the
Knight, it has strong pressure on White's
weak f2.
"The white Bishop has merely defen­
sive duty in protecting the c-pawn, is un­
guarded, but controls two center squares
and supports e5 for the white Knight.
"The black King's Bishop is the supe­
rior piece.
Knights
"The white Knight is unguarded, but it
has a protected square on e5 from which it
would attack simultaneously the adverse
Rook and Bishop, and exchange against
- 1 59 -
threat White has.
"The black Knight is pinned and is in
the way of the Queen's Bishop. It is pro­
tected, in the center, and has pressure on f2,
g3, and c3.
"As the white Knight has a good threat,
we can say it has some advantage over its
rival . . . unless the black Knight has a threat
to balance.
The Pawns
"We compare a-pawn versus a-pawn,
e-pawn versus e-pawn, and so on.
"The a-pawns are about evenly placed,
protected, but not under pressure.
"The b-pawns are the same, only that
White's is protected by the weak c-pawn
and can become weak itself.
"The c-pawns: White's pawn is twice
attacked, by Rook and Knight, and just
protected-by the valuable Queen and the
Bishop. It is a clear weakness in White's
game. (An inexperienced player as Black
would go after it, but wrongly in this case.)
"g-pawns: The white pawn is semi­
pinned by the Queen's Bishop. Its value is
in covering its King. The black g-pawn is
well advanced and very dangerous for
White. It is threatening to advance and
break the white King's position by attack­
ing f2 and h2. Also, by advancing this pawn
to g3 Black can play his Queen to h4 with
mating threats. So there is one strong threat
against White's possible Ne5.
"Now, last, the h-pawns: Black's pawn
is advanced, and also is threatening to break
White's King's position in two moves by
going to h4 and h3. While White's g-pawn
is semi-pinned, that is another dangerous
threat against White. But it is two moves
long, during which White would have time
to play Ne5 and Nxc6. The white h-pawn is
merely protecting the King from frontal
checks and barring enemy occupation of
 The Search for Chess Perfection
g3. It can be attacked by the black g-pawn.
So his h-pawn is a decided weakness in
White's position.
"By means of all this comparing, we
are able to judge the position as it is at
present on the board.
"Black has a big advantage.
"Further, we know where his advan­
tage lies: it is on the King-side, particularly
against White's King. Black's pieces 'aim' in
this direction; so it would be wrong to con­
centrate against White's weak c-pawn. Black
must do something on the King-side, other­
wise his advantage would slowly disappear
after Ne5!
Queen by ...Ng3f, as gxh3 cannot be played
because of ...Ng3f and mate.
"But the catch here is that White will
make room for his King by 2. Bd4, to play
Kgl after ...Ng3f.
"We could continue the attack by 2 ...
g3! 3. Rf4 (of course 3. gxh3 Nj2t 4. Kgl
Nxh3#) Rxh2t 4. Kgl Nj2! 5. Rxf2 ( 5. QJe7
Rhl#) gxj2f 6. Kxj2 Rxg2f with a winning
attack. But it is too long again.
"There must be something better. Only
the white h-pawn and the black Knight are
in the way.
"How can we remove them?
"We see it all now: 1. Ng3t!! 2. hxg3
••

Qh4t!! 3. gxh4 Rh3#.

Planning "White can of course decline to die so
"As we know White's threat and one of beautifully by playing 2. QJg3, but Black
Black's threats, we (as Black) have to find still wins with ease.
which weakness on White's King-side can "Combinations do not 'come to us.'
be exploited successfully and in less time We have to find them. When we know
than White's threat takes for its execution. exactly where the weaknesses are in a posi­
"Weaknesses, we know, are on White's tion, we have covered the most difficult
f2, g2, and h2. part. The rest is what is generally called
"To use f2 we need more pressure on it, 'routine,' but care is always required. There
so we make the attempt 1... g3, which also is no excuse for carelessness."
threatens White's h-pawn and ... Qh4 and (End of Sarapu's article.)
mate on h2.
"If White plays 2. Ne5, ... Q!t4 3. h3 Commentary
QJh3f 4. gxh3 Nf2t 5. Kgl Nxh3#. There is a great deal to be said for
"We can disregard the threat of 1... h4,
Levenfish's form of reconnaissance from a
which gives White ample time to defend. positional viewpoint. As Sarapu says, it can
For instance, 2. Ne5 h3 3. Nxc6 and White usually be carried out during your oppo­
has avoided a quick loss. nent's move-a far better way of using the
"So attack on White's g-pawn is too time than speculating on possible moves, of
slow." which he can play only one. Moreover,
(Sarapu evidently intended to mentionalthough it cannot give a precise estimate of
the objection to 1... g3. We leave it to our
a position, nevertheless it forces you to
readers, for they would have to see it in observe many things you could easily miss
actual play.) by reconnoitering less methodically. I think
many readers will have occasion to bless
Against White's h-Pawn Sarapu for drawing their attention to the
"As we know, the white g-pawn is semi­ system.
pinned. Therefore perhaps we can play 7...
Rh3, with the threat of mate or win of the

- 1 60 -
 His Writings
(article diagram repeated)
Black to move
Now note that I said, "from a posi­
tional viewpoint." Look at the diagram
again, reprinted on this page. You already
know the combination that wins for Black­
a very nice sacrifice of� and 4). It is based
on the white �'s lack of squares: one safe
check must be mate-a type of "net." Just
how much is the combination based on the
positional valuation, or upon Black's posi­
tional superiority as estimated by that valu­
ation? I say that it has very little connection
therewith. For supposing we greatly im­
prove White's position in various ways, and
make it like the next diagram.
(Hypothetical diagram)
Black to move
Here we have eliminated White's glar­
ing weakness at c3; we have transferred his
undeveloped § to the positionally magnifi­
cent square e2, where it reinforces the pres-
- 161 -
sure on the black 4::1 ; and we have advanced
the other § to f4 so that it threatens Rxe4.
If we now apply the Levenfish system,
we shall at least be in grave doubt as to who,
on the whole, comes out on the credit side.
No longer are the black § and 4::1 bearing
on a weak ft , nor are any white pieces tied
to its defense; no longer can we claim that
Black's �-.il must be rated above White's
�- §-always remember, we are not sup­
posed to have seen any combination yet,
for if we had, the reconnaissance would be
unnecessary. We can only judge on purely
general grounds. On those grounds, how
could we place Black on the credit side?
Indeed, if it were White's move he would
win material forthwith, and Black might
begin casting about desperately for some
way to save his 4), and consider the sorry
resource .. .j5-ifhe didn't see the combina­
tion.
Yes, the combination is still on, and is
even stronger now! There are several other
changes we might have made in the posi­
tion without eliminating it, just as there are
numerous possible ways of ruling it out­
e.g., in the first diagram, place the white 4::1
on e2, and then, although you could not say
the 4::1 was as well placed in a vague, posi­
tional sense as on c4, yet it would be nearer
its own � and would prevent Black from
making a crushing assault; and Bd4 would
become a good defensive threat.
In short, we can improve White's game
"positionally" and make him lose more
quickly: we can make it "worse" and give
him a fighting chance! No kidding? No, no
kidding!
Why did I say "even stronger"? Be­
cause after 1... Ng3f 2. Q;cg3 Rxg3 Black has
a § en prise, and of course White cannot
take Black's � because of ...Bxg2#. So, for
the combination, White's § is worse placed
when well developed (on e2) than away in a
corner doing nothing. Such paradoxes are
 The Search for Chess Perfection
typical of combinations in general. General
principles count for nothing when there is a
way for one player to force certain moves
by his opponent. By a combination, as
Emanuel Lasker says, in effect, you may
twist credits into debits and debits into cred­
its. Looked at positionally, combinations
are sheer "Alice in Wonderland." They up­
set the logical side of chess-using "logical"
in the popular, narrow sense-with romance.
In chess, the hero really does rescue the
heroine when surrounded by brigands,
gangsters, tigers, crocodiles, and whatnot,
and the intrepid secret service agent really
does get out of prison and through the
enemy lines with the vital documents. It is
so in the second diagram-not so much in
the first, because there Black does happen
to have a positional advantage and his win
comes as no surprise.
In the second diagram, we did not
make the position nearly as bad for Black as
we might have. If you like, throw in an extra
white .il, say at b3. White becomes a Ei up,
and his position is "overwhelming" -only it
is Black's move, and the combination still
wins for Black. That should convince any­
body.
Conclusion
So what do we conclude? Simply that a
positional valuation is reliable only if we
can exclude combinations from our
thoughts, i.e., we are sure that the player
whose move it is cannot do anything star­
tling, and that his opponent is not threaten­
ing anything startling either, or that if he is,
it can be prevented without inconvenience.
Does this mean that a hunt for possible
combinations should altogether precede the
positional reconnaissance? Not necessarily.
Especially at your opponent's turn to move,
a positional reconnaissance will pay. His
move may radically alter the situation, so
that in any case you will need to check up
- 1 62 -
for combinations after he has moved. And
even suppose your opponent moves too
soon for you to complete or even begin
your positional reconnaissance-well, still
go ahead with it if you cannot decide on
your best move easily. And then, after com­
pleting it and forming a rough positional
estimate, temporarily erase that estimate
from your mind and examine the board for
possible combinations-forks, pins, nets, ties
on the one hand (see Guide to Good Chess}
and checks, captures, and threats on the
other. For two ways of looking for combina­
tions are better than one-just as a detective
may miss a clue when following one line of
investigation but may pick it up when he
changes over to another.
It may seem that much time would be
consumed over all these reconnaissances.
Not nearly as much time as most players
waste in haphazard calculation-going over
the same ground several times and perhaps
missing something that would stare them in
the face if they searched methodically.
Let us suppose that the first diagram
were slightly altered so as to preclude an
immediate combination, e.g., &i:J/e2 as al­
ready suggested. Then the Levenfish sys­
tem of valuation could be very helpful to
Black. It would show him his big positional
advantage and possibly suggest a plan for
turning it to account. But it is not strictly a
combination-finder.
In a previous article Sarapu used the
Levenfish system in a quieter position, where
its merit was more obvious. It is very useful
where no combination is "on," which means
in the great majority of chess positions. But
in my opinion a player should never omit to
comb the board for combinations in the
two ways I have often written about: (1)
forks, pins, nets, ties; (2) captures, checks,
and threats.
 His Writings

THE STEINITZ·LASKER "LAW" EXPLODED

Showing that the "law" stated by Emanuel Lasker does not work even for combina­
tions of the grand type-also showing how Lasker lost the world championship by
following the "law"-various useful sidelights for those already firmly convinced about the
main issue.
The scene is Baden-Baden in the merry month of May 1925. We are visitors to the
great chess tourney in progress. Just as we enter, something of an altercation is going on
at a board occupied by two of the tallest grandmasters of chess, Richard Reti, who is six
feet four inches, and Alexander Alekhine, who looks almost as tall because he holds
himself straighter.
Alekhine has falsely claimed a draw by way, I think most experts would say White
repetition. The director easily upsets the had an edge, while granting him but faint
claim, and the game proceeds. Mter a few winning chances since he will have fts on
more moves we arrive at the first diagram. only one wing. Others would call it "fairly
White (Reti) has just played 25. b5 axb5 balanced." I am making the purely imagi­
26. axb5. nary assumption that you could find mas­
ters who would not recognize the position,
Alekhine although to confront a chess master in real
life with this position and ask his opinion
would be rather like asking a student of
English literature what would be a good
line to follow upon . . .

. . . The blue deep thou

wingest,
And singing still dost soar

Reti Still, making that assumption, there is

From the wording of Alekhine's next
note in the book of his games ( 1924-37),
which I quote further on, it is clear that he
takes it for granted that on purely positional
criteria White's game seems preferable. He
speaks of White's "attack" and finds it "al­
most incredible" that Black should have a
move to overthrow what would appear to
be the natural order of things. Yes, sum­
ming up the position in a purely positional
one thing certain: that nobody would claim
for Black a "considerable plus." If anyone
did so just to be "contrary," you could ask
him, "Why, then, did Alekhine use the words
'almost incredible'?"
But Emanuel Lasker states as a law,
based on the tenets of Steinitz: "No combi­
nation without a considerable plus."
This "law" is easily shown to be false as
regards "little combinations," but I said that
some people might try to defend Lasker by

- 1 63 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
saying he intended to refer only to combi­
nations of a more grandiose type. That is
why I now discuss one of the longest combi­
nations ever played-"grandiose," ifyou like,
though "grand" fits it better, and "beautiful"
better still.
Here I must digress to admit to a vague
recollection of having seen the same posi­
tion discussed by another chess writer, and
from the same viewpoint as mine, but ran­
sack my files as I will I cannot find the
reference, so I hope some reader will write
and inform me so that due acknowledgment
may be made later on. Chess literature suf­
fers enough already from lack of ac­
knowledgment; some chess writers have no
compunction about lifting chunks of analy­
sis and leaving readers to assume it is origi­
nal, which is unjust both to the originator
and to the student, who has a right to know
whether the authority for the analysis or
statements is one to inspire (a) trust or (b)
doubt-though, to be sure, trust is in general
a bad attitude in a chess student, and doubt
always safe.
I suggest reconnoitering the position
by the Levenfish scheme detailed by Sarapu.
This will not give a very clear-cut verdict,
but at least it will not give a considerable
plus for Black. White's aggressive 4)/cS
and the isolated ft soon to appear on Black's
�-side (b- ft or c- ft ) make that impossible
on any purely positional reconnaissance.
By Znosko-Borovsky's system of positional
valuation-material equal, "time" in White's
favor, space obviously so-we get a plus for
White, but I don't press this point, as Z-B's
system of positional valuation is quite illogi­
cal and a serious flaw in his otherwise excel­
lent work on the middlegame. Also, by
Weaver W Adams' system we at any rate
get no plus for Black. Nor by any other
system I have heard of could we arrive at an
appreciable plus for Black-let alone a "con­
siderable plus."
- 1 64 -
Therefore, according to Steinitz and
Emanuel Lasker-formidable authorities,
surely, seeing they monopolized the world
championship for about the last four de­
cades of the 19th Century and first two of
the 20th-there is no point in Black's search­
ing for a combination in the position of first
diagram. He will only waste time.
Now, Alekhine was once asked, "From
what player have you learned most?" and
he replied, "Steinitz." Then he was asked,
"With what master do you feel the most
affinity?" and he replied, "Anderssen."
It is clear that he did not despise Stein­
itz, but he knew that chess was a bottomless
ocean; you can survey it and acquire knowl­
edge about it, but you cannot plumb it. So
he ignored the advice of Steinitz and Eman­
uel Lasker and searched, like Anderssen,
for the magic talisman. He played:
26. ••• Re3!!!
Now I quote his very important note:
"It seems almost incredible that this spec­
tacular move not only stops White's attack
but even brings him into serious trouble.
And yet it is so." He adds, "It is obvious that
the Rook cannot be taken . . . "
Yes, obvious enough once you see the
move at all, but the difficulty is to see moves
that put pieces en prise-especially here, for
even if one glanced at ... Re3 the tendency
would be to think, "Yes. White can't take
the Rook straight away, but surely he can
fix things so that it will have to retreat
sooner or later, and the net result will be
loss of time."
 His Writings
The point of ...Re3 is that it contains a up to this point; otherwise, I'd have chosen
threat, namely ...Rxg3f, with obvious win­ a more convincing combination and a more
ning variations. White, however, has vari­ convincingly "inferior" position. I'll do that.
ous parries, and the difficulty is in proving Just to show how the Alekhine game
that against all of them Black can come out went, here are the moves; and observe that
all right. Note that 2Z Rd3 is answered by the combination goes on all the time, though
2Z .. Rxe2, whereas if 26... Ra3, then 2Z Rd3 it takes turns which could not possibly have
is good. been visualized at the outset. The better the
27. Nf3? player, the less he needs to analyze a com­
All immortal brilliancies require the bination right through; in each variation he
defender's cooperation. He must, by chance, stops where his judgment tells him his at­
select the replies which allow the brilliant tack is sufficient. How do you tell when a
sequel. Alekhine tries to make out that he combination ends? The answer is, when a
could have gained an advantage still after "quiet" position is reached again-even if
2Z Bj3 Bxj3 28. exj3, and his analysis, so far only for one move. In this game, violent,
as I know, has never been challenged. But it forcing, or semi-forcing moves by Black
is quite wrong, and the truth is that Black persist right from Move 26 to the end. For
has an easy draw but nothing more, e.g., by full notes, see My Best Games 7924-JZ
simply extricating his � . He will afterwards 27. cxb5
lose his weak ft on the 'i;Y-side, and because 28. Qxb5 Nc3!
of White's doubled ft on the 'itl-side White 29. Qxb7
would not have a vestige of a chance to win. If 29. Qs4, ... b5.
This is enough to prove the combination 29. Qxb7
sound, seeing that any other line would be 30. Nxb7 Nxe2t
at least slightly in White's favor. But Ale­ 31. Kh2
khine claims an advantage for Black, and Alekhine shows that Kf7 also loses.
his analysis (after 2Z Bj3 Bxj3 28. exj3) runs 31. ... Ne4!
28... cxb5 29. Nxb5 Qg5! "still with advan­ Alekhine calls this the beginning of a
tage for Black, as 3 0. Rxd5? would lose new combination arising out of the first, but
immediately after 30... Re7f 37. Rxe7 ():elf that is a subjective way of regarding it.
followed by . . .Ra 7.
" Objectively, it is a brilliant move by which
That is simply not true. Mter 32. Kg2 the original combination is kept alive.
Ra 7 White plays 33. Rd8f. If then 33 ... Ne8, 32. Rc4! Nxf2
34. Rxe8f Q:e8 35. Nd6. White cannot lose, 33. Bg2 Be6!
and has winning chances. Or if 33... Kh7, 34. Rcc2 Ng4t
34. Q!!A f Kg6 35. f4 and White wins, for 35. Kh3 NeSt
now he has a safe piece plus, and if Black 36. Kh2 Rxf3!
regains it by 35... Qf7 fand 36... Q:b5, White 37. Rxe2 Ng4t
wins easily by 3Z Qg5fand 38. Qj5f, etc. 38. K.h3 Ne3t
Alekhine's analysis up to 37 ... Q:e7fis, 39. Kh2 Nxc2
however, okay for a draw, but Black must 40. Bxf3 Nd4!
then play 32 ... Nxd5 before . ..Ra1, leaving 41. Resigns
White to force perpetual check. Because of 47. Re3 (or 47. Rj2) Nxj3f
It only occurred to me to check Ale­ 42. Rxj3 Bd5! and Black wins a piece.
khine's analysis after writing all the article Thus the combination was 17 moves

- 1 65 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
long. In November 1948 Chess World, we
gave one of Botvinnik's that ran to 22
moves-believed to be the longest in the
annals of chess.
Hoist With His Own Petard
Since I have demonstrated that Reti
had a saving line, thereby weakening my
case-but demonstrating once again that far
more published analysis is unsound,
Horatio, than is dreamed of in your phi­
losophy-I shall look at another position.
And why not one ofEmanuel Lasker's own,
since it was he that announced the crazy
"law"?
In this case Lasker obeyed his own
"law," or Steinitz' s if you like, and thereby
lost the game he could have won-and he
lost, at the same time, the world title. For
the loss put him two down against Capa­
blanca, a terrible handicap against a player
whose drawing technique was nearly infal­
lible; a win would have made the score
one-all, with the final result unpredictable
since Lasker would have gained new heart.
You might wonder why I didn't seize on this
dramatic refutation forthwith-I just didn't
think of it till the Alekhine combination
failed to work out a hundred percent.
Capablanca
1 clock. Of course Lasker had no chance of
Lasker (to play his 1 7th)
Reasoning on purely positional lines,
Black must be conceded a slight edge.
- 1 66 -
White's move ahead in development is viti­
ated by the pin of his �. White has an
isolated d- .ft . True to his Steinitzian "law,"
Lasker thought only of equalizing the posi­
tion and played, accordingly, 17. Bxd5 Nxd5
18. Bxe7 Nxe7 19. Qb3 Bc6 20. Nxc6
bxc6. White has come out quite well; his
yielding of the "two Bishops" was only tem­
porary, and as against White's "isolated cl­
pawn", Black himself now has an isolated e­
ft . The position is balanced. Lasker drifted
unaccountably, and lost, but that has noth­
ing to do with the case.
The Hungarian, Breyer, demonstrated
an absolute win for White in the position
diagrammed, by 77. Bxf6!This gives up the
two .Q.s without any positional compensa­
tion (if simply ...Nxf6in reply), and it is only
when treated as the first move of a combi­
nation that it begins to make sense. Lasker
failed to do so. It seems to have been part of
Lasker's method-never mentioned by him
in his books-to play the opening as quickly
as possible, going mainly by principles, so
as to conserve time; if he could be well
ahead of his opponent on the clock in the
middlegame, he did not object to a slight
disadvantage; his defensive skill was great,
and in trying to increase his slight advan­
tage against a precise defense, the opponent
was liable to get still further behind on the
getting ahead of Capablanca's clock, but at
least he did not want to get far behind, so he
would naturally pursue his normal policy.
Thus Lasker would be averse to pondering
over "anti-positional" moves like 7Z Bxf6.
He must, however, have glanced at it; I
wonder if he considered 7Z .. Nxf6 or 7Z ..
Bxf6 as the probable reply; very likely he
pictured either of these moves as good for
Black, not seeing any compensation for giv­
ing up "the two Bishops."
No doubt had Lasker thought 7Z Bxf6
worthy of a good look, he would have seen
 His Writings
its merits; but a player must follow his prin­ forces ...Bd8. 20.f4! Bxf4 21. Q/5.
ciples in cross-board chess, as time is short. At last! Now the 'U1 comes here with
Lasker's results show that his principles must gain of tempo because it hits a loose piece.
have been decidedly good, by and large, 21... Bc7 (so that after Q:d5 the 'U!-� is
but the one he followed here let him down. not pinned, e.g., if 27 ... Bb8, 22. Q:d5 a6 23.
It remains now to give Breyer's demonstra­ a4 Rfd8 24. Qj5 g6 25. Qs5 and wins, for
tions, after 7Z Bxf6!! ... Re8 loses the Exchange). [Ed.: 25. Qs5
2 loses to 25. . . Bxe5. On the other hand, 21 . . . Bb8
is noprize and 21 . . . Bg5 is certainly better. 24. . .
g6 is bad because of25. Nxh6f. We don't know
what Purdy had in mind here.}
Breyer did not analyze 21... Bg5 22.
Q:d5 a6 23. Q:b7 @4; however, after 24.
Nxb5 axb5 25. Re2 Black has a ft- and
virtually no compensation.
22. Nxd5 Kh8 (White threatened mate
in three, also a fork.) 23. Nxh6! gxh6 (Else
After the suggested 1 1. Bx/6!! White has a ft + and still his attack.) 24. Nf6
and wins. (If 24... Kg7, mate in three. If 24...
Variation I Bd3, 25. Q,xd3 with a winning attack and a
17... Nxf6 18. Ng6! Rfe8 (If .. .fxg6, 79. ft + thrown in.)
Rxe6 regains the piece with a passed ft
plus, therefore winning.) 19. Rxe6!! Other Variations
And again White is a passed ft +, and If 7Z .. Nxc3, 18. Bxe7 and White will
wins, for if 19... fxe6? White mates prettily emerge with .§ and two pieces for ¥fJ [Ed.
in four [Ed. Note: It goes 20. Bxe6f Kh7 21. Note: After 19 . . . Ne2f 20. Rxe2 Rxc2 21.
Nj8t Kh8 22. Q!t7f Nxh7 23. Ng6#.} It is Rxc2].
easy to see how even Lasker, if his prin­ If 7Z .. gxf6, 18. Ng6! is a simple and
ciples told him a combination was not likely decisive little combination, easily worked
in the position, would fail to see all this. out.
Breyer seems to have proved that 7Z
Variation 11 Bxf6 gives White a sufficient advantage to
17... Bxf6! 18. Bxd5 exd5 19. Ng4! win in all variations.
In annotating the game in Mein What then?
Wettkampf mit Capablanca, I do not know The logical mind must then insist that
whether Lasker had as yet seen Breyer's there must have been an advantage for
analysis. At any rate, he gives Variation 11 Black inherent in Diagram 2. Of course!
only, and at this stage 19. Qj5, placing Black What are we to deduce? There are two lines
in difficulties. But Breyer's move is stron­ of thought available.
ger. 1. That a positional valuation is valid
19... Bg5. Black cannot let his position only on the assumption that the player to
be wrecked. Nor can he guard the threat­ move has no sound combination and is
ened � with his 'U1 because of 20. Qj5 with threatened with none.
multiple threats. If 19... Bd8, 20. Qj5 forks 2. That the accepted ways of evaluat­
.§ and ft . If 19... Bh4, 20. g3 Bg5 21. [4 ing a position are too rough and ready-that

- 1 67 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
we ought to go further and look for
combinative "motifs" (signposts suggesting
the mere possibility of combinations) as
part of our valuation.
Now, proposition 1 is absolutely true,
so we can let it stay put whether 2 is sound
or not.
Proposition 2, up to the dash, is also
right. In particular, none of the systems of
positional valuation sufficiently emphasize
the overriding importance of the respective
�s. Most of them ask you to compare the
�s, but they merely treat them as a factor
without stressing that they are an overrid­
ing factor. The �s must be looked to from
two viewpoints:
(a) degree of exposure ( ft shelter or
lack thereof);
(b) number of hostile pieces able to be
brought to bear quickly, relative to the num­
ber of defending pieces.
If we look at Diagram 1 from these
viewpoints, we see that White is slightly
ahead in (a) and clearly ahead in (b), and
then Breyer's combination begins to look
less surprising. This reduces the romance,
but gives us a chance to become better
players. True, both (a) and (b), but particu­
larly (b), are always almost impossible to
estimate with precision in the matter of
degree or extent, but that is no tragedy. It is
not so vital to decide who, on the whole, has
the better game as to decide where each
player's prospects lie.
The question that matters to you in
actual play is simply "What is my best
move?", and if you can decide without be­
ing sure who has the theoretical advantage,
so much the better.
What about "motifs" for combination
other than the �s-"pins," "nets," "ties,"
etc.? Well, if you notice a tied piece you are
entitled to count it as a positional disadvan­
tage anyway, and the same applies to a
piece with limited or no retreat (therefore in
- 1 68 -
danger of netting). Pieces standing on the
same file, rank, or diagonal, or on squares
of the same calor bearing a certain ge­
ometrical relation (subject to a 4J fork if a 4J
is handy), cannot always be treated as weak­
nesses; so much depends on whether an
enemy piece is available to make some­
thing of it.
It boils down to this-that if you try to
combine the positional and combinative
reconnaissance and call it all positional,
your verdict will be very indeterminate.
Better to make a purely positional recon­
naissance first (but including the �s as para­
mount), because then-ifthere are no com­
binations around, as usually there aren't­
you have a reasonably precise valuation
going on. But you must remember to look
for combinative possibilities then.
The truth about combinations in gen­
eral can be illustrated in a way more fantas­
tic than precise-and fantastic ways are the
best because easily remembered-by a tale
of Baron Munchausen. He had only one
charge for his gun, but, for some reason I
cannot call to mind, needed quite a large
number of ducks for provisions. So he waited
patiently for days, hidden in the rushes, and
was at last rewarded by seeing the ducks,
for one instant, ranged in a straight line
passing through his post of vantage. Taking
rapid aim, he fired, and the musket ball
went clean through every duck in the pack.
That was a combination. Munchausen had
to wait for one particular configuration; in
chess, there are a great many-a book which
sets out the types in full variety is Winning
Chess by Chernev and Reinfeld.
 His Writings

WHAT IS A COMBINATION!
In a previous article [Ed.: How to Tackle Wild Positiom, Chess World, August 1955, to
be reprinted in CJ.S. Purdy 's Fine Art ofChess Annotation VtJl. 2}, I wrote a good deal about
the investigation of threats in any position to see which ones, if any, are real.
Before proceeding with the present ar­
ticle, I ask every reader of it to cast his eye
over the first diagram. It is Black's move,
and you are asked what you consider his
best. White has a very real threat in Bg5,
winning the Yf1 in a few moves. Black can­
not play 7... Qf5because of 2. e4 Q_h5 3. Be2
and again the Yf1 is lost. In development,
Black is already three or four tempi behind.
But still, his position is not yet resignable.
What do you think he should play, and
why?
Don't turn over the pages yet, because
a suggested answer is given further on, and
it is really important that the reader should
decide on his own answer first. So I will go
on to something else.
Position Play v. Combination
For many years I have been writing,
off and on, about the distinction between
combination and position play. There is no
doubt that even if the two merge occasion­
ally, the broad distinction must be under­
stood if anything remotely resembling sane
chess is to be played. For instance, there is
no doubt that in some positions there is a
winning combination to be found, and ei­
ther the player finds it and wins, or doesn't
find it and doesn't win. There is equally no
doubt that in most positions there is no such
combination to be found-there are prob­
ably spectacular, forcing moves that have
to be looked at, but they all prove to be
unsound-and in these positions, since noth­
ing can be forced and the opponent has a
wide choice, the art is to find, if possible, the
move, at least a move, which will give the
best results attainable no matter what the
opponent does. That is position play, and it
covers an enormously wide field. It deals
only with small improvements in a posi­
tion, never with big gains; but it is just as
important as combination because, between
experts who can usually prevent accidental
combinations, neither player is very likely
to get the chance for a combination unless
he can build up an advantage in little ways
first.
Some authors do not explicitly differ­
entiate between the two different ways of
thinking in chess-the combinative and the
positional. But they still have to use the two
different ways, even if they don't enable the
student to realize it or don't even realize it
themselves. For in such a book, where posi­
tional ideas are being discussed in connec­
tion with some illustrative game, the author
will find himself compelled to interpolate
such notes as, "Not yet Nd6 because of the
sacrificial reply ...Bxh2t"followed by a string
of moves. Perhaps the author does not ever

- 1 69 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
discuss sacrifices and combinations in the
book, but still he is unable to write a chess
book at all without bringing them in. For,
whether he likes to admit it or not, a sound
combination overrides all positional "prin­
ciples" whenever it chances to crop up.
Such a book can be informative to ad­
vanced players who understand that, but
may terribly confuse those who don't.
Combination: Attempts at Definition
In this article I deal with combinations
alone, because I have lately carried my
investigation of the subject a stage further.
Attempts to define a combination have
been legion. The trouble is that a combina­
tion can be looked at from so many differ­
ent aspects. These are some of the attempts:
Emanuel Lasker: "A variation or net of
variations which leads to a desirable issue
by force." (Manual, p. 123.)
Znosko-Borovksy: "A maneuver distin­
guished by surprise (usually springing from
a sacrifice) which brings about a sudden
change in the position, and should gain
some advantage." (Art of Combination, p.
19.)
Euwe: "A short part of the game within
which a certain purpose is attained by force."
(Strategy and Tactics, p. 58.)
Romanovsky: "A variation (or group of
variations) in the course of which both sides
make forced moves and which ends with an
objective advantage for the active side." (As
translated from the Russian by S. Garry in
Botvinnik's 100 Selected Games.)
Botvinnik: "A forced variation with sac­
rifice." (As translated from the Russian by
S. Garry in 100 Selected Games.)
Fine: "A double attack."
Gardner: "A series of moves, with a
threat at every stage and at least one of the
threats a double threat, so that the oppo­
nent is compelled to lose material or other­
wise submit to disadvantage." (Lecture in
- 1 70 -
Dunedin, New Zealand, 1954.)
Purdy: "Play of which the initial move
would lead to gain in every possible varia­
tion, through weakness at more than one
point." ("Secrets of the Chessboard," ACR,
March 1938.)
Purdy: "A sudden coup which brings
about a substantial gain, no matter what
reply the enemy makes." (Guide to Good
Chess, 1950, 1952, 1954.)
The last is not an attempt at complete
definition, but at one which will be under­
stood by beginners, since it occurs in Part I,
the portion of Guide to Good Chess intended
partly to introduce the game to people who
know nothing about it.
Romanovsky gives a traditional sort of
definition, while Botvinnik "rolls his own."
Botvinnik criticizes Romanovsky's defini­
tion because it would include things which
come under the category of maneuvers
rather than combinations. It lacks the crash­
bang-wallop effect that we always associate
with a combination.
Botvinnik's own definition covers most
combinations, but it does not cover a com­
bination like the one in the second diagram.
I hardly think that Botvinnik would call this
a maneuver. Even if he would, few other
people would. Then again, his definition
fails to include a great many combinations
of the "net" type. Here we have a succes­
sion of threats winding up with the capture
of the netted piece, where the netter may
have sacrificed nothing at all. Combina­
tions are characterized by violent moves,
but not necessarily sacrifices, see Diagram
2, for example.
 His Writings
nation in chess is indeed a special contriv­
ance by which an out-of-the-way effect is
achieved. To use a very crude analogy, po­
sition play is like a number of people lifting
a car with their bare hands; a combination
is utilizing the special principles of physics
and jacking it up, but in chess it is only
sometimes that a jack is handy. Or, to take
another analogy, while position play is pe­
destrian, a combination is the utilization of
White to play, wins by 1. Bb5t Ke7 2. a car, a plane, or a helicopter-a contrivance
Nf5t Ke6 3. Nxg7t, etc. in which physical laws of various kinds are
Fine's definition is an obvious over­ utilized to produce extraordinary speeds.
simplification. It cuts down to three words
the leading idea of most combinations, but Answer to Problem with Commentary
not all. I tried to set this problem (see diagram
Dr. Gardner's definition is an excellent at start of article) without giving the show
one for combinations other than "nets," away. Mostly, problems from actual play
which do not necessarily contain a double are too easy because the mere fact that an
threat unless you define a threat in a very author thinks one worth a diagram indi­
special way merely to fit in with the defini­ cates a surprising type of key move, and the
tion. Since mate is a particular case of a net student is thus led to examine moves which
("encircling motif," to use Lasker's more would entirely escape him in actual play.
grandiose language), this is a serious matter. In the present case, for example, a
But Gardner's definition has advantages caption "Black to play and win" would have
over the others. made the problem so easy as to destroy its
value. Black does win, and quite easily, by
Difficulty of Definition 1... d5. This happens to be a double threat.
The word combination covers so very One of the threats is very obvious, the other
wide a field that it is hard to define it pre­ not so obvious unless you have read the
cisely and usefully at one and the same masterpiece by Kahn and Renaud, The Art
time. A wide definition is likely to be too ofCheckmate. Since the second threat is mate
abstract, and a less abstract one is likely to (in two), the first threat cannot be parried,
be too narrow. so White must lose a piece, for which even
It is possible to give a good idea of his four tempi are not nearly enough com­
what a combination is in one word. pensation.
A combination is a coup. White's threat of winning the � by
There is no other single word that Bg5becomes meaningless, since 7.. d5 pro­ .

comes anywhere near it. duces a counter-threat that sends it reeling

Thoughtful players often wonder how back on its haunches. This shows how im­
the word "combination" in chess arose. I portant it is, once you have discovered the
am certain it was merely a literal translation opponent's threat or threats, to imagine pro
of the French "combination," which can tern that he could not possibly execute them,
have the meaning of "a contrivance." This and then examine possible attacking moves­
meaning is lost in the translation. A combi- since one of these may wipe the threat out.

- 171 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Once you become obsessed with an oppo­
nent's threat, you are liable to start scratch­
ing around for a defense. On the other
hand, if you don't even bother to see if he
has any, you will be constantly making
absurd blunders, because very frequently a
defensive move does happen to be neces­
sary.
It is interesting to observe that the win­
ning move would be much easier to see if
Black's c- ft were on c6 instead of c7. For
then 1... d5 would be shrieking to be played
from a purely positional viewpoint. Not
only would it gain a refuge for the threat­
ened ¥!1 (at e6), but it would open a line for
the �-A while gaining time by hitting
White's �-A. In other words, Black would
play it whether he saw it threatened mate or
not. Let us suppose that in answer to 1... d5
White withdrew his � to f1 or e2. So far, let
us assume, neither side has seen the combi­
nation. Now, with the �-A's diagonal open,
Black does see it. Let's say we have started
from this position (after ... d5, Bfl) and do
not know what has gone before. Now we
have the two-move combination 1... Q:c3f!!
2. bxc3 (absolutely forced) Ba3#.
I have put the matter this way so as to
get a combination which Dr. Gardner's oth­
erwise excellent definition would not well
fit. Neither of the two moves of this combi­
nation can reasonably be described as con­
taining a double threat. Both are single
threats, but it just happens that there is no
defense. On the other hand, if we begin
with the actual diagram, the first move 1...
d5 does happen to be a double threat.
Another Moral
Look at the diagram again in the light
ofEmanuel Lasker's erroneous proposition:
"No combination without a considerable
plus, no considerable plus without a combi­
nation."
I proved the absurdity of this in my
- 1 72
Chess UfJrldarticle of November 1953 to the
satisfaction of all but a few readers who
apparently regard any disagreement with
Lasker as sacrilege. I regard Emanuel Las­
ker as occupying in chess a position almost
like that of Shakespeare in literature, but
BenJonson was able to say of Shakespeare,
"I loved the man this side idolatry," and still
to believe that he had written a few of the
worst plays ever published-as indeed he
had. Equally, it was quite possible for Las­
ker occasionally to talk nonsense.
I have had correspondents argue that
if a player has in a given position a winning
combination, he must for that very reason
have had "a considerable plus." All right,
but they admit that very often it is abso­
lutely necessary to see the combination be­
fore you can see the plus. In that case, we
first see the combination, then deduce that
there is a considerable plus, and from that
fact draw the marvelous conclusion that
there may be a combination!
Lasker's statement quite obviously im­
plies that it is no use looking for a combina­
tion unless there is a positional advantage.
Here, reasoningpositionally, White is about
four tempi ahead, and he has what is gener­
ally regarded as ensuring the safety of a �­
plenty of pieces around him. As it happens,
the �/d2 and the .§ /d l deprive the � of
flight squares, and it is true that this should
help to give Black the clue to a mating
combination; but to call this a "consider­
able plus" is to twist words in a way that
neither Lasker nor any other person could
possibly defend.
It is true that combinations are usually
brought off by the player with the clearly
superior position, but many combinations
arise entirely through an error by one side.
This is quite often made in a position which,
before the error, was much superior, and
which, even after the error, cannot be seen
to be inferior unless and until one sees the
-
 His Writings
combination which the error has made pos­
sible. Nobody can possibly dispute these
statements.
The conclusion is that in any position
we should be optimistic enough to look
around for possible combinations, even if
we can often cut the search down to a mere
glance, that being enough to show that the
search is hopeless. We must never be de­
terred by what appears to be a general
positional disadvantage. Every part of the
board must be examined for some acciden-
tal feature of a sort that we know may give
rise to a combination. Such things override
all "positional" rules and precepts.
In the diagram, remove White's 4:'1
from d2 to any other square but e4, and
then it is quite correct to say that White
ought to win-on the purely positional rea­
soning that he is three or more tempi ahead
in development. But if it is at d2, there is a
sound combination, and positional reason­
ing is misleading.

I n 1 9 9 5 Th i n kers'
Press was fortu nate in
secu ring a purchased
agreement with M rs.
Anne Purdy, and
others, to republish
any or all of C.j . S .
Pu rdy's chess writings.
CECIL JOHN SEDDON
lt is her wish that the PURDY 1 906- 1 9 76
next vol u me in the
Pu rdy library Series that we publish wi l l be
" H ow Pu rdy Won" because she felt it never got
the attention it deserved (th i s is true).

I n early 1 9 9 8 we wi l l repu blish "How Purdy

Won" by C.j . S . Purdy, Fra n k H utch ings , and
Kevin Harrison . l t wi l l be done in algebraic
notation, completely reformatted, and reedited.

- 1 73 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

HOW TO THINK IN CHESS

ON THREATS
Threats are the basis of winning chess.
In my article "What Is a Combination?" I included nine different definitions of a
combination by eight different writers; I implied that none was fully satisfactory, and that
I was brewing a follow-up article which would attempt to throw new light. This is it.
The essential of a combination is an attempt to gain something by force.
What exactly does force mean? Simply limitation of choice of moves. When we have
a move that leaves the opponent a wide choice, as we usually must, our move cannot
possibly form part of a combination. It cannot effect a substantial gain of any sort.
Limitation of our opponent's choice is not in itself a combination. We may so force
him that he has only one move, but that move may be a winner! So the limitation must be
unfavorable.
How is limitation achieved? In general, only by threats. There is one solitary
exception, and that is in positions where if it were the opponent's move he would have to
suffer some loss. In such a case, if we can find some move which leaves the situation in
essentials absolutely undisturbed, we place him in zugzwang (literally "move-compul­
sion") . Because such a move strikes a paradoxical note (masterly inactivity as a forcing
measure! ) , it is reasonable to class it as combinative. Emanuel Lasker did class zugzwangas
a type of combination.
If we avoid doing so, and treat zug;::wang as something unique, we can say that:

Every move ofthe attacker in every variation ofevery combination is a threaL

That excludes the culminating move to which every variation must lead-either a
mate, a capture, or-some authorities exclude this-a very great positional gain, such as the
establishment of two � s on the seventh/second rank. That move is not part of the
combination, but its payoff. The payoff may be entirely different in each variation.
Combinations shade off, till you get down to such simple coups that few or no players
are prepared to dignify them with the title of combination. For instance, I play d4, hitting
your AleS early in the opening and forcing it to move a second time. My move had a
threat, and I have gained a clear tempo. This can be given a material equivalent. Roughly
a third of a ft -a little more or less according to circumstances. So it might be argued that
it is a combination, though of a very rudimentary kind.
I doubt if it matters whether we call it a combination or not. Certainly general
agreement to do so would never be reached.
The important thing is to recognize the overriding importance of threats in chess.
In real life, a threat is an unpleasant thing, often punishable by law. But chess is a
game. We are allowed to strive for victory with all our powers, within the rules of the
game, and victory without threats is impossible. A threat in chess is not a threat to our

- 1 74 -
 His Writings
opponent as a person, but a threat to his
pieces. And the pieces themselves are the
only abstractions. They are "such stuff as
dreams are made on."
As I shall be writing so much about
threats, I am at pains to dissociate the term
from any unpleasant connotation. Chess is
a wholly pleasant game, rightly played.
What do we mean by a threat? Assum­
ing it is your turn to move:
A threat is a move the opponent could
make if it were his turn to move which
would be damaging to your game.
It is most important to get this wording
clear. A threat is a move. Loosely, we often
say "He seems to be threatening to trap my
Queen." Or "His threat is to trap my
Queen." In such vague thinking lies the
root of many bad moves. Instead, you must
think in actual moves. Look at an actual
move that could be a threat, and try to find,
by a little calculation, whether it is a real
threat or only an apparent threat.
A threat is Rxd4, BcB, Q.h6-not a threat
"to take my pawn," "to chivvy my Queen,"
or "to come down here and start trying to
mate." Cut out all baby-talk.
To think of threats in words will con­
tinually throw you astray. Listen to experts
in a postmortem, and you will continually
hear them say things like "Is Rc7 a threat?­
Well, let's see if it is." They get down to
brass tacks-moves, not words.
Having got it straight that a threat is a
move, let us remember that it is always an
imaginary move, since, by definition, it vio­
lates the laws of chess. It is a move the
opponent could make ifit were his turn to
move, which it never is ("opponent" is used
in the old legal sense of "player not to
move").
An actual move made should never be
alluded to as a threat. But we may, I think,
- 1 75
speak of it as a threatening move, meaning
that it contains a threat, e.g., a move like
Qj2 may be "threatening" because it con­
tains the threat of @6. If that threat is not
parried and @6 is played, then Q.h6 is no
longer a threat because it has been played.
Whatever is done in chess is the past and
ceases to matter. Theoretically, you are not
interested in any particular move your op­
ponent has made, but only in the total present
position and the future. That was the view
of Alekhine, the greatest player of all time­
but it's not "view" at all, any more than
there can be a "view" that two and two
make four.
Mter Q.h6 has been played, it may be
that Qg74F is a threat.
A little point arises with a check. To be
consistent, we must say that a check, once
made (say Rg7f), is not a threat, but that it
contains the threat of ):! takes �.
Well, that may sound funny, but it is
right. Every threat is an imaginary move,
and every check threatens the imaginary
capture of the �. The threat is never ex­
ecuted, because if the opponent fails at first
to parry it he is compelled by the rules to
retract his move and do so-except in light­
ning chess, where Rxe7 is perfectly legal.
But although a check, when given, is
no longer a threat, it may well be a threat
before it has occurred.
It is impossible to play chess even pass­
ably well unless you see all captures and
checks at your own and your opponent's
disposal.
Observation must precede thought, else
the "thought" will be waste of time.
But seeing captures and checks is not
enough. Thu must see all real threats. That
means you must also see the unreality of
unreal threats.
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Here we come to a nice point. It is
often difficult to determine whether a threat
is real or unreal.
(An unreal threat is a move which your
opponent might make if it were his move
and which may appear damaging, but which
a deeper examination will prove harmless
or even suicidal.)
When in doubt, you can always save
time by remembering that it is really your
move. Try then the following way of think­
ing.
Imagine the threat could notpossibly be
executed. Then what would be my best move?
Try out each attractive move separately, con­
sidering each one as follows. Visualize the
whole position as it would be after this move
of yours, and then work out whether the
opponent would gain by executing his
''threat. "
This is not only a good way to think
when you are uncertain if a threat is real,
but even when you know it is real. For ifyou
know it is real, you are prone to play defen­
sively, which may lose you an opportunity:
Capablanca-Bogoljubov, Carlsbad 1929.
to play anyway, and it would make calcula­
tion unnecessary, as it gives the e- ft extra
guard. So he played it.
But forcing the enemy to move a �
out of play is usually even better than devel­
opment. Had Capa reasoned on the lines
set out in my last paragraph in italics, he
would have considered 9. b4! This would
force the � to withdraw (if 9... Ncxe4??, 10.
j3) and gain valuable space on the �-side.
Znosko-Borovsky published Capa's
failure to play 9. b4 in a list of "Carlsbad
Blunders."
Since exaggeration in chess writing is
rife and harmful, I mention that there is
only a fine shade of position involved. After
9. b4 Ncd7 10. Bb2 a5 11. a3, Black can free
his game by a .§ swap, and White's advan­
tage is slight. On the other hand, after 9.
Nbc3 a5 White probably had none at all.
In your own games, I suggest you try
investigating threats (both real and doubt­
ful) on the lines suggested.
MORE ON THREATS
My last article opened with the sen­
tence, "Threats are the basis of winning
chess."
It is most important to realize this fully.
Apart from zugzwang, you cannot gain
ground in a game of chess without threats.
This is easily proved by definition.
We defined a threat as:

'� move the opponent could make if it

were his turn to move which would be dam­
aging to your game."
After 8 ... NcS
Equally well:
It may be a little tricky to work out
whether 9 ... Ncxe4 is a real threat. Actually, '� move you could make ifit wereyour
it isn't, and it is very easy to see that 9... turn to move which would be damaging to
Nfxe4 isn't. But Capablanca reasoned that your opponent's game."
9. Nbc3 was a developing move he wanted

- 1 76 -
 His Writings
So if either player makes a move that
does not contain a threat, it means he could
not damage his opponent's game even if he
were suddenly given the right to make two
moves in succession. Still less can he do so if
the opponent has a move in between.
"Still less" is subject to occasional ex­
ceptions. In some positions, the opponent
has no move which will improve his posi­
tion, e.g., his best course is to let his �
oscillate between h l and gl. In such posi­
tions, "still less" would be the wrong words.
"No more" would be correct. But the proof
is not affected.
Finally, there is the very exceptional
case of zugzwang. This is a case where the
player is under no threat, but any move will
make his position worse. So of course we
had to give this as an exception at the
outset.
We cannot always threaten, nor is a
threatening move invariably better than a
nonthreatening one, since the opponentmay
be able to parry the threat with a powerful
threatening move of his own. Indiscrimi­
nately selecting moves just because they
contain dangerous threats is no use; you
must pay some attention to what the oppo­
nent can do in reply. Never imagine that
you can under any circumstances dispense
with calculation, though only a very little
will sometimes suffice.
However, without regarding every
threatening move as necessarily strong, we
should search for strong ones at every move,
even when the opponent himself is strongly
threatening us.
A tennis player, when caught in a terri­
bly defensive position, may startle his op­
ponent with an unanswerable shot, as when
he volleys a smash and, being near the net,
easily passes his opponent. Still commoner
are attacking resources by a defender in
chess. It is perfectly true that a player with
an "overwhelming position" ought theo-
- 1 77 -
retically to win a game of chess, just as he
ought to win a rally in tennis. But attackers
rarely play perfectly; they make mistakes.
Get away from the time-honored con­
cept of military strategy in chess, where
plans of campaign are the dominating fac­
tor. Chess is better regarded as something
like a long rally in tennis. You plan, but
must not be at all surprised if you have to
discard your plan next move, either be­
cause your opponentplays weakly and gives
you a new opportunity or he plays strongly
and shows that your plan is not feasible.
All this is true for correspondence chess
at least as much as cross-board. Truer, in
fact. For adherence to plans has the advan­
tage in cross-board chess of gaining on the
clock. But correspondence chess is pure
chess, divorced from such extraneous con­
siderations, and is therefore better than cross­
board chess as a starting-point for discuss­
ing pure chess theory. It is here that the old
chess concepts based on military strategy
will let you down most seriously. This is the
branch of the game in which my views are
least likely to be disputed. It is quite true
that correspondence-chess methods cannot
be profitably applied to cross-board chess
in general, but correspondence chess does
teach us a lot about basic chess theory.
In cross-board chess we have to strike
a compromise between pure theory and
practical politics. It does not pay to ponder
deeply on a search for the perfect move in
all positions, as many champions do to their
cost-they know it is unwise, but get bogged
down in such cogitations in spite of it-but it
does pay to be invariably alert for tactical
resources-more simply, moves that con­
tain strong threats.
Formerly, I always put the advice in
the form "Always be on the lookout for
combinations." The difficulty with that term
is that agreement has never been reached,
and will never be reached, as to just what
 The Search for Chess Perfection
kinds of series of threatening moves merit you define a combination in a way narrow
the designation. There will always be bor­ enough to suit all views, you will exclude
derline cases, but a series of threatening some kinds of forcing lines composed of
moves may be decisive whether all author­ threats, just as important to see in actual
ities are willing to call it a combination or play, but too humdrum to most players'
not. notions to be called combinations.
In other words, my emphasis is hence­ If you see all moves containing threats,
forth on threats, which are the component you will inevitably see all combinations­
parts of combinations, rather than on com­ however widely or narrowly you define a
binations, since this is a controversial term. combination. So I am no longer vitally con­
That is the general answer to the fol­ cerned with the endless controversy as to
lowing valued letter from Mr. Max Salm, what is or is not a combination.
whose opinions-as one of the world's best
correspondence players-can never be treat­ Mter saying "it is reasonable to class
ed lightly. 2Jigzwang as combinative," how can you
In the course of the letter we make leave it out of your definition. If one does
interpolations, answering the points seria­ accept your position that it is unique,
tim rather than en bloc. what then do you call 2Jlgzwang?
Mr. Salm fails to see eye to eye with me
mainly because I have not previously ex­ While it is "reasonable" to class the
plained my new viewpoint fully. In spite of production of zugzwang as a kind of combi­
that, his letter is opportune, since argument nation, few writers do so, and I think it is
is more instructive than monologue. more helpful not to. In actual play, thinking
about such a wide concept as combinations
Dear Cecil, might help you to see you could produce a
I suppose you are inviting comment zugzwang, but thinking about zugzwangwould
on your articles on threats even if you are be a surer help; and the clue would consist
too busy to answer! in noticing an already existent limitation of
Actually the term "combination" is moves. What do I call zugzwang?Just zug­
not really defined. Your "definition" only zwang. If it is unique, it cannot be classified.
describes what each move is, that is, a
threat. Often in games we have a series of There are also drawing combinations
moves which presents the opponent at {with stalemate as the ultimate) which are
every turn of move with a threat that not covered by your definition of a threat;
requires answering until ultimately one for a draw is not damaging to one's game,
threat leaves the opponent without ad­ even if it could be to one's ego. This
equate counter. Is this a combination? It aspect you do not consider-perhaps you
could be only middlegame play, or could doubt their existence altogether.
even start right from the opening itself,
and yet by no stretch of the imagination The execution ofa threat to draw would
lead one into describing it as a "combina­
always be damaging to a superior position.
tion." But it does meet the requirements
If a player in an inferior position notices
of your "combination." that his opponent is "threatening" to draw,
it is up to him to decide whether it is a threat
All this has been answered above. If or not. Supposing him to be much the stron-

- 1 78 -
 His Writings
ger player, confident of winning even from is, capable of being executed. The point
his inferior position, he could regard the at issue is whether they are profitable or
threat as real and part of the combination not. An unreal threat just does not exist!
which, from his viewpoint, would be a sound
one. Otherwise it would be an unreal threat Exactly! An unreal threat is not a threat.
or non-threat, and part of an unsound com­ It looks as if it might be a threat atfrrst, or to
bination. There are plenty of spectacular some players all the time, but it is not a
series of moves that look like combinations, threat. But it is convenient to speak of an
only they lead to bad results. One can only unreal threat, just as it is convenient to
call these "unsound combinations." They speak of imitation pearls. An unprofitable
consist wholly or partly of unreal threats. threat by my definition cannot exist. To be
Theoretical writing cannot treat blunders as real, i.e., to exist, it must be damaging to the
combinations. opponent and therefore profitable to the
threatener.
In your definition of a threat, the word
"damaging" is very vague. One could A Little Problem
lose a pawn, and this would be damaging In the opening, say after 1. e4 e5, can
to one's game but it would not necessarily we say Black is "threatening" to develop a
mean the loss of the game, for in many piece? No, if both sides make developing
types of endings a pawn minus is not moves with nothing else involved, we have
fatal. Then positionally what is damaging merely a see-saw. Neither side is "gaining
to one player may not be deemed so to ground" -please read again the second para­
another type of player {Crow!, for in­ graph of this article. Threats are concerned
stance!) with upsetting the balance, e.g., getting "the
two Bishops," forcing a weakening move,
Individual idiosyncrasies cannot con­ gaining a tempo, winning a .ft , and so forth.
cern a theorist. A player in his own game
may consider some fancied threat to be "How to Win"
real, i.e., damaging. If an annotator subse­ The cover caption "How to Win" re­
quently can show that, for chess players in fers to this whole series rather than this one
general, it would not have been damaging article. The brass tacks are to come later.
even if executed, then that is the truth for Students must remember we are on to
players in general, which is all that can new ground in chess literature, and plenty
concern a writer. One can go further-it of justification is needed for breaking with
might pay a player, over the board, to pre­ tradition. Most of what has been written on
vent something rather than spend a long combinations is based primarily on Eman­
time wondering if he ought to or not. Writ­ uel Lasker's pioneer work, and secondarily
ing purely objectively amounts to treating on my own amplifications and divergences
every position as in correspondence chess. over the years 1932-55. There has been
But the point is not of practical impor­ very little other original work. So, although
tance. In any situation in actual play, it rests it appears to many that I am challenging
with the player to decide whether some­ other writers' opinions, what I am mainly
thing would be damaging. doing is developing my own-and this auto­
matically involves disagreeing with writers
Another thing, all threats are real, that who have accepted my earlier ones.

- 1 79 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

EVERY MOVE IS PARTLY WEAKENING!

"Except the mating move, there is no move which does not weaken some part of a
position."-Tarrasch.
Of all the pronouncements of Dr. Tarrasch, "the man who taught Europe chess," the
one just quoted has always impressed me the most. It is not often that one can lay down
a rule without an exception, or what amounts to the same thing-with only one exception,
and that clear-cut.
Moreover, Tarrasch's dictum is one that is worth bearing in mind at every move in
every game you play.
Every move you make, however strong it may be, robs something of protection;
perhaps a piece or ft , perhaps some squares, or perhaps only one square.
Tarrasch's exception can be extended slightly. Not only the mating move, but every
move in a combination leading to a forced mate in every variation can be excepted; or, if
you like, any "weakening" effect is purely academic. This exception is not important to
remember. After all, "strengthening" and "weakening" are useful in practice only as
positional terms, and have validity only if there is no forcing line (combination) to
supersede them in any particular position.
Whatever is weakened, it is most important to see before you move whether the
weakening is serious. In many cases, it will not be; e.g., a � moved from captivity at alla8
onto an open file moves away from its protection of the a- .ft. , but usually this will be a
matter not worth bothering about. All the same, you should investigate; it might
conceivably be quite serious or even disastrous, as in this position, C. Purdy-Awdiew,
Melbourne 1956-57.

a piece is temporary; the weakening caused

After I 0. 0-0
Here Black played the plausible devel­
opment move 10 ReS?, when 11. Nb5
•••
gave White a big advantage ( 11 ... RaB 12.
Nd6).
The weakening caused by the move of
by the move of a .ft. is permanent.
But a "temporary" weakening may be
of more importance than a permanent one,
e.g., a � may vacate the back rank and
allow a mate in one. Combinations usually
take advantage of temporary and perma­
nent weaknesses at the same time.
The conception that every move is
partly weakening helps us to understand
Nimzovich's dictum:
"There is no such thing as an abso­
lutely freeing move."
In other words, an opponent with a
cramped game must aim at some freeing
move or other, but that freeing move can

- 1 80 -
 His Writings
always be utilized by the opponent for his
own benefit to some extent. It follows that
Znosko-Borovsky's dictum that a proper
way to proceed against a cramped game is
to prevent freeing moves is not quite exact.
One should say not "prevent," but "provide
against."
That wording includes either direct
prevention or what Nimzovich calls, for
want of a better term, "prophylactic" play.
To make this clear, let us examine an
example from a game between two A-grade
club players in Sydney.
White to play.
White has an immensely superior po­
sition; Black is very cramped. Apparently
White noticed that Black might free his
game slightly if permitted to play ... b5. This
induced him, on the strength of Znosko­
Borovsky's dictum mentioned above, to play
the absolute preventive move a4!?
Now, such a move is really a conces­
sion to the enemy. White interrupts his
development to make a move that is in its
nature weakening. Before doingsuch a thing,
one should look for a move which may be
of a generally helpful nature and which,
while allowing the "freeing" move, pro­
vides for some means of taking advantage
of it.
If such a move can be found, the oppo­
nent will probably be deterred from mak­
ing the "freeing" move, and the effect will
therefore be the same as if you had made
- 181
the absolute preventive move, only that
you will have strengthened your position
instead of weakening it.
In this case, any developing move will
do for White, e.g., 1. Racl (the most natu­
ral). For if 7... b5, then 2. cxb5 cxb5 3. a4!
Here a4 comes in as an attacking move
instead of a preventive one. After 3... bxa4
(forced) 4. Nxa4 many lines are opened up,
and all White's pieces blossom out. This
. .. b5 proves itself most decidedly "not an
absolute freeing move."
Another example occurred a little later.
The play went:
1. a4 Re8
2. c5
Not consistent; better on the previous
move, if done at all. Better now to omit it, as
it releases the pressure on the point d5, and
thus makes it possible for Black to manage
the freeing move . . e5. We should have pre­
.
ferred 2. h3, providing a safe place for the
valuable �-A if threatened with exchange
by . .Nh5.
.
It may be objected, "But isn't h3 seri­
ously weakening?"
When the opponent has castled on the
�-side, no; the weakening effect of h3 is
then very slight, and the move provides a
useful escape for the � later on.
True, ..Nh5 could be answered by Bd6,
.
but then Black could force an exchange and
free his game slightly by ...dxc4 Bxc4 Nb6.
Exchanges, especially of a mobile ,il, should
be avoided, as a rule, when the opponent is
seriously cramped.
2. ... Nf8
And now White made another preven­
tive move,
3. a5!?
This certainly prevents Black from ever
moving his b- ft . But such a move is not
worth preventing, since it would weaken
Black more than it would free him. How­
ever, the freeing move that Black really
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
wants to play, and can enforce, is ... e5 (rou­
tine in such positions).
Visualizing ... e5 played, White should
see that he will have to play dxe5. This will
partly open the cl-file. Therefore it will be
helpful for him when that time comes to
have a t! on the file. Therefore, far superior
to 3. a5 would be 3. Rfd1!
Once again we come back to the value
of simple development. Don't leave t!s
undeveloped merely because there are as
yet no open files!
The game proceeded thus:
3. ... N6d7
4. Bd6
Necessary to defend the c- ft after what
is coming.
4. e5
5. dxe5 Nxe5
6. Be2 Nxf3t
7. Bxf3 Nd7
8. e4!
A nice ft sacrifice, the only way to
keep the initiative. With 8... Bxc3 Black can
win a ft , but will have a very difficult game
because of the deplorable weakness of his
dark squares. But White's game would be
much better if he already had a t! on dl.
Black's position in the diagram was so poor
that he should never have been allowed to
get as playable a game as he now has.
White's ft moves are to blame. Be­
sides losing time, they prevented a break-
- 1 82 -
through on the Y;¥-side at any stage by b4,
a4, and b5.
And these preventive moves were rea­
sonably in accord with Znosko-Borovsky's
advice. That advice is valuable, yet inex­
actly worded.
We repeat: one should not always pre­
vent freeing moves. Provide for them: but
absolute prevention may be bad if the pre­
ventive move is not otherwise useful.
Hint: Playing Over Games
Playing over annotated games is the
best cheap way to improve at chess, but
only if you cover the moves. Get a card and
cut in it an aperture about as long and wide
as a printed move of one side of a game.
When you have decided what you would
play and wish to compare your move with
the text, slide the card down until the move
shows. Then, after making a comparison,
slide the card across until the other side's
move shows. Don't ponder in advance about
both side's moves-only one side's.
If you like, you can keep a record of
the number of moves you get the same as in
the text and watch it rise. It won't rise
evenly, as some games contain many obvi­
ous moves-others not. But if you take an
average over ten games, your average for
the next ten games will be higher. And so
on.
 His Writings

NOTES ON PLANNING IN CHESS

Planning in chess is hard because you can seldom be sure you are choosing the best
plan. The soundness or unsoundness of a combination is a matter of sheer calculation,
even though in actual practice it is not always feasible to take the necessary time. In that
case, you decide either not to risk the combination or else to take a chance; in other words,
it's yes or no-not a case of comparing one possible combination with another, for it is not
often you have a choice of combinations.
With planning, however, there are usually alternatives, and comparison is a matter of
shades.
Don't Always Plan Everybody has seen tennis played, and can
It is most important to realize that plan­ see how absurd it would be for a player, all
ning and position play-more or less syn­ set to make a kill at the net, to put the ball
onymous-are concerned with positions in tamely back into play. Yet in tennis he would
which: only throw away one sure point each time
(a) you are not called upon to parry he did it, whereas in chess he is often throw­
threats, and ing away his chance of winning the game.
(b) you cannot make a good forcing The search for good forcing moves in­
move of your own. volves looking at all forcing moves. These
comprise all checks, all captures, and all
By a good forcing move, I mean a threatening moves. A check is only one
move that forces the opponent to make a kind of threatening move, but so compel­
reply which at least incommodes him in ling in its very nature that it is best looked at
some way. The value of a threat is not to be separately. However, remember that you
measured by its target, but by the extent to can check a ¥/1, a <tJ, or anything-the oppo­
which it inconveniences the opponent, e.g., nent may not be compelled by law to evade
a threat to win the ¥/1 may be parried by a the check, but may be compelled in his own
mating combination, whereas a threat to interests. And remember that most forcing
win a ft may be decisive because there is moves are silly because the opponent has
no good reply. an excellent answer; but the occasional good
If there is a "good forcing move" avail­ forcing move is so valuable that the search
able, it is probably the best move on the must never be neglected.
board, or, at any rate, the only move likely So, after all, the main thing about plan­
to be better is another forcing move. ning is to avoid planning when there is
Therefore, do not waste time planning something better.
until you have first combed the board for However, planning is important, be­
good forcing moves-whether these are al­ cause most positions in chess are of a kind
ways capable of being described as combi­ where both (a) and (b) apply, and although
nations is only a matter of definition, and nothing very much can be done with them,
does not matter much. it is important to do what little can be done
How can I explain how vital this is? to ;'our advantage or to do nothing to your

- 1 83 - -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
disadvantage.
Master chess is much concerned with
fine shades of position, but for players be­
low that class, even very good players only
a little below it, it is a mistake to waste too
much clock time on them; the players will
do better to conserve the time for positions
in which calculation af forcing lines is com­
pulsory, since Hanks' dictum that most
games are won and lost on tactical over­
sights is truly absolutely beyond doubt.
Hanks' Theory
I once queried the oft-made assertion Short Plans Best
that even a bad plan is better than no plan.
My reasoning was that a strong player, once
he forms a plan, may induce himself to play
moves that violate elementary principles,
whereas if he just compared the merits of
the several moves that looked feasible, he
would be less likely to select a really bad
one.
For illustration I quoted the game
Lazare-J. Purdy, Perth 1954-55, in which].
Purdy, an excellent tactician but at that time
a poor strategist-which shows the relative
importance of strategy and tactics, since he
was able to win the Australian Champion­
ship, which a poor tactician could never
do-evolved a plan which was so bad as to
do little credit to a certified lunatic. This
plan changed his position from a level one
to a losing one, without any assistance from
his opponent-it so happened that his oppo­
nent did not reap his reward, and finally
lost, but that is no argument for bad plans.
John Hanks put up the counter-argu­
ment that a plan is of some use even if a bad
plan, since it reduces the possibility of tacti­
cal oversights, and it is mainly tactical
oversights that lose games-I fully agree.
If, says Hanks, a player first determines on
a certain strategical aim, good or bad, he
will have fewer moves to consider than if he
doesn't. The fewer moves he considers, the
- 1 84
fewer he has to check for possible com­
binative replies, and the smaller chance he
has to make a blunder.
This reasoning is certainly valid for
cross-board chess below a certain level, and
possibly even for correspondence chess at a
still lower level. It was certainly not valid
for J. Purdy in the game cited; he would
have done better, seeing that no forcing
play was possible, to look for moves that
would at least avoid weakening his posi­
tion.
The truth is that there is something in
both the opinions, and the problem is to
evolve some way of reconciling them.
Choose a simple aim, one that requires
extremely few moves and one that you feel
quite sure cannot make your position worse.
Still better would be "extremely few
and commonsense moves." If a plan re­
quires for its execution any move or moves
that look bad on principle, it nearly always
means the plan is faulty. In my own games,
I have had this brought home to me time
and again, yet still have a tendency to hyp­
notize myself occasionally into making a
move that has an attractive object, but which,
if I could get outside the game for a few
seconds, I would unhesitatingly say "could
not possibly be good." Try to bring the cold
blast of common sense onto any moves that
are not combinative, i.e., nonforcing. Com­
binations have nothing whatever to do with
common sense, but plans have. If you can­
not make a forcing move, it almost always
means that your opponent will have a wide
choice of replies, and will therefore most
likely be able to improve his position in
some way. Therefore it is silly to think you
can achieve anything much with a plan. If
you can make the very slightest gain in
-
 His Writings
position, you are doing very well, and you almost right through a game. Lasker says:
are not likely to do this with a move that
looks bad on the face of it. Nearly all plan Reti's explanations, wherever they are
moves that look bad are bad-the exceptions concerned with analysis which covers a
are those which force the opponent to do few moves, are correct and praiseworthy.
something that is bad for him, and then As yet, nobody has been able to do much
they are essentially not plan moves, but more than . . . conceive plans as the game
combinative moves. proceeded. The reader of Reti's remarks
Masters proceed by a series of short­ is led to think that an altogether new and
range plans revised at every turn according profound strategy has recently arisen and
to the opponent's play. In actual war, the is probably tempted to cast very deep
plan must be the master; in chess, you can strategical plans.... He is in danger of
and must revise the plan at every move, losing his sound judgment.
especially when your opponent makes a
move you have not expected. It would actu­ Reti was correct, insofar as some par­
ally be an advantage in war for a com­ ticular motif may persist right throughout a
mander-in-chief to be able to change his game; e.g., after 4... dxc6 in the Ruy Lopez,
plan with lightning rapidity, but it just can­ White's three �-side fts hold Black's four,
not be done-large bodies of men take time and White knows that ifhe can ever bring
to move, ships in one ocean cannot flit to about a .ft. ending without this factor disap­
another like jet planes, and great organiza­ pearing, his majority on the 'it'-side should
tion is involved even in changing an air win. This will make White hanker after
campaign. In chess, on the contrary, each exchanging pieces, but will at all times be
player moves in turn; until your move is only one factor in his calculations; at times,
made, the opponent can do nothing. It other factors may completely override it;
should be obvious that your opponent's White must still proceed by short-term plans,
move will often change the position in such and must be ready to discard even these if
a way as to make it wrong to continue with he has to meet threats or if opportunities for
your plan, and you must invariably look to something better crop up.
see if this has happened. A plan in chess is
something to guide you in making the one Quick Rule for Plans
move you have a right to make before the I have found a certain rough-and-ready
opponent's next move, and perhaps, but rule extremely serviceable in choosing an
not necessarily, later moves. aim for a plan. It would be still more ser­
viceable to players of less experience, who
Confirmation by Lasker often cast about quite vainly for a strategical
This advice seems so contrary to what aim in "quiet" positions and end up by
many players have read that I will once doing any old move. This rule is:
again quote Emanuel Lasker: the evidence
that he knew something about planning is Lookforyour least activepiece orpieces,
that he was World Champion for 27 years and then look for a plan to make them
and was the world's best tournament player active.
for even longer. Lasker was criticizing some
remarks by Reti which gave the idea that a A plan really involves two things:
single strategical plan could be followed (1) an aim, and

- 1 85 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
(2) a series of moves for carrying it
out-and by a series, I mean a series of
moves of one side only, regardless for the
moment of possible intervening replies.
For example, you have started with a
Stonewall and have fts at c3, d4, e3, f4.
Your development is in a sense complete,
but your .Q,/d2, very inactive and quite
unable to take part at present in any w-side
assault, which is therefore likely to be futile,
being a piece short. A good plan in such a
situation would have the aim of bringing
this .Q, to life, and the moves envisaged
would be Be1-h4.
Naturally, before deciding on Be1 as
your next move you would comb the board
for possible strong replies, but, if you found
none, you could conclude that the plan
seemed at least not a bad one. Another
player, perhaps imaginative but untaught,
might waste a lot of time working out a plan
involving the advance of the w-side fts,
which might or might not be good. The
taught player would know that even if good,
it could not be very good, and that it might
be very bad since it would involve the
weakening of the attacker's W, and why
should not this lose rather than win?
Here is an example-honestly taken at
random, for if my rule is any good it should
apply in most positions that one could come
across, except of course those in which (a)
or (b) fails to apply; again see above if you
have forgotten what (a) and (b) are, as they
are about the most important things in the
article.
- 1 86
Reshevsky
Euwe (after 2 1 . Rdc I )
The first thing we are called upon to
decide is whether c5 is a threat. The answer
seems to be no, as ...Rd5 would be a good
counter. It is easy to see that Black has no
good forcing move. In short, (a) and (b)
apply, and Black can think up a plan. Fol­
lowing my rule, we note that two black
pieces are inactive; the ¥11- l':'i cannot be­
come active till the otJ becomes active. So a
good aim for Black is to get his otJ out. The
only way to do so in one move is by 21...
Ne7, as 22... Nb6 is "potassium cyanide."
However, if it weren't for the fork,
clearly the otl would be much more effec­
tive on b6, as he would be tying up a hostile
1':'i . So can we make a preparatory move
which would rule the fork out? The obvious
attempt is 21 ... c5. This we have to examine
for forcing replies, but the only forcing re­
ply would be 22. bxc6 e.p., which brings
Black's 1':'i to bear on the weak ft and is
therefore to be welcomed, not feared.
Thus, our plan will consist of the moves
. .. c5 and ...Nb6. Where to from there? is a
question that most players tend to ask. An
expert does not worry too much about the
future. In a quiet position, if he can effect a
slight improvement in his position he is
doing the most that can in reason be ex­
pected, and looking further ahead than nec­
essary is waste of time. The expert is not
usually concerned with what he is actually
-
 His Writings
going to do with a good position in the
future. Enough for him to get the good
position, and he knows that it will lead to
something; what the something turns out to
be will depend partly on his opponent's
moves, and he does not care much what
these are once he makes sure the opponent
has no good forcing moves.
If Quick Rule Fails
If my quick rule turns out to be inad­
equate in any given situation, as it quite
often will, apply the rules given on p. 77 of
Guide to Good Chess, i.e., "List of possible
weaknesses and the normal way of taking
advantage of them," "List of enemy strengths
and normal ways of removing them," fol­
lowed by formulation of a plan which does
some or all of the following things:
(1) exploits enemy weakness(es),
(2) removes enemy strength(s),
(3) removes your own weakness(es),
(4) establishes your strength(s).
Circumstances will guide you as to
which and how many of the four things it
will be wise to attempt-usually you can do
only one or two at a time.
Need Not Be Sure of Success
One thing I have often written about
plans is that the aim envisaged ought to be a
feasible one, as striving after an unattain­
able object means wastage. This is true of
an objective that is absolutely attainable;
but if, in order to make it unattainable, the
opponent must weaken his position, then
your plan may be perfectly correct. The
first example that strikes me will do-a simple
one from Foster-Bachtiar, Sydney 1958-59.
- 1 87 -
After 1 3 ... Qg6
Here a certain aim for White shrieks
aloud, namely to put a third attacker on the
pinned ft . Foster mistakenly did it with 14.
g4?, a move that looks bad at first glance,
and therefore probably is (it lost the game).
The obvious and correct plan consists of the
moves Re 1-eS, and the mere fact that Black
can make the objective unattainable by 14...
d6(in reply to 14. Rft1} is of no importance,
for ... d6is a weakening move which permits
the forcing move 15. Re6, giving White a
winning position in another way. Black could
also upset the plan by 14. . h6, but this also
.
loses-not because it creates a new weak­
ness, but rather because White's 14. Rfe1
has created new strength; it gives the new
possibility of Be7, which results in White's
obtaining altogether too strong a position.
Most plans are like this. Plans that are
longer than two moves are all the more
easily upset, and the only question is whether
the upsetting moves still allow the oppo­
nent some good continuation other than
the one planned.
You cannot always see whether your
opponent has a good way of upsetting your
plan or not. What you can see is whether
the initial move or moves of your plan are
of a strengthening kind or a weakening
kind. If the former, your plan is almost
certain to do you no harm-provided you
are not creating some temporary accidental
feature which permits a combination (this is
 The Search for Chess Perfection
somewhat different from a move which is in
its nature weakening, like g4). If the latter, it
is odds-on that your plan is crazy. And it is
well to remember that the vast majority of
plans made in chess are crazy by master
standard. They are evolved from a player's
inner consciousness rather than from the
position on the board.
Much the best advice for planning is,
keep your feet on the ground. An ambitious
plan is absurd, except with an already won
game, for it is not in the nature of plans to
achieve major gains.
Replies Must Be Considered
In the case before us White's position
is greatly superior, so that a small gain
should mean an outright win. The initial 14.
Rfe 1 is so strong as to fall on the borderline
between a plan move and a forcing move. It
is only reasonable to expect such border­
line moves, for it is not in the nature of chess
moves to fit into pigeonholes. Nor is it
possible ever to play chess without consider­
ing possible replies. Although the series of
moves you envisage as your plan is a series
of moves on your side only, you must not
embark on them before considering pos­
sible replies to the initial move. Your plan is
just a sort of working hypothesis. However,
do not make the mistake of considering all
possible replies. Only the ones that can be
classed as forcing moves need calculation;
replies that are pressing but not forcing can
do with attention in advance, but it is not a
case of absolute necessity, whereas to over­
look a good forcing move may at any time
spell disaster, even though before you
moved your position was overwhelming.

THE PURDY MYSTIQUE

In August 1996 we published one of

the best books ever written on chess
instruction! We know it's good be­
cause it went through 10 printings be­
fore our 1 1th! Our version has been
reformatted and converted to algebraic
notation. No. 1 in our Gold Series.
Yes, inside you will find the same
lucid writing as in this book. Excellent
examples, tips, small lists of things to
remember, and a much more readable
book than was available in the earlier Australian editions.
$16.95 + $2.00 S&H (USA).

- 1 88 -
 His Writings

AIDS TO SEEING COMBINATIONS

The most important thing in chess is to see combinations-and by combinations, I
mean anything from the simplest lt fork up to the grandest Alekhine sacrifice.
The problem of how to see combinations is really two problems.
Problem 1: to become familiar with the many types of combination.
Problem 2: to see them consistently in actual play.
Problem 1 is that of all beginners, but also of students who have concentrated on the
positional side of the game, and are therefore prone to blunder. Dr. Emanuel Lasker first
tackled it in his "Lehrbuch" in 1925 (Manual, 1927). It was he who first discovered a logical
method of classifying combinations. Mason, in his Art of Chess ( 1898), gave 177 exercises
in combination, very good practice for good players. But there was no attempt to classify,
and no explanatory matter.
Since Emanuel Lasker, the real thinker and pioneer, there have been many other
books dealing with the subject, e.g., Znosko-Borovsky's Art of Chess Combination with
about 70,000 words and 200 examples.
Spielmann's Art ofSacrifice is perhaps the most interesting of all books on combina­
tion, but it is just a collection of games in which combinations occur.
For the purpose of Problem 1, books with a great number of examples are best; above
all, Reinfeld's 7001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations.
Why We Siip business, oversights are avoided by system
Problem 1 is mainly a question of giv­ and method. In chess, system and method
ing plenty of exercises for the student to will not enable a beginner to play like a
practice on. Our space can be much more master, but what they will do is to help
advantageously devoted to Problem 2, which every player to be consistent. Not one player
has never been tackled seriously except by in the world is 100% consistent.
the present writer. It is the problem of all
players-not only beginners and over-theo­ Primary Rule
retical students, but even masters. First and foremost, you must get used
For we all miss combinations that we to forcing yourself to:
are capable of seeing. The tyro is capable of
seeing forks one move deep, yet he some­ Look aroundfor combinationsforyour­
times misses them. Masters are capable of self at every move; and before playing any
seeing any combination at all, yet they of­ move, visualize the wholeposition with that
ten miss them, and sometimes quite el­ move made, and then look aroundfor com­
ementary ones. All players have had to ask binationsfor your opponent.
themselves, "How on earth can I have
missed that?" Winter, in his Chess for Match Players,
We miss combinations that we ought deliberately contradicts this advice, which I
not to miss simply because we look for first published in 1930, saying that it is
them in a more or less haphazard way. In impossible to carry out. The context shows

- 1 89 - -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
that he is confusing the process of looking
for combinations with that of working com­
binations out! As Winter himself says, a
glance is sometimes sufficient to tell a strong
player that no sound combination can be
on. But woe betide him if he forgets to
glance!
My 1 93 1 System
But a glance is not always enough,
especially for players below master class;
and even a good "look around" is compara­
tively useless in complicated positions if
done only vaguely.
The search should be made systemati­
cally. In 1930 and 1931, I gave a system for
finding combinations based on the classifi­
cation of combinations given in Lasker's
Manual. I quote the following from p. 275 of
the Australasian Chess Review of December
1931.
Question 8. Have I a sound and cor­
rect combination? To help in answering
this, look for the presence of the follow­
ing motifs.
1. Geometrical motif (pieces on the
same line, pins, pieces liable to a fork,
loose pieces, etc.).
2. Motif of confined pieces, including
castled King.
3. Motif of function. See if any piece is just described 1... b4 2. Ne2 b3! Then came
burdened with more than one defensive
task.
The next three motifs are endgame
motifs.
4. Pawn promotion.
5. Zugzwang.
also adopted in the main by his successors,
with a few changes in terminology.
My method was an attempt to make
practical use of a ready-made theory.
However, I realized later that the
method does not carry out its main purpose
with maximum efficiency.
That purpose is:
To break down thepower ofillusion.
Purdy
C.L.R. Boyce (after 3. Nexd4)
The position diagrammed occurred in
the Australian Championship in 1926. Pre­
viously, Black's b- ft was on b5, he had a '£)
on d4, and White's '£) was on c3.
Correctly thinking that the combina­
tion must be good, but without working it
out fully, I played in the previous position
3. Nxd4 (forced), and we have Diagram 1.
Here I had intended 3... bxa2! 4. Nb3
RbB 5. Na1. But I was now unable to see
how the combination could be followed up.
I should only have two fts for the piece,
and, as I thought, not much of an attack. So,
choosing what I thought the lesser evil, I
wrote the ft off and retook the '£) (3 •••

6. Stalemate. Qxd4) with a very inferior game.

The late G. Gundersen, then chess edi­
The System's Fault tor of the Australasian, pointed out a forced
For such a young writer, it was prudent win by the very pretty pseudo-sacrifice of
to pay such heed to Lasker's classification- the ¥11 after 5. Na 1, by 5... Qs3!!

- 1 90 -
 His Writings
This forces 6. Kd1 Rxb2 7. Ke2 Rh 1 8. In any position you are considering,
Rdd1, when 8... f!!a 1 wins. present or future, look around for all pos­
That calculation would not be neces­ sible checks (however absurd-looking); also
sary. One would only have to look for a all checks-and above al� mates-that would
second at the one move 5 ... �3 to perceive be possible if every piece could jump over
its obvious merit. But even the simple com­ anything in its way and could not be cap­
binations are sometimes hard to see a few tured.
moves ahead. The point is, what rule could
I have followed, if any, which would have Shortened form:
made it easier to see 5... �3 on Move 3?
The motif is that of "function" (Lasker) In any position, present orfuture, look
or "overload" (Euwe). The white b- .ft. has around for all possible checks, all jump­
the "function" of blocking the b-file against checks, and particularly alljump-mates.
...Rb1#.
But telling a player to look for units Nearly all combinations that cannot be
with defensive "functions" or "loads" is found with the check, jump-check, andjump­
rather like telling a man to look out for all mate rule will be amenable to the follow­
fences that have bulls on his side of them. It ing:
would be much better for him to keep his
eyes skinned for the bulls themselves. In anyposition, present orfuture, look
In order to see that the b- .ft. had the aroundfor all possible captures andjump­
function of preventing mate, I must first see captures.
that mate. Therefore, it would be better to
look for the mate first. With the mate once Ajump-capture of the ¥11, for instance,
seen, the possibility of either ... Qg3? or may be as important to see as a jump-mate .
... �3!would suggest itself automatically. But, in general, it is not so important to look
The mate is hard to see because of the at jump-captures as to look at possible cap­
power of illusion. We find it terribly hard to tures that have an illusion of impossibility­
look at moves that involve jumping over for instance, a ¥11 giving itself up for a .ft. , the
pieces. Such moves are the real motifs of prelude to many mating nets.
innumerable combinations. Needless to say, the application of these
rules involves looking at many moves that
New System not only look absurd, but are. However,
The moves of this sort that matter most every such move can be dismissed in a
are mates, because they give rise to the fraction of a second, so that the total wast­
most amazing sacrifices and pseudo-sacri­ age of time is infinitesimal. It is compen­
fices, which are very hard to see. But strong sated for many times over by the discovery
checks are nearly as important. of moves that look absurd and are not!
Any good player looks at all reason­ I now give several other examples
able checks on the board, but I maintain which will illustrate the practical advan­
that by carrying this policy much further, tages of my 1938 rules over my 1931 rules.
most of us could reduce our output of blun­ I have selected mostly positions in which
ders enormously. oversights actually were made, usually by
The rule might be put thus: myself.

- 191 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Missed by Hundreds we shall lose ourselves in Euclidean night­
Diagram 2 shows a position from a mares. Again, we might very well observe
game in the Steiner Invitation Tourney, that the black c- .ft had the function ofguard­
Sydney 1937. ing the d- .ft , but that abstract truth would
not necessarily suggest a combination to an
inexperienced player.
But if we force ourselves to look at all
captures, that is, visualize them actually
made on the board before us, then we can­
not fail to consider 7. Nxd5!, and that is as
far as any mechanical rule can take us. The
rest is up to our judgment and calculation.

Master's Oversight
Black to play Diagram 3 is from an old game, Pod­
horzer-L. Steiner, Vienna 1938.
In the game, I correctly played 1... ()6,
but afterwards, both in the A. C.R. and Chess, 3
I suggested 7.. .f6, challenging the White .ft
center. Nobody wrote to either magazine
about this, so it is a fair inference that many
hundreds of readers failed to see the flaw,
which was pointed out by Steiner himself in
ChessReview (U.S.A.). Now, years later, with
the standard of play higher, a great many
readers would see the slip, but still many
hundreds would miss it. After 2 1 ... Qxd4
In answer to 7.. [6, White would sim­
.

ply play 2. Nxd5! The combination is not Podhorzer played 22. Rdl? He had
devastating, but Black's nice position in the overlooked the combination. 22 Qxdl t!•••

center is spoilt, and White obtains an ad­
vantage in all variations. The variations do
not matter just now. The point is that any
player would merely need to look at this
single move, 2. Nxd5!, to see that it was
worth examination, since the � cannot be
taken. The trouble is that our eyes are just
not conditioned to rest on such moves. The
d- .ft has the illusion of being supported,
and we are bluffed.
If we apply my 1931 rules and look for
forks, we may see that the black � and ¥f1-
El lie on intersecting lines, but the fact is
comparatively obscure; and if we are going
to look at everything on intersecting lines,
23. Nxdl Rxdl t 24. Kh2 Bb5.
This locks up the white Yf! .
It was a comparatively difficult combi­
nation to see. On my 1931 rules, it might be
suggested by the motif of a confined piece,
the white Yf!, but in the diagrammed posi­
tion the white ¥t1 does not look confined at
all. She only becomes so after the sacrifice,
and what we want is something that will
make us think of the sacrifice.
I cannot find any better chance of see­
ing the combination than the rule of consid­
ering all captures. Had Podhorzer, before
playing 22. Rd7, seriously visualized the
move ... Q3d7 f, he would have had to carry

- 1 92 -
 His Writings
on with the forced moves given above, and
could hardly have failed to see merit in the
combination. Mter all, the sacrifice is a
small one, about equivalent to the Exchange.
And Black would have to lose at least one
ft , anyway, if he withdrew his Y/1. Further,
by making the sacrifice Black gains time
instead of losing it-a net difference of two
clear tempi.
An interesting point is that this combi­
nation does not readily fall into any of
Lasker's pigeonholes-or any other author's.
It is not exactly based on the "encircling
motif," for the white Y/1 cannot be won, nor
yet is it a "desperado" combination. Funda­
mentally, it is just a sacrifice of material to
save time. But it does not matter what sort
of combination it is, if only you can see it.
A jump-Check
Diagram 4 shows a position from an
old correspondence game ( 1937).
G.F. Mclntosh
C.j.S. Purdy
White to play
It would be bad to accept the offered
4) . Black threatens ...Bxc3, etc. The obvious
move is 1. e4, and this would almost cer­
tainly have saved the game. Thinking to
"consolidate," however, I posted "1. Qb3,
and if 1... Bxc3, 2. bxc3."
Black, of course, accepted the condi­
tional, and then played 2... Qb5t!, which
- 1 93 -
wins easily.
In the diagrammed position, White had
failed to look at this check simply because
of the illusory effect of the A on e5. Once
the check is seen, the necessity to look into
it is obvious, for it is not a sacrifice, not even
a pseudo-sacrifice. Had White followed the
rule of looking at jump-checks (I had not
invented it when this game was played), the
oversight would have been impossible.
With a few alterations, Diagram 4 turns
into Diagram 5, which is full of thrills.
Might You Miss lt?
White to play
In Diagram 5, Black has the same threat
as in Diagram 4, but intensified, because
the white r3;J has no flight square.
Now 1. e4?would be answered simply
by 1... Bxc3. Suppose with the same idea as
in Diagram 4, White played 1. @3 (or
Qg4)? Bxc3 2. bxc3. Then comes a very
pretty move, 2 . . . @5!! Not a check, and the
square is not supported this time, yet the
move is devastating. Black must get the �
on his a6.
With a flash of hope, White might look
at 3. RxdBf RxdB 4. RaB!? And wins for
White? Joy! Well, it does, except for the
neat resource 4 ... Oj8#.
Although pretty, 2 . .. @5 is compara­
tively easy to see because the mating threat
is obvious, and a mating threat should lead
you to expect even the wildest sacrifice.
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Anything can be given up for mate. for two reasons.
Many players might come to the con­ Firstly, having accepted the role of de­
clusion that White's position in Diagram 5 fender, a player tends to look only at defen­
was hopeless, as a preliminary exchange of sive moves. Secondly, most of us are influ­
:§ s still leaves the mating threat on. enced by the utterly mad advice proffered
by so many writers-even the great Eman­
And if 7. Rd5, still 7... Bxc3!This pseudo­
sacrifice of the ¥11 is easy to find, by the rule
uel Lasker-that it is useless to look for
of looking at all captures. combinations until you have a positional
However, if White keeps his nerve andadvantage.
remembers to look for all jump-mates, he The fallacy is that you can only tell
can not only save the game, but win it off whether one side has a positional advan­
hand! Thus: 1. RxdBf RxdB 2. Qj5!! tage by first making sure that there are no
combinations.
The first step in seeing this is to look at
the jump-mate, RaB. Then you naturally It is correct to say as a general rule that
look at the exchange of one pair of ;§s, one should not attack without an advantage,
which obviously brings the mate nearer. at least in that quarter of the board, but an
Then it is not a difficult step to 2. Qj5!! If a
attack usually involves a slow ft storm be­
player could not find the combination this fore any combination can start.
way, he would never find it. But a combination consists entirely of
forcing moves, and a player can lay himself
An Absurd Fallacy open to one at any time through an error,
Combinations by the player who is however overwhelming his position was
apparently on the defensive, like 7. RxdBf before the error. That is what gives chess its
and 2. Q,d5 in Diagram 5, are often missed biggest thrills.

THE PURDY GENIUS

Purdy was a bona-fide original thinker,

explorer, and discoverer, like Richard
Feynmann was in physics. Besides
writing about and playing chess, he
thought about chess, its origins, its
rules, and its best games by its best
players. Genius does what it wants,
and it often suffers as a result, yet the
internal reward must be worth it. This
book was written by a genius for budding geniuses of chess.

- 1 94 -
 His Writings

THE DUAL SOUL OF CHESS

I have recently been emphasizing the combinative or tactical side of chess, rather
than the positional or strategical side.
There are special "elements" in chess that belong to chess alone. It is these unique
characteristics of chess that give rise to combinations-things that have no counterpart in
war or any other sphere, but are found in chess only.
I have emphasized, above all, that in reconnoitering a position one should always
look for combinative possibilities before making a final judgment.
But more often than not, there are no combinative possibilities. In other words, such
forcing moves as there are can be refuted with ease. Neither side has left itself vulnerable
to a bolt from the blue.
In such positions, the player's problems are more like a general's problems in war,
and more like the problems we encounter in our daily life. Chess combinations have no
counterpart in war or life; they are picturesque, almost fantastic.
As I wrote long ago, it is as though two good fairies had cast their spells on Caissa at
her birth. One, the spirit of universal truth; the other, the whimsical sprite of romance.
Two kinds of beauty whose conflict and whose union are the soul of the game.
It is in such positions-the noncombinative ones-that Lasker's principles of struggle
will guide us.
The fundamental principle of struggle is the maximum utilization of all your
resources. In an article in Chess World of September 1956, I called it the Principle of
Economy. Here, "economy" is used in a much wider sense than merely "parsimony."
We shall now see that all the big general principles of chess are just various aspects of
the fundamental guiding principles, e.g., development in the opening, cooperation of
forces, reserve the greater option, waste as little energy as possible on defense, an
unsuccessful attack will recoil on the head of the attacker, choose only feasible aims or
those which can be defeated only by some concession, e.g., a badly weakening move.

Development that the principle looms very large. It pays

The principle of development in the
opening is only part of a wider principle
that runs throughout the game: that it is
better to employ an inactive unit rather
than one already active.
For if you move an active piece, you
only transfer him from one job to another;
if you move an inactive piece into play, you
must gain.
In the opening, especially right at the
start, nearly all one's pieces are inactive, so
never to flout it unless you are sure you are
right. Exceptions occur when there is some
specific weakness which can be exploited
only by a piece already in play, or you wish
to save or gain material.
Cooperation of Forces
By cooperation is meant not overlap­
ping. Except for the purpose of attack on a
single square, pieces accomplish most when
they command most squares. That is why it

- 1 95 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
is useful in the endgame to have your .fts on
opposite-colored squares from that of your
A. More squares are commanded, and the
.fts do not obstruct the .Q.. It is also the
reason why it is generally better to place
your l==( s on two adjacent open files, rather
than double on one file and leave the other
unoccupied-adjacent because their force,
while not overlapping, will be better con­
centrated than if they were a long way
apart. It is also the reason why a ¥11 and 4J
cooperate better than a ¥11 and a .Q.. The
perfect partners are two As, for under no
circumstances can they overlap.
This aspect of the principle of economy
is clear. Overlapping is wasteful!-uneco­
nomical.
Reserve the Greater Option
The principle of reserving the greater
option is of tremendous importance. If you
waste an option, you are losing something.
Keep as many irons in the fire as possible.
The player who has the initiative can­
not always exploit it by a direct attack;
usually he has to build up new threats until
the opponent is so hard pressed that he has
to create permanent weaknesses. A wide
choice of action is itself an advantage.
One reason that control of the center is
so important is that it gives you the chance
of transferring your attack from one part of
the board to another.
Do not Over-Defend
The principle of defense in all struggles
is to make the smallest possible concession.
Thus, a skillful boxer tries to evade a blow
by the slightest possible movement, so that
he will be in a position to deliver a counter.
Any defensive move at all is a concession to
the opponent-a holding up of your own
forward march. A player who persistently Chess Is Logical, But ...
acts on the defensive when it is not neces­
sary will gradually work himself into a posi- a thoroughly logical game when boiled
- 1 96 -
tion that is indefensible. Thousands play
this way.
Since the smallest possible concession
must be made, it follows that you should, if
possible, avoid any concession at all. In
other words, always look for a way of ignor­
ing a threat before you look for ways of
parrying it.
Do Not Attack Unjustifiably
Attack must always be your goal, but it
needs first a positional advantage, at least in
the sector where you attack.
Unsuccessful effort means waste-a vio­
lation ofthe principle of economy-and must
be punished. If you attack and fail, you will
not be in the comfortable situation of being
able to start afresh; you will inevitably have
damaged your position, and will be vulner­
able to a counterattack. Attack is never
justified in a balanced position. We all know
what happens to people who try to win
drawn games. They are like a boy on a see­
saw who tries to weigh the other boy down
by giving a little jump in the air. The other
boy outweighs him as soon as he jumps.
An attack must be distinguishedfrom a
combination. An attack involves a plan, usu­
ally starting with rather slow preparatory
moves, and a combination may never oc­
cur in it, although usually it does at the end.
If it involves slow preparatory moves, such
as a pawnstorm, a big initial advantage is
necessary or the loss of time will prove fatal.
But a combination, as I always empha­
size, can arise at any time, however weak
your position may be, through an opponent's
blunder-to take a simple case, he may leave
his � and ¥11 to be forked, though his
position before the move was overwhelm­
ing.
Consequently, although chess may be
 His Writings
down, you can't boil it down when actually
playing, so it is of more practical use to see
it as logic and romance in conflict. Be ready
to adjust your mind to combinative possi­
bilities at every turn. Do not, as Lasker did
in a famous game in his 1921 match with
Capablanca, allow your mind to become
imbedded in "positional" channels. Think
of the positional principles as operating only
if combinative possibilities are "off."
It is this extraordinary conflict between
purely chess principles (tactics) and the gen­
eral principles of struggle that is one of the
secrets of the game's fascination.
Choose Only Feasible Aims
It is better to play with some aim than
no aim at all. But the ideal aim is one that is
feasible. If you try for a too ambitious aim,
you may by accident accomplish some­
thing smaller-but you may, on the other
hand, spoil your game completely. It is all
right to have a plan the opponent can upset,
provided he can upset it only by damaging
his position more than you damage yours
by not accomplishing your aim.
Another exception occurs when you
have a losing position. In such a position, it
often pays to play unsoundly, for in any
case you cannot save the game unless the
opponent makes a mistake.
The commonest example of an unfea­
sible aim is an attack on a moveable object.
Such an attack is justified if the aim is to gain
time for some other purpose, but beginners
often make it with the idea of actually win­
ning the unit in question-which is ridicu­
lous, unless there is a "net" combination
afoot.
In general, one's aim should have to
do with gaining command of squares. This is
the least ambitious aim you can have, and
therefore the most feasible. "Position play"
is just a fight for squares.
- 1 97 -
Prophylactic Play
When you cannot prevent the enemy
from doing something he wants to do, you
have two alternatives. The first is counterat­
tack; sometimes, however, counterattack is
useless because the enemy's attack will get
home first. The second is what Nimzovich
calls "prophylaxis." You make a move which
merely anticipates the threatened maneu­
ver, with the idea of making that maneuver
assist you as well as your opponent. For
instance, if he threatens to open a file at
present closed, you can place your El on
that file. It is useless there just now, but if
the opponent opens the file he automati­
cally brings your El into play.
By "prophylacting" you may deter your
opponent from executing his scheme, and
may then proceed with your own "counter­
attack" at your leisure. Thus by prophy­
lacting you can often wrest the initiative-an
important Nimzovichian paradox.
So there is nothing bizarre about
Nimzovich's ideas. They are only aspects of
the fundamental principle of economy. You
employ "prophylaxis" where both preven­
tion and counterattack are uneconomical.
Conclusion
It is vital to recognize that these prin­
ciples are of practical assistance only out­
side the sphere of combinations. You must
always have the two spheres of thought in
your mind, and the combinative sphere
first.
 The Search for Chess Perfection

HOW TO REDUCE OVERSIGHTS TO A MINIMUM

Main Cause of Slips

What is the most important thing in practical chess? There can be only one answer:
avoid oversights.
It is perhaps a defect in chess that a real chess connoisseur-one who has a good
knowledge of theory, appreciation of master strategy, and an insight into the true spirit of
chess-is often defeated by a banal woodshifter, one whose understanding of the game is
very limited, but who has acquired by years of club "skittling" a mechanical skill that
enables him to play with consistent mediocrity.
The answer to this is that the connoisseur has other strings to his bow. In playing over
the games of the masters he derives keen enjoyment; here he is like a music-lover listening
to a master musician, while his friend the woodshifter listens to himself strumming on a
guitar. But even in the realm of struggle, the connoisseur can find a suitable medium in
correspondence play. Here he can beat the woodshifter, whose deficiencies are shown up
when time is allowed for thought.
And even over the board, the connoisseur could do much better by following a few
purely mechanical rules. The same applies to the young, ambitious student who has had
more study than practice, and whose chess knowledge is always disappointingly better
than his or her chess results. Perhaps it applies to almost all chess players.
In the next decade, somebody may succeed in programming an electronic computer
to play a good game of chess. It will doubtless be inferior to human experts, but will
occasionally beat them because most experts occasionally make bad blunders. The
computer will play at a dead level of mediocrity, never below it. What a tremendous
advantage it would be to any player if he could achieve such a degree of mental discipline
as to combine a human brain's intuitions with a computer's consistency!
There are one to two must questions or, rather, mechanical operation about which
there is no option if one is to make any attempt at all to avoid absurd slips.
The first is the search for the opponent's threat or threats.
The second is the search for possible dangerous replies ("surprise moves") to a move
you are considering. This is usually carried out, but seldom properly.
What is the proper way? To answer this, you have only to remember how often you
see your mistake after you have made your move-very often, the instant after.
Well, then, the solution is: before playing a move, force yourself to visualize that
move made, and while visualizing it, cast your eye over every part of the board. All this
time, you must see the position as it will be, not as it is. This requires effort.
Try doing it invariably, forcing yourself at move after move in game after game, until
it becomes a habit.
Right from the start you will notice that your oversights decrease, especially the
blatant ones. Your actual chess capacity will not improve, but the point is that all chess

- 1 98 -
 His Writings
players, from masters to beginners, tend to
play below their full capacity because they
make avoidable oversights-that is, over­
sights well within their capacity to avoid,
and sometimes so bad that they can hardly
believe they have made them. In chess, as
in real life, the great number of things re­
quiring attention makes oversights inevi­
table. In life, they can be reduced only by
system and method. So in chess.
Purdy
L. Steiner (to move)
Here is an example of an oversight
made by a master through failure to visual­
ize. In this game, Steiner-Purdy, Sydney
1937 (invitation tourney), Black had just
played ...c4. It seems obvious that Black's
idea is to tempt White to take the a- ft and
then trap the 4J. Can the 4J get out? That is
the puzzle that Steiner must have busied
himself with for about 15 minutes, and he
finally satisfied himself that the 4J would
not be lost, for he played-1. Nxa5? [Ed.:
See Part 3, Game 10.}
All this time, Black had no intention at
all of trying to entrap the 4:), and he now
made the simple but effective reply 1... c3.
This at least wins a ft .
White's mistake was that he made an
assumption. Had White simply visualized
the position after 1. Nxa5, forgetting pre­
conceived notions, and looked all over the
board for possible surprise moves, he could
- 1 99 -
not have missed ... c3. Nor could he have
wasted valuable time on irrelevant calcula­
tions.
Second Cause of Slips
So th e cause of slips is th e failure to
search properly for forceful replies the op­
ponent might make to the move you are
considering.
The other main cause of slips is the
failure to search properly for threats in the
move the opponent has just made. Yet an­
other cause is the common habit of treating
a threat in a defensive spirit. This sort of
error does not lead to major blunders, but
rather to missed opportunities.
So I divide this section into two parts:
(1) the search for threats; and
(2) the way to treat threats.
Search for Threats
A move may have an object without
containing a threat. A threat may be de­
fined as a move by which the opponent
could harm you if it were now his turn to
move.
As soon as the opponent has moved,
comb the board for possible threats, look­
ing first at all checks and captures, however
fantastic.
Most of the moves you look at, you will
see at a glance are not threats at all; but
occasionally you will find that one of the
moves that looks fantastic is a real threat,
and thus avoid a terrible blunder.
Other moves may need quite a lot of
calculation to discover whether they are
real threats or not; in other words, whether,
if it were the opponent's move and he played
Bxd5f (say), it would ultimately be to your
detriment or his.
In such calculations you may waste
much time, because you are not allowing
for your next move. You may have a very
simple move which you want to play in any
 The Search for Chess Perfection
case, and which rules the threat out of court. a real threat? That may require a little cal­
Here our inquiry merges into the second culation, so don't let us bother to find out
part of the article, how to treat threats. For just yet.
just now, let us state this rule: Capablanca played now 9. Nbc3. He
probably reasoned quickly somehow in this
When in your search for threats you way: I don't care if ...N(f!c)xe4 is a threat or
come across a move which seems to require not, as there is an obvious developing move
considerable calculation to discover ifit is a that I'm going to play in any case, and it
threat or not, pigeonhole it inyour mind and rules out the capture.
continueyour searchfor other threats. When That sounds very plausible, and thus,
your search is over, mentally name all the according to Znosko-Borovsky, Capablanca
moves (usually two at most) which you know missed a chance of forcing a clear positional
are threats or which may be threats. advantage. On the next move, Black played,
of course, the routine ...a5, establishing the
How to Treat Threats 4J on its good post. By imagining that what­
Let us examine the usual case, in which ever you do Black cannot reply with
there is only one threat. It may be a real ...N(f!c)xe4, you would surely examine 9.
threat, or you may not be sure; the treat­ b4, forcing the 4J to go back, and thus
ment of it should be exactly the same! And showing 8... Nc5 as a loss of time. You then
that treatment should be: look at 9. b4 Ncxe4 and see at once that
Black would lose a piece by f3.
Imagine the threats could not possibly Znosko-Borovsky published Capa­
be executed. Then what would be my best blanca's "miss" in a list of "Carlsbad Blun­
move? Try out each candidate separately; ders." This was a decided exaggeration, as
imagine theposition as it would be after this after b4Black, despite his deficiency in space,
move, and then (and only then) work out would have a fair chance of equalizing by
whether the opponent wouldgain by execut­ opening the a-file. Still, it does seem that
ing his "threat." Capablanca missed a good move.
Another example: Suppose you were
Why this particular treatment is right Black in a "simul," and the game opened
can be shown most clearly by an example. thus: 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 c5
5. Qg4. Many would bluff themselves into
5... Kf8?or 5... g6?Certainly 0"g7is a very
real threat, but you must first ignore it and
consider such moves as 5... cxd4 and 5...
Ne7.
The second of these can be proved
sound by quite easy calculation (but not 5...
cxd4? 6. 0"g7 dxc3 7. Kd1!). After 5... Ne7, if
6. 0"g7?, .. .Rg8 7. 0-h 7 cxd4 with advantage
to Black ( 8. a3 Bxc3f! 9. bxc3 Qs7).
Capablanca (to play)-Bogoljubov Notice that calculation of moves can
never be dispensed with. Chess cannot be
At Carlsbad, 1929, Bogoljubov hadjust played by rules alone; they merely help.
played 8... Nc5. Is either ... Nfxe4 or .. .Ncxe4

- 200 -
 His Writings

A GUIDING RULE FOR ENDGAMES

Although as a general work on endgames there is nothing to equal Euwe and
Hooper's Guide to the Chess Endings, students ought not to dispense with the endgame
section of Guide to Good Chess, as it is the only book, as far as I know, that gives the general
principles of endgame play.
Reuben Fine, in his Chess the Easy Way, gave "ten rules for the ending," but some of
them are rather vague, and important ones are left out. However, his sixth rule, "Do not
place your pawns in the same color as your Bishop," is an important one omitted
inadvertently from Guide to Good Chess.
The first and guiding rule for endgames in general, and the one this article is about,
is stated nowhere but in Guide to Good Chess and in occasional articles in this magazine
down the years. You will find that the masters of endgame play all follow it, but they must
do it intuitively, i.e., on the basis of unconsciously formulated experience. For those who
are not great masters and have no such intuition, the rule can be extremely helpful, and
the only reason it does not appear in textbooks in general is that the writers themselves
have never thought of it and have probably not read the Guide, perhaps thinking it too
elementary.
The rule as stated in the Guide is:

Rule (1)-Before ever beginning to think ofmaking a passedpawn, get allyourpieces

into as goodpositions as possible.

This presupposes that you do not already own a passed ft . If you do, the rule could
have many exceptions. It might be advisable to rush the passed ft quickly, even though
your pieces have not yet attained their best positions.

Where you are likely to get sidetracked

in endgames is in excursions for winning
material. Material is certainly important in
endgames, and yet . . . I was reminded what
a good rule this Rule ( 1) is when looking at
the end of my game with Hay in Perth. In
the position where he resigned because he
would lose the Exchange, there was a possi­
bility of a long and tedious struggle if White
made what most players would consider
the obvious moves. White to play

I am under no obligation to use the

Purdy-Hay position, and to make it slightly

- 20 1 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
harder for White to win, I have made a
slight alteration in placing a black ft on hS
instead of h7. In any case, Hay actually
resigned two moves earlier.
If confronted with this diagram, I am
sure the great majority of players below
master class would quickly play 7. Rc8f Kh7
2. RaB, and even some masters might care­
lessly play it. True, it wins the a- ft , but it
takes a very well placed E! momentarily out
of play at a8, and Black can start good
counterplay with 2 ... Rd3 3. R8xa7 Rxb3. If
4. Rb4, ...Rd3 5. Bb2 Nd5 6. Re4 Rb3 and the
road to victory still stretches for miles.
If White applies Rule (1), the win is not
startlingly easy, but it makes just that little
difference that is all the difference.
How to apply the rule? White's E! s are
already well situated, but White's A would
be better on the long diagonal. Then again,
Black has a threat, namely ...Nd4.
This suggests of course 1. Bb2! We
quickly see that this leaves Black with no
progressive reply. If the black E! leaves the
seventh rank, then Bxf6 and Rxa 7 threatens
mate. Or if 7... Nd5, 2. Be5 places White in
so dominating a position that the win is not
in doubt. If Black plays the developing sort
of move, 7... Kj7, it is at least clear that 2.
Rea 7 saves a move as compared with the
originally obvious 7. RcBf, as the ft is won
with only two E! moves instead of three.
Again, if 7... Kh7 (so as to keep the �
from check), White could afford to simplify
by 2. Bxf6 gxf6 3. Rea l Kg6 4. Rxa7 Rd5 5.
Rh 7 Rxb5 6. Ra6 Rxb3 7. Rbxb6, which forces
the E! off and thus gives a slow but easy win.
The analysis is not very important. It is
given only to prove what is fairly obvious.
Since 7. Bb2 improves White's position with­
out giving Black a chance to improve his, it
must be a good move, whereas 7. Rc8-a8
only amounts to an exchange of fts.
And, as Fine succinctly observes:
- 202
To win, exchange offpieces; to draw,
exchange offpawns.
In the example just above where we
exchanged off the black .§ , we did it at the
cost of swapping all the fts on the �-side.
But it was worth it. It does not matter if a
win is slow, if it is easy. With fts all on one
wing, a ft up is usually not enough to win,
but the Exchange up does win. The final
winning coup is almost always to give up E!
for piece and win a ft , producing a winning
ft ending.
In a winning endgame, if it is not a
question of racing as yet, do not be over­
anxious to "do something." The win won't
run away. See first if you can apply Rule (1),
i.e., improve your position without giving
the opponent a chance to improve his in
any substantial way. Of course, if the oppo­
nent has threats, they must be looked after;
but if the situation is "quiet," remember a
winning position is a winning position, and
you can keep it so. Don't jeopardize it by
rushing to win weak fts. A weak ft can
usually wait.
The reason for Rule (1) is that in the
endgame there are very few pieces, and the
fewer the pieces, the more important it is to
get the most out of each one.
(This means, in general, getting them
all into attacking types of positions. The �
is often an exception. He is frequently bet­
ter kept back to protect fts that might other­
wise fall a prey to a marauding E! . It is
mainly in minor-piece endings that the ad­
vice to rush the � out is mandatory.)
One final word. Why did I place the
black ft on hS instead of h7? Had it been
on h7, 7. Bb2 would still have been the best
move, but the difference between it and the
obvious play would have been less marked.
However, the rule would have held just the
same.
-
 His Writings

BRONSTEIN WINS WITH THE "ISOLATED d-PAWN"

After starting to annotate Bronstein-Berger "briefly," I realized it would make quite
an article on the old "isolated d-pawn."
Bronstein gives an excellent illustration of how the player with the "isolated d-pawn"
should conduct the attack. Berger does not give an equally good illustration of how to play
against the "isolated d-pawn", so the annotator must fill in.
Just at present, "isolated d-pawn" theory rather leans toward the attacker. A proviso
is that the attacker should be White. If it is Black who has the "isolated d-pawn", and if
White has not lost a tempo somewhere, White's chances of emerging safely from the
middlegame and proving the "isolated d-pawn" weak in an endgame are pretty good. The
odd tempo makes a big difference, so finely balanced are the chances. It follows that any
lack of precision can spoil the attacking chances of the player with the "isolated cl-pawn",
even though he opened with White.
Here, however, it is Black who lacks precision, and the "isolated d-pawn" wins in
short order.

D. Bronstein (U.S.S.R.)-B. Berger 10. exd4

(Australia)
Queen's Gambit Declined
1. c4 e6
2. Nc3 d5
3. d4 Nf6
4. Bg5 Be7
5. e3 Nbd7
6. Nf3 0-0
7. Bd3
Pachman, in his monumental work on
the d- ft , calls this a "colorless continuation 10. ... Nb6
rarely seen now in master play." This, how­ In all such positions, unless White
ever, was written before the current fashion castles ¥1¥-side it is best first to "put the
of deliberately courting the "isolated cl­ question to the Bishop" with ... h6, while
pawn" took hold. If deeper study is given to Bxf6 can still be met with ...Nxf6. The A is
the defense, the pendulum may well swing forced either to h4, where it can never again
back. threaten the sacrifice Bxh6, or else off the
7. dxc4 semi-pin diagonal, removing the pressure
8. Bxc4 c5 on the .I£) which protects the mating square
9. 0-0 cxd4 h7.
Must be good, as it does not have the 1 1. Bb3 Bd7
objection it sometimes has of freeing White's 12. Ne5
¥11- A, it being free already. The "isolated cl-pawn's" main and al-

- 20 3 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
most sole virtue is that it supports this pow­
erful 4).
12. Rc8
13. Qd3 Nbd5
14. Rfe1 Bc6
By now, Black cannot afford 14 ... h6
because of 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 16. Bc2!, and if
now 16... g6, 17. Nxg6 Bxg5 18. Ne7f! and
mate next move [Ed.: Alas, there is no mate
here, itjust looks that way at first glance. 18. . .
Kg7 19. Q!t7f Kf6 20. Nxd5f exd5 21. f4 Bxf4
22. Rf1 Ke7 23. Rxf4 @6 24. Raf1 gives White
a niggling edge; 17. Bxh6 is simpler and gives
White an immediate edge.]
15. Qh3 a6?
Loss of valuable time needed for safe­
guarding his �- When White is cooking up
a mate on h7, an excellent defensive plan is
to get the �- � to d8 as soon as possible to
make a flight for the � at f8. In order to
check on h7, White first has to play Bxf6,
bringing Black's .Q. from e7 to f6, and this
gives Black's � a further necessary flight
square at e 7.
On Move 17 Berger plays ... Qj6 and it
loses off hand. Had he played it immedi-
- 204
ately, for a quick . ..Rfd8, he would still have
a good game, e.g., 15... Qj6:
a) 16. Rad1 Rfd8 17. Bc2 Be8! 18. Bb1 (if
18. Nxd5, ...Rxc2! 19. Bxf6 gxf6! 20. Nxe7f
Q:ce7 and White's attack breaks down) @4!
19. Nxd5 Rxd5 20. Bxf6 Bxf6 21. Bxh7f (or
Q:ch7f) Kj8, and Black will regain his ft
with advantage.
b) If 16. Bc2, ...Rfd8! 17. Nxd5 Q:cd5 18.
Bxf6 Bxf6 19. Bxh7f Kj8 20. Nxc6 bxc6 (not
. ..Rxc6 21. Be4), and again Black will regain
his ft with advantage. .Q.s on opposite col­
ors in the middlegame are an advantage to
the better A (Black's, here).
16. Rad1
Bronstein's choice of squares for his
�s is the best. It would be!
16. ... b5
Fiddling while Rome burns. Here 16...
Qj6, instead of next move, was still quite
playable.
17. Bc2 Qd6??
Now a blunder losing outright. Black
cannot play 17. .. g6because of 18. Bh6 Re8
19. Nxj7! He could, however, play 17. .. b4,
and if 18. Ne4, ...Nxe4 19. Bxe4 j5 20. Bxe7
Q:ce7 with an inferior but not lost game. In
this, if 18. Nxd5, ...Bxd5 19. Bxf6 Rxc2.
18. Nxc6 Rxc6
19. Bxf6 Nxf6
20. Ne4 Resigns
Black must lose the Exchange. Had he
not played . . .b5, the combination would not
have been on, as a ft could have taken on
Black's c6. See note to 16... b5.
-
 His Writings

HOW TO ADVANCE IN CHESS

A corny title, but the subject is near to almost every player's heart. Even if the player
doesn't seek to become a champion, he rightly feels he could get more fun from chess if
he played it with more facility, less tendency to spoil his games with oversights.
Oversights Psychology
We all make oversights. Petrosian In my student days, psychology was a
makes oversights; they are few and far be- more conceited science than now. It thought
tween. At the other end of the scale, we itself adolescent. Now it seems to know it is
have a game I once saw at Sydney Univer- still a child. The once revered Macdougall
sity in which one player-of extremely high is derided as an oversimplifier. The amount
intelligence but not high skill, since I was of solid truth in Freud is variously estimated
able to give him a ltl-played a spectacular at anything from a fraction over nil up to
handicap game against another student who who knows what. Dogma is out, groping is
knew the moves and rules and nothing m.

more. The second student was also very
intelligent, and is now a leading figure in
the legal world. The first student gave the
second student all his pieces except his 'tl
and his eight fts. The first student won. You
don't believe it? I could bring witnesses, but
I could not descend to such unkindness to
an eminent member of the legal profession.
For there are many people who insist ab­
surdly on correlating chess skill with intelli­
gence, and his reputation would suffer.
Intelligence is an advantage in chess.
But intelligence and skill are entirely differ­
ent things.
Can chess skill be inborn, in the sense
that certain nerve connections may be al­
most ready-made in an infant's brain, so
that very little instruction is needed to es­
tablish them? We just don't know. There are
infant prodigies. But who is to say whether
they might not have shown extraordinary
ability in other directions if prodded? It
might be helpful to know what was the I.Q
of Morphy, Capablanca, Reshevsky, and
Fischer, for I.Q still means something, if
not very much.
As applied in chess, however, psychol­
ogy has advanced from wild guesses to
rudimentary science. De Groot's Thought
and Choice in Chess has shown up many
fallacies, has shown partly how chess mas­
ters think and how they don't think. Be­
cause of that book, what I write now about
chess must be a bit different from what I
wrote many years ago.
But don't let's kid ourselves. Despite
Thought and Choice, our knowledge of how
thinking in chess proceeds is still vague.
Nor can any of us have much idea of what
innate capacity for chess we have. And
supposing we omitted to learn chess when
very young, are we justified in saying, "It's a
bit late to start now"? Certainly not. It is
helpful to learn chess in the formative years,
but not vital. Amos Bum did not take up
chess seriously till he retired from business
late in life, yet became one of England's
aces and one of the world's top 20. George
Hastings did not even learn the moves till
he was 30 or 31, yet about five and a half
years later was runner-up for the Australian
Championship; the next time, to show it

- 20 5 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
was no fluke, he shared in the quadruple tie
for the title. ]. Kopp, the Sydney player,
learned at 50, yet in three years was able to
cope with state champions, and would have
beaten one in Melbourne but for forgetting
to stop his clock.
Evidently, if a person retains an agile
brain by constantly exercising it, his capac­
ity to learn new things need not be wrecked
by age. Or, alternatively, he may acquire a
sudden passion for chess, combined (either
through good or ill fortune) with a plentiful
supply of spare time, and thus the game
itself may give his mind an agility it had not
previously shown. I think that might be said
of Hastings, a man of high intelligence (I
think) but taciturn, and one whose earlier
background, insofar as I know it, did not
suggest that he had previously used that
intelligence in an intellectual sphere.
Is There a Panacea?
In short, few of us can gauge our ca­
pacity for chess. The question I now ask is
this: Is there some recipe for improvement
which will assist everybody, no matter what
his present age or skill? That is, leaving out
prodigies and grandmasters, who need not
concern us.
To answer this question, we need to
inquire into the nature of chess skill. In the
first place, chess is rather more like batting
at cricket than it is like tennis. In tennis, you
can strike a bad patch, but that is far from
fatal. You may lose a set. So what? But in
batting, one false step can doom you. So in
chess.
And yet chess is still vastly different
from batting. Batting may be a bit like light­
ning chess, but not straight chess. In straight
chess, you can and must deliberate. There
are so many things to look at, and if you fail
to look at something you ought to look at,
you may make a hideous oversight, after
which all the skill in the world won't save
- 206
you.
We now arrive at this:
The main desideratum in chess is avoid­
ance of oversights.
To put it another way, if we could all
play chess always at our full strength, we
should all play far, far better than we do.
Obviously, we all make moves below
our full strength. "Saw it as soon as I'd done
it!" We have all said this many times. Evi­
dently, in such cases, had we taken the
trouble to visualize clearly the position as it
would be after our proposed move, and to
look for shock replies in this visualized posi­
tion instead of the position before us, we'd
have seen the oversight before it could hap­
pen.
Going a bit beyond that, we have the
Purdy system, that little series of self-ques­
tions given at the end of Chess Made Easy.
Employed at every move, such a system
will cut down slips enormously. Yet in ac­
tual practice, it proves hard to discipline the
mind even to that small extent. Had I used
the Purdy system every move and in every
game since I evolved it, and had the same
degree of good and bad luck that I have had
during my chess career, I believe I'd have
won about 40 tournaments and matches
instead of about 30, and would often have
come second instead of third, and so on.
Making Your Best Better
Still, let's say you are capable of the
necessary self-discipline-by practicing yoga
or whatnot. You don't play as well as Boris
Spassky, or Korchnoi, or Petrosian, or Fisch­
er. Why not, damn it? Because even your
consistently best chess, or mine, is not as
good as they can play with or without the
Purdy system.
So the second question is: How do you
make your best chess better?
-
 His Writings
Houdini was once asked, "What is your
secret?" He replied, "I haven't one, I have a
thousand."
In chess, that would be as big an exag­
geration as it was with Houdini. Yet it is true
that in chess there is more than one road to
success. One player may be fortunate
enough to have a very good coach on tap. If
that coach will go through the player's games
with him, he's got it made. But good coaches
are rarer than good players.
Supposing you have no good coach.
My own case is one I can write about with
first-hand knowledge. I had nobody to give
me one word of advice.
So at 14, I had to work out a method of
learning for myself. A friend lent me Green's
Chess, a miserable little book with a dozen
or so unannotated games at the end. I
thought that if I played over these, always
covering the moves with a card before look­
ing, I must learn something. I was right. I
did not try to guess only the moves of one
side-perhaps the best idea-but both sides.
Doubtless this was because I had just had
one book, and it had very few games.
Mter that I started on Morphy's Games.
Very much more useful, of course, for al­
though P.W. Sergeant's notes hardly do
Morphy justice, they are infinitely better
than no notes at all.
The scheme must have worked, be­
cause a few months after learning the moves
and teaching my brother and sisters and
young friends the game, I was able to win a
handicap tournament in which I conceded
odds up to � � '£\, ft and Move (that's
' '
about half your fighting force). My oppo­
nents were far from dumb but quite un­
skilled, whereas I had been, by a more or
less unconscious process, acquiring just a
fraction of the know-how of the masters
whose games I had been playing through.
And that's just it. Good annotations
help, but are not essential. What chiefly
- 207 -
matters is that you put in some work your­
self on each move, and then compare your
move with the text move, either confirming
that yours was okay or discovering, if you
can or if the annotator will tell you, why it
wasn't. If you want the process to be quite
painless-and why not?-you can nowadays
make it so with Chernev's Logical ChessMove
by Move, with notes to every single move.
Mter that, you are ready for other books of
games.
Books and More Books
Today there are hundreds of good chess
books, and the process of improving at
chess is much easier. But although it is good
to read textbooks, you must not regard
them as a substitute for the playing over of
games-rather, an important supplement.
Reading chess theory helps you very much
in the long run. It does not produce steady
progress, but a series of occasional jumps
forward. Suddenly something clicks, and
you jump. Playing over games and solving
problems from actual play-like in Winning
Chess and Win at Chess and The Art of Check­
mate-is quite different. It improves you
minute by minute. You can feel it doing you
good!
Openings
Many players think they could play a
good game "if only they knew the open­
ings." This idea is really crazy. You can
improve your opening play at any stage of
your career. Make the most of your early
years by using them to improve your intrin­
sic chess skill, which has very little to do
with special openings. The general remarks
on openings in Guide to Good Chess are
enough until you become fairly good.
Blindfold Practice
You don't have to work hard at chess,
but if you feel like it, here is a way you can
 The Search for Chess Peifedion
infallibly improve your chess ability. Force
yourself to play through published games
blindfold. I know it's hard when there's no
necessity. It would be a good idea to go
camping with a book of games and "forget"
to take a chess set.
It's like rowing. In my student days,
cars were a rarity for young people. There
was more hiring of rowing boats. Now, one
thing about rowing is that you may go with
the tide but come home against it; more­
over, a strong wind may get up and fight
you. But you just have to return the boat to
shore, not to mention the girl. Thus, be­
cause you have to, you become an almost
tireless rower. And afterwards, rowing in
calm water is a pushover.
Same with blindfold chess. When you
have to, because you have undertaken it,
you can play quite a number of games
blindfold simultaneously. When you don't
have to, it seems irksome to play over even
one game blindfold. But if you make your­
self do it, it soon gets easier. Sarapu used
this kind of practice, and it may have helped
him to become Champion of Zone 10.
Why does blindfold chess help? Be­
cause a vital element of chess skill is to force
yourself to visualize positions several moves
ahead. In one way, that is harder than blind­
fold chess, because you have the present
position before your eyes to distract you. In
another way it is easier, because at least part
of your future picture is the same as now;
you have less to fill in. But if you want to
practice visualizing future moves while dis­
tracted by the position before you as in
actual games, you can do so by making a
practice of religiously ploughing through
the strings of analysis given by tough anno­
tators, and making sure you really do "see"
the position as it changes move by move:
do not give up halfway through a note.
If you find it very hard to play right
through a game blindfold, do not be dis-
- 208 -
couraged. One of the very worst blindfold
players I know is John Purdy, yet a player
who has twice won the Australian Champi­
onship cannot be utterly hopeless. He seems
to find the second kind of visualization, i.e.,
unseeing the position before him and see­
ing it a few moves ahead, quite easy, but he
is handicapped if he has no board at all.
If you find blindfold chess hard at first,
begin by playing with a blank board and no
men. Another tip: when lying in bed, spend
a minute or two each morning saying the
names of squares, like c6, and immediately
telling yourself whether it is dark or light.
Koltanowski, the great blindfold expert,
learned this way. It shows that blindfold
chess is not something you either can or
cannot do. You can learn it and improve at
it. We all know that hl and a8 are light.
Therefore, g2, £3, e4, dS, and b7 are light.
And of course fl, dl, bl, c8, e8, g8. From
that you can work out the rest. But with
practice you stop working them out, you
just know.
More on Books
I do not agree with "Zugzwang" on all
points. He says "players of talent" do not
need many books. They do not need them
if they merely want to play better than
untalented players. But if they want to im­
prove their own chess rapidly, books will
help them enormously.
There are two great differences be­
tween chess today and chess in my boy­
hood.
1. The number of competent players
the world over is vastly greater; I would say
it has multiplied twentyfold or even a hun­
dredfold. It is impossible to be more exact
than that, because the word "competent"
itself is vague. In my boyhood, almost ev­
ery player ofgreat skill had, as far as I could
see, a rather keen mentality, and there were
very few of them. Now there are a great
 His Writings
many players of about their strength, with
extremely varied mentalities.
2. The number of helpful chess books
is also vastly greater, and ( 1) has happened
because of (2). Chess literature in my boy­
hood was pitiful compared with now. The
main trouble was a general belief that the
finer points ofchess were unteachable. There
were books on openings and books of re­
corded games (with superficial notes), and
very little else. Nobody dreamed that actual
skill in chess could be taught, e.g., the abil­
ity to see combinations and to make good
plans.
The Big Breakthrough
Although it is not realized now, one
single, superior intellect was responsible for
the change-Emanuel Lasker. His Manual
showed (in 1928) that both these things
could be taught. Because he himself blew
no trumpets about his pioneering, but sim­
ply launched his book as though it were just
one more chess book, and secondly be­
cause he obscured his brass tacks by drag­
ging in bits of idealist philosophy that were
rather boring, but above all, because he
gave the credit for his theories to Steinitz­
thus disguising new lamps by calling them
old-ordinary players did not realize that a
new chess era had started. The people who
did wake up to it were writers, and the first
was Lasker's old rival, Tarrasch. Tarrasch
had previously taught only by annotation.
Now he produced his textbook, The Game of
Chess. This was so crammed with brass tacks
and free from Lasker's irrelevancies that
nobody seemed to realize it was based di­
rectly on Lasker and would have been im­
possible without Lasker-that Lasker was
the genius, Tarrasch just a great teacher
serving up Lasker's dish in a new, and to
most people, a more acceptable form.
Lasker was not the only great pioneer.
There was also Nimzovich. Later writers do
- 209 -
not use Nimzovich's rather humorous ter­
minology, and they avoid his exaggera­
tions, but all his insights are essential ingre­
dients of their works. Nimzovich dealt
mainly with special types of positions
(mainly very closed ones). Other writers try
to deal with all types, but their treatment of
the special types is still based on Nimzo­
vich.
Other Pioneers
Another pioneer was Znosko-Borov­
sky. Unfortunately, he started off, like the
old philosophers Descartes, Spinoza, Leib­
nitz and that crowd, with an a priori theory
that the "elements" of chess were force,
space, and time. Capablanca realized that
this was bunk, but his own attempt to patch
it up was a silly one. He said that Z-B had
left out a "fourth element," namely "posi­
tion." He went on to describe "position" in
such vague, complex terms that the absur­
dity of calling it an element should have
been obvious to his mathematical mind-so
crystal-dear when dealing with actual chess
situations over the board.
Just as the philosophy of Descartes is
full of good, fruity stuff despite its false
premises, so Znosko-Borovsky made an
important contribution to chess literature,
especially by showing how lucid a chess
writer could get without bursting at the
seams. The best parts of his book, The
Middlegame in Chess, are quite independent
of his force-space-time theory; they deal
extremely practically with the treatment of
superior, inferior, and equal positions. Ca­
pablanca, in Chess Fundamentals, was just as
lucid, and did not handicap himself with
any special theory at all. His criticism of Z­
B's theory is merely mentioned in passing
in another book, his Primer (out of print);
and here again, although he says the four
elements of chess are force, space, time, and
position (sheer bunkum), he makes no fur-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
ther mention of them, so that they don't
handicap him in the least.
Larry Evans similarly gave some mad
list of "elements of chess," but again he does
not allow it to handicap him in his intensely
practical work New Ideas in Chess, which is
really a splendid series of practical prob­
lems in strategy and tactics, with the solu­
tions fully explained.
"Myself When Young"
My own pioneering work, started in
1930, was of great practical assistance to
those who had the chance to read it. Not
many, for it did not appear in book form
but only in the A. C.R.-now all collector's
pieces. What I did first was to explain just
how Lasker's teaching on combinations
could be utilized in practical play. At first I
used Lasker's own grandiose terminology,
and only years later did I evolve my own
exceedingly simple one, "forks, pins, nets,
ties," and so forth. I did deal with position
play, but I concentrated on "how to see
combinations," and time has proved me
right. For the great lesson of De Groot's
scientific experiments detailed in Thought
and Choice in Chess is that combinations
(tactics) are the fundamental things in chess,
and strategy mainly derivative, so that the
difference between rabbits and fair ama­
teurs, fair amateurs and strong amateurs,
strong amateurs and masters, masters and
grandmasters, boils down almost completely
to one thing-the ability to see tactical possi­
bilities and see them quickly. It's actually
hard to believe, until you read Thought and
Choice and see how scientifically the ex­
periments were conducted.
Principles
All the same, though strategy may be a
derivative of tactics, meaning that general The Moral
principles in chess are based, deep down,
on mere practical experience of the results spise general principles and did suffer for it.
- 210
of actual moves, that is no reason why the
average player should go to all the trouble
of deriving his own strategy in that way. If
clever writers have arrived at certain fairly
reliable principles, it saves an enormous
amount of labor if you study those prin­
ciples and employ them, more or less on
trust at first, rather than go through all the
labor of trying to work them out for your­
self. This way, you may get in a few months
the fruit of five centuries.
Elementary, Watson
We could all think of players like C.G.
Watson whose tactics were obviously far
superior to their strategy. Watson did study
chess books, but he never bothered with
general principles. He reveled in sheer cal­
culation and probably whipped through a
dozen variations almost every move; he
saw far more, and far more quickly, than
most of his opponents, including me. Ab­
stractions bored him. Yet I, for one, had a
hoodoo over him, and the reason was that I
had some faith in principles, and discarded
quickly many ofthe lines he took the trouble
to calculate out for many moves ahead.
It makes me wonder how Watson and
I would have compared had we been used
as guinea pigs by De Groot. Watson cer­
tainly saw tactical possibilities faster than I
did. Yet he nearly always lost to me. What's
the answer? Would De Groot say that Wat­
son was potentially a more skillful player
than I, or would he discover that, although
I looked at fewer lines than Watson, I hit the
sounder ones sooner than he did? I don't
know, because, quite frankly, I have not
fully read De Groot. Perhaps he makes
some provision somewhere for exceptional
cases like Watson.
The fact remains that Watson did de­
-
 His Writings
And the moral is that the reading of general lion or weakening the opponent's.
works on the game is beneficial, even though This is evident from the fact that al­
it remains true that seeing tactical possibili­ though one should usually have a plan,
ties is absolutely essential to skill in chess. sometimes it is obvious that your best move,
Faith in, and use of, general principles will come what may, is simply to create a flight
save you a vast amount of clock time. for your W by h31. . . h6, thus freeing your
Eis, or Re7/Re2 to take the seventh/second
Purdy, Iconoclast rank with a Ei .
My later contribution to chess theory If you say, "Oh, well, that's a plan
was to point out the bunkum inherent in a consisting of one move only, but still a
priori theories like Z-B's force-space-time plan," my reply is that it is bad to stretch
one, and to show that the proper way to words beyond their accepted meanings. A
examine chess was to start from the game plan is rightly thought of as a series of
itself, not to impose something upon it from moves, not a single move. In either case,
outside. Thus I started to examine the moves you cannot dispense with an inspection of
and the rules. Above all, I pointed out that the position for possible shock replies; but if
almost the whole basis of chess is the rule you find there is none, and you have obvi­
that each player must move in turn and ously one good move only, and it is not a
only one thing at a time. This makes it threat nor a parry of a threat, you are play­
entirely different from war, and explains ing positionally, and yet are not making a
why such enormous advantage results if plan because there is no need for a plan.
one side can face his opponent with the The idea of "strengthening" or "weaken­
often impossible task of doing two things at ing" covers all position play. It usually in­
once. Not impossible always, for one move volves a plan, but need not.
will sometimes do two things. But often, It was because my ideas differed so
combinations are all based on that rule. sharply from other writers-even my origi­
For years I searched around for a true nal hero, Emanuel Lasker-that I entered
definition of a combination-there have been for the World Correspondence Champion­
at least a dozen attempts-and finally real­ ship, in which I felt that sound theories,
ized that a definition was unnecessary. And rather than the tactical facility I would never
why? Because combinations can be split up possess, should tell. It is only reasonable
into something simpler, namely threats. that a player with unusual theories should
Thus I arrived at my most important dic­ be expected to bring some evidence that
tum: they can achieve results. I knew my theo­
ries were at least 90% right. My winning the
Threats are the basis ofwinning chess. event did not prove them right, but it of­
fered some evidence that I was not an ec­
Position Play centric crank.
I also got down to a very basic idea of In recent years I have written nothing
position play. Position play is for when no along these lines, but have now resumed.
sound combination is "on," and it does not
necessarily involve a "plan," as other writ­ Position Play Made Easy
ers insisted it did-including even Lasker­ As explained, position play is for when
but primarily a much simpler thing, and no sound combination is "on," and that is
that is the idea of strengthening one's posi- most of the time. lt need not involve a plan,

-21 1 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
as most writers insist that it must, but it does John Purdy
usually.
What does the average player do when
he can neither threaten anything useful nor
has to parry some specific threat? He just
has no guide, and probably ends up making
a .ft move which he thinks will do least
harm, but may actually ruin him because a
.ft move is irrevocable; a .ft cannot after­
wards return.
The simplest recipe for a plan in such
circumstances is to find which of your pieces S. Lazare (after 1 8. Qe3)
is doing least good, and try to utilize it.
This applies right through the game. Here Black could, indeed, have played
For example, take the simplest case. In try­ a mildly threatening move, 18... j5, but it is
ing to mate with ¥11 and W against W, never two-edged and falls into the category of
move the ¥11 if the W is able to advance. risky .ft moves. John Purdy, then aged 19,
Why? Because a W is absolutely null and won the national title, but he was not yet a
void at a distance. The only exception to positional player. Floundering for a plan,
this rule is that you must avoid giving stale­ he chose the weird 18... Kh8 with the "aim"
mate-a special trick rule in chess which of .. .Ne5 and ...RgB. All meaningless, and it
supersedes the principle that gaining squares only spoiled his level position. He later
is always good. extricated himself and won brilliantly, but
Coming back to the opening, my prin­ that is irrelevant.
ciple applies in the well-known rule that All he had to do was to look for the
you should develop unmoved pieces rather piece that was doing least good, and mobi­
than move ones already out. In this case lize it. That's either � . The ¥11- � is not
you usually have a choice of pieces that are needed to protect the a- .ft , nor is there any
doing "least good," but if you have only one early prospect of attacking via ... a4. More­
piece left to develop {usually a EO, then the over, the serious weakness in Black's game
choice is narrowed down to it. Remember, is the c- .ft , which has two guns trained on it
this is only for when you can threaten noth­ and needs the d- .ft to stay "backward" to
ing useful and do not have to parry a threat, guard it. By simply placing the ¥11- � on c8,
though even then it might still be good to Black would have made an inactive piece
develop that last � . useful {defensively) and eliminated his only
For the middlegarne, we need a spe­ serious weakness. No "looking ahead" was
cific example. Take this one from the Aus­ necessary.
tralian Championship, Perth 1954-55. It Here's how the game went:
shows the difficulty that nonpositional play­ 18... Kh8? 19. Bb2 Ne5 20. Na4 Rg8?
ers have in vague positions. 21. h3 f5 22. f4 Nd7 23. Bb5 Bxb2 24.
Rxb2 Nf6 25. e5! Nd5 26. Qt2 dxe5.
With a few swift, sharp strokes, Black
has transformed his entirely satisfactory
position into just about a dead loss. Sim­
plest now for White was 27. fxe5, but he

- 212 -
 His Writings
chose to complicate with 27. c4, and a wild
game developed. White thought he could
play Rd7 after 2Z .. Nxf4, but then ... Qg5
would threaten a deadly fork.
Black probably thought for a long time
about 78... Kh8, yet it made no sense. By not
thinking at all and just following the prin­
ciple (activate least useful piece), he would
have saved minutes on his clock and pre­
served a good game.
It's true the other l"i was also inactive,
but the possibility of later playing .. .j5 for
attack makes it potentially active. So a move
by the �- l"i would not have been as good
as ...Rac8, but would have been far better
than the useless move chosen.
So you see, position play is not as hard
as you think. If a move "looks" silly, it
probably is silly, so avoid it unless you can
prove beyond doubt that it is good.
Digression
Recently I did something I have not
done for several decades-gave a lesson to a
fairly raw beginner. This pupil, age 13, was
very intelligent, and had read Chess Made
Easy, and had played some games, though
only with a girl who did not fully know the
rules.
I was surprised to find that in spite of
her perusal of C.M.E., evidently only a brief
one, she was still not absolutely clear about
"en passant." She knew the rules of castling
as well as Averbakh5 did before Adelaide
1960, but did not know them fully.
Furthermore, her "sight of the board"
was virtually nonexistent.
The lesson took the form of a game in
which the pupil thought out a move each
time entirely for herself, but was only per­
mitted to play it if it was not a serious error.
If it was, the error was explained and she
was asked to think again, and if necessary
again, till she found a good move.
Thus she improved by almost a whole
¥11 in a lesson lasting a little over an hour. If
anyone thinks this an exaggeration, we must
explain that a player who can be given a ¥11
by a master can easily find opponents to
whom he or she can give a ¥11, and those
opponents can find victims to whom they
could concede a § or more.
What would I charge for such a lesson
normally? Well, at least $20, assuming I was
willing to give one at all. Not many begin­
ners care to pay so much for early lessons.
What is the answer? I saw it at once,
and told the pupil, who realized I would not
have time to give further lessons.
Ten years ago, there was no answer.
Now there is. It is Chemev's Logical Chess
Move by Move.
For this is the only book of annotated
games that is comprehensible to a tyro.
Every other book of annotated games leaves
some moves unexplained. The annotator
assumes that the pupil will find some moves
fairly obvious, whereas in fact he or she
finds none at all obvious.
Some students are satisfied to remain
completely puzzled by some moves. Pro­
vided they can follow most of them, they
realize the game is doing them good. This is
the best way to be. This was how I myself
had to be, as the first book of chess I ever
possessed had games with no notes at all.
But this is part of my nature. I am
happy to remain in complete doubt about

5 Ed.: In Averbakh-Purdy, Adelaide 1960, Purdy castled ¥11-side and Averbakh argued
that Purdy's l"i had passed over a square (b8) commanded by a white piece-so the
castling was illegal! Averbakh's misconception was pointed out to him by his Russian
friends and the game went on. See Chess World, Oct. 1960, p. 198.

-213-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
many things.
But about 90% of us are not. These
90% or so like to understand everything
when they study something. Gaps of in­
comprehensibility in a game worry them.
This is remedied by Chemev, who anno­
tates every move in every game, even going to
the lengths of saying something new each
time about 7. e4 or 1. d4.
Even then, beginners will naturally find
a few bits of the notes not fully understand­
able, but they will at least understand all the
moves of each game.
In this series, I have mentioned the
value of books mostly in a general way.
There are now so many that readers have
suggested that I offer a sort of guide to
them.
When somebody asks me what books
he should get, I need to know first of all
what books he has already, and about what
strength he is. If he has some books already,
I want to know his reactions to them. For
example, some students find Nimzovich's
My System extremely illuminating, helpful,
and easy to understand. Others have diffi­
culty with him, and if I can discover why
they have difficulty, I can pick books that
will help them.
In some cases the difficulty is simply
that they have never acquired a quick "sight
of the board." Nimzovich takes a good deal
for granted. Every now and then he men­
tions that the move that would be indicated
by the "system" is no good because of . . .
and he reels off a little string of moves. A
player who is already good enough to know
that tactical possibilities must invariably
have precedence over "principles" is not
worried by this. But the player who has
come on to Nimzovich too soon is con­
fused.
As to strength (or weakness) of play, I
also need to know just where his weakness
lies. Often he thinks his weakness is in
- 2 14
openings, and is usually wrong. Most play­
ers have one weakness in common, though
they may have others: they do not see the
"obvious" quickly. Look at the nearest dia­
gram and see how long it takes you to see
White's correct move. One second? That is
satisfactory. But suppose, three moves ear­
lier, you saw that you could win a piece but
would be then faced with the position in the
diagram; might you not hastily conclude
that being faced with such a diabolical­
looking fork three moves later would make
the whole thing unsound, and might you
therefore refrain from winning the piece? If
you are quite certain you would not allow
yourself to be fooled in this way, either you
are kidding yourself or you are a good
tactician. In the latter case, you need ad­
vanced books on position play, having al­
ready a fair grip of the mechanics of the
game.
The mechanics of the game are the
great bottleneck with most learners. Any­
one of intelligence can understand the prin­
ciples of quick development, control of the
center, and so forth, but nearly everyone, at
any age, is slow in acquiring facility in chess
geometry.
The hardest moves to see are:
(a) very long moves backwards, and
(b) the Knight's move.
Many writers describe the .:tl's move
as two operations. This is bad. Nobody is
ever going to get to even "Z" class in chess
until he stops seeing the .:tl's move as two
steps and sees it as only one. Therefore it is
best to describe it as one only from the start.
The main thing is to show it in diagrams, for
in actual play it has to be seen, not thought
about. So long as you have to think about
the .:tl's move, you cannot play chess.
If a learner can stand it, it is best to give
him innumerable exercises in 4J forks, other
forks, pins, and skewers. But show him that
-
 His Writings
forks, and pins and skewers of a sort that
threaten to win material, are really all the
same thing-pins and skewers are really only
particular cases of forks, both the forked
pieces lying on the same line instead of on
different lines.
I spoke of Logical Chess Move by Move as
an answer to a learner's prayer.6
Since then, I have found that it is not
enough for most learners. They need actual
chess exercises.
How to Force Checkmate
The best book of exercises for a learner
to start with is Reinfeld's How to Force Check­
mate. Reinfeld's best books are those with
hardly any words at all, but only diagrams,
captions, and solutions. This is one.
It starts with 36 diagrams in which the
problem is to mate in one. It is surprising
how long it takes most beginners to see
these, and this shows how much they need
them.
After whipping through these, the
learner is introduced to 156 mates in two­
not those frightfully difficult sort that are
specially composed and appear in Sunday
newspapers, but ones where the first move
is almost invariably a check, as in real chess.
All these positions are from actual play.
When the learner has been through
these, taking a little more time, he is intro­
duced to 108 mates in three-again, all start­
ing with a check or other forcing move. No
mate in three in real chess or in this book is
ever as hard to see as a cleverly composed
mate in two.
In other words, all the exercises are
either very easy or fairly easy, and this is
good. It means that you get through 300
fairly quickly, and you are then no longer a
raw beginner-whereas if a learner merely
reads a book that tells him some principles,
useful though they may be, his actual play
will still be ghastly because he is not yet
seeing. He is only thinking, and this is futile.
It is obvious from lightning chess that
it is not absolutely necessary to think in
chess-though it's a help. But it is absolutely
necessary to see. A person may have a ter­
rific brain, but until he starts seeing the
"obvious" in chess he will continue to com­
mit the most atrocious blunders. There is
nothing inherently obvious in chess. You
can get to a stage where the "obvious" is
really obvious just by playing chess for years
and years. Or you can get to it in a few
weeks with the right books of exercises or
books of games, but exercises give you
more specific practice in the essentials.
"Win at Chess"
After How to Force Checkmate, there is
another good book by Reinfeld called Win
at Chess.7
These exercises are not quite so easy.
They are all combinations, but not all end­
ing in forced mates. It is important to real­
ize that although mating combinations are
the most vital, they are not the commonest.
Little combinations involving loss or gain
of material come into calculation at every
move in the game, even when it is only a
case of avoiding a certain move because it
would permit a little combination by the
opponent. In master chess, a minority of
moves are actually combinative, but this is
because both players are seeing all the corn-

6 Ed.: Unfortunately, Logical ChessMove by Moveby Chernev has been out of printfor some
time and as of 1 997 there is no word of a reprint.
7 Ed.: Thinkers' Press, the publisher of the book you are reading, also publishes a title
called Win at Chess! by Ron Curry. Available !rom many fine booksellers.

- 2 1 5 --
 The Search for Chess Perfection
binations that certain moves would give the
opponent, and are avoiding such moves.
A thing not often realized is that in
most grades of chess, when you get a chance
for a winning combination it is usually
through an error by the opponent, and
when your opponent gets one it is usually
through error by you. It follows that unflag­
ging attention has to be given to checking
up at every move to see if it permits an
enemy combination. For once you have
moved, the board is at your opponent's
mercy.
Equally, since your opponent may
make an error permitting a combination at
any time, you must also look for possible
combinations on your own account, when
it is your move. Every time.
Play through a game by a couple of
learners or average players, and you will
find that both ofthem constantly overlooked
dramatic possibilities. Their games have
few combinations because they didn't see
them. The games of masters do not, as a
general rule, contain a great number of
combinations, either. But this is for the op­
posite reason that the masters see all the
ones that would arise through errors, and
avoid the errors.
Like Tennis
The difference between books of games
and books of exercises is a bit like the
difference between playing sets of tennis
and having special practice at volleying
against a wall or with the aid of an appara­
tus, or even with another player across the
net. Or practice in serving by serving a
dozen balls from corner to corner several
- 216
times. Playing the set gives you varied prac­
tice, but does not improve you rapidly in
particular shots. Volleys may be likened to
combinations because they are the finish­
ing shots, and if you volley too feebly you
are usually vulnerable to an easy passing
shot, so you lose where you should have
won. And a good service will pay off in
aces, forced errors, and weak returns. And
volleys and serves are shots that not many
players become very good at, but they are
the ones it is possible to become very good
at more quickly than any others in the ways
described.
Books for Practice!
The main point is that practice is better
than theory, but practice against other learn­
ers is of little use because they do not take
advantage of most of your errors, so that
you go on making such errors. And you
cannot, in common humanity, ask an ex­
pert to play with you. Not only will it bore
him, but it may have a really bad effect on
his play. I have known players to go right
off their game through being inveigled fre­
quently into playing weak opponents. A
book of exercises from actual play or a
book of games is practice of the very best
sort, always provided you never peep at the
solution or the text move until you have
"had a go." And provided that if you went
wrong, you try to find out why you went
wrong. But don't spend too long at that. As
I always say, even if you only understand
50% of the moves, you are getting some­
where and your percentage will rise. Don't
expect to understand everything at first­
just forge ahead.
-
 His Games

Cecil Purdy competed in his Championship tourney in

1926, the year I was born. Despite this generation gap, it seems that, except
for Garry Koshnitsky, I had the longest close contact with Purdy of any
current player. My first encounter was in 1941 when, as a schoolboy who
had learnt chess only the year before, I brashly wrote to A. C.R. suggesting
an analysis of an endgame was wrong. Not surprisingly, I was in error, but
I received back a pleasant letter giving more detailed analysis and offering
a book if I could refute it. Later I was taken by Steve Kruger to meet Purdy
at No. 1 Bond Street, the first of numerous trips of mine to the office of
incredible chaos at the top of the stairs-a habit broken only when I
graduated at Sydney University in 1945 and then came to live in Melbourne.
During my Sydney years I saw Purdy in action many times, ranging
from some years in the same interclub team through several N.S.W
Championships up to the 1945 Australian Championship.
My contact was not confined to chess events. Mter our 1973 personal
distress, Cecil showed a high order of sympathetic sensitivity. When
possible, we were tennis adversaries. I often visited his home-Cecil was a
learned yet entertaining conversationalist. We were frequent correspondents.
Cecil had the great virtue of being prepared to objectively look at new
concepts and, even more unusual, at heterodox ideas challenging accepted
wisdom. We argued at length over abstruse areas of chess philosophy,
much more than ever was mentioned in Chess World. He was always willing
to espouse any suggestion that he thought to be good for chess.

- 217 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
THE PLAYER
When a player is a F.I.D.E. Interna­
tional Master and is capable of winning
four Australian Championships, his ability
must be of a very high order indeed. What
then were his skills? He was a most effective
player; his genius for winning the impor­
tant games and the important events, even
against innately better opponents, was un­
paralleled. But above all, he was extremely
efficient in his play, more so than anybody
else I have seen. That is, he marshaled his
talents and applied them in the most effec­
tive way. Never was there whimsy for the
sake of being different or showiness or other
forms of waste of effort. In a way, his great
skill was methodical organization ofthought,
and systematic application of one overall,
overriding concept.
I do not mean that his play was stereo­
typed, only that his games (and his suc­
cesses) were based on one idea. Purdy was
the perfect example of how a person's own
abilities influenced not only his actual play,
but also his philosophy of how the game
should be played. Running through all his
writings is the theme that a bad positional
mistake may sometimes be decisive, but
almost always defeats arise from tactical
errors, minor or major, so that the key to
winning chess is to avoid such mistakes
oneself and take advantage ofthe opponent's
mistakes. Except perhaps at the very top
levels, that proposition is undoubtedly cor­
rect, and Purdy's great contribution to chess
literature was to emphasize it, to classify the
-218-
types of situation, and to provide a scheme
which could be used by players of all
strengths to at least minimize such tactical
errors. All this echoed his own merits: even
at his peak, his aims in play were modest­
his successes arose from his avoidance of
minor tactical errors, his perception ofwhen
his opponent so faltered, and his ability to
keep a game in channels where constant
vigilance was required. Most illuminating
was his own comment to an unexpected
loss to a tail-ender-that Tymoshenko ob­
tained a position where the right moves
were straightforward.
It can be deduced that Purdy would be
troubled by players of reasonably compa­
rable standard who did not make mistakes
or, in a particular game, until they made a
mistake. I do not mean somebody who
stolidly did nothing, as the Purdy style of
constant small tactical possibilities is dyna­
mite against such types. Instead I refer to
somebody who keeps the minor tactics un­
der control, but who may be fertile in ideas.
In such cases deeper, long-range plans come
into play, and Purdy's advocacy and use of
merely finding the best piece-improvement
move is found wanting. Games over the
years verify this deduction.
Among Cecil Purdy's attributes have
to be placed iron nerves. If he ever got
nervous, it was certainly well concealed.
Over the board, his concentration was re­
nowned. Immersed under his famous
eyeshade (to avoid distraction), it was rare
to see him stir. Chess was a struggle, and no
matter who the opponent, how the game
was going, what the event was, or whether
he was in the running, all games were given
full attention.
Purdy was the epitome of the fighter.
Never was he one for the casual draw, and
still less for the pusillanimous grandmaster
draw. If you were a leader, you aimed to
beat other leaders to open up a margin;
 His Games
even if you were an also-ran, you aimed to
win to improve your standing. This implies
both courage and a concern for self-respect.
As a fighter, he was never beaten until he
turned over his W. In bad positions he was
the master of finding the best chance, and
his games are full of sacrifices of a ft , or of
the Exchange for a ft to provide counter­
play; and many a time the game thereby
swung his way. Given the great influence he
had on me, it is no surprise that we drew
only three of our 18 games, and two of these
were 80-move hairsbreadth escapes and the
other was by forced repetition in a wild
position in which I was vast material be­
hind.
In a major event, Purdy believed in
getting plenty of rest, at night or before play
as appropriate to the session times. Except
for sometime press duties, he rarely stayed
around long after he finished his game, and
he was never one who returned to an ad­
journment session merely for interest. Like­
wise, he was not of those who socialized or
went to parties or "did the town" at nights
or on rest days. All this is very wise, as a
major tournament is a test of stamina, and
he never seemed to tire in an event (or for
that matter even in a game until advanced
in years).
OPENING PREPARATION
Purdy placed great store in preparing
the opening, not so much for gaining a
theoretical advantage, as his own concepts
would show how ephemeral that could be,
but rather to run the game into the type of
position he wanted and whose basic ideas
were known to him. In a major tourney, he
would often beforehand prepare very deeply
in one or two openings and confine himself
wholly to them. That worked pretty well,
though occasionally he came unstuck by
running into somebody whose own pet
- 219
opening it was.
The idea behind opening preparation
is to avoid unnecessary time expenditure,
but Purdy rarely succeeded in this. His slow­
ness and consequent perennial time trouble
were notorious. However, he then was cool­
ness personified. Nobody avoids all mis­
takes in time trouble, but I'd say Purdy did
better than most. So often was it a feature of
his game that he even worked out a scheme
of prior marks on the score sheet to allow a
move tally to be maintained with just one
pencil stroke. Without getting flustered, he
would work out an answer to possible moves
and reply instantly-again the systematic
approach. Since he used the transmission
time to think, he was ideally suited to tele­
graphic play, and his record was superb. As
his teller, I once saw him shoot out about
ten instantaneous replies consecutively. A
most curious discrepancy was that he had
all the requirements for lightning play, yet
he was a complete flop at this: I cannot
explain it.
If the game was adjourned, Purdy
would analyze it deeper and deeper until it
held no secrets. He seemed to be invulner­
able to fatigue, and for him this approach
was very successful; but one's physiology
plays a part, and for others a more circum­
spect approach to food needs and recupera­
tion between sessions might turn out better.
His analytical ability was outstanding,
as evidenced by his correspondence achieve­
ments. From the start I was impressed by
his skill in playing over an unknown game
and very rapidly locating the critical error
moves. His annotations were to the point
and could well be emulated in aim by most
of the present day: he aimed to show where
the mistakes were, why they were in error,
and what should have been played. Of
course, he was not always correct, but when
sound analysis was provided it would be
accepted ungrudgingly and without rancor.
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection
It was the same in over-the-board analysis
at game completion. He could confine his
attention to critical positions, avoiding the
trivialities where a loser attempts to show
otherwise by more-or-less lightning anal­
ysis. Equally, he was very rarely averse to
agreeing that he had been in error or even
losing-very unlike many players I could
name.
Cecil Purdy had the old-fashioned but
still desirable ethical attitude to play. You
do not cheat, you do not use gamesman­
ship, but the rules are to be kept and you do
not allow your opponent to breach them or
otherwise take advantage of you. You do
not give up while a chance remains, but you
do not go to a further session with a game
demonstrably past salvation. Still less do
you commit the utterly appalling act of
failing to appear at that next session. Like­
wise, you play on for a win whilst any
reasonable opportunities exist, but you do
not continue games where your only chance
is for the opponent to blunder due to fa­
tigue, boredom, or annoyance.
Lest the reader feel that CJSP was a
paragon, I must now admit that he was
human and did have his imperfections. Nev­
ertheless, about his conduct at the chess­
board "I find no fault of this man," and it
was as magazine editor that some flaws
were seen. We all tolerated the incredible
unpunctuality of issues of the magazine and
soon learned to discount the promises of
future articles, features, books, etc., so few
of which ever came to fruition. Perhaps the
most amusing were his proclaimed retire­
ments. At the Brisbane 1951 prizegiving, I
heard him declare his abandonment of all
future competitive play! If this was the first
time, it certainly was not the last, and what
he was engaged at when he came to his
untimely end shows how strong the attrac­
tion of the battle is to the true warrior.
In his writings, he was occasionally
- 220 -
unduly dogmatic. One case was his reitera­
tion that a position could not be judged
statically on head-counting and positional
grounds until after all tactical possibilities
were surveyed. This overlooks that the merit
of a tactical flurry often cannot be evaluated
without prior assessment of the existing po­
sitional and material aspects; yet his own
practical successes were often due to his use
of that self-same reasoning. He constantly
tempted opponents to exchange great posi­
tion plusses for only slight material gain.
Likewise, his dismissal of the claim that
combinations only arise in superior posi­
tions was obscurantist. No writer has ever
denied that the easiest win can be destroyed
by a tactical blunder: the real claim is that,
provided patent blunders are avoided, win­
ning combinations arise only after the op­
ponent has been pushed downhill so far
that he can no longer attend to all dangers.
The magazines always tended to be
rather Purdy-centered, and in the later years
of Chess World the achievements of the Purdy
family were certainly unduly prominent.
Cecil sometimes came on rather much about
ethics and, like us all, showed his little bi­
ases about certain persons and States and
incidents. He was so scrupulously fair over
the board that I was always surprised that in
his magazine writings he was sometimes
very less than fair and distinctly ungener­
ous about his strongest rivals and their
achievements. Still, even an angel needs
some warts lest he becomes cloying.
To finish, I have left the best till last. If
Cecil Purdy's attitude to the playing of tour­
nament chess had to be summed up in one
word, I would say Integrity. In fairness to all
competitors, every game has to be treated
alike. Even if well out of the running, never
should one indulge in such disreputable
practices as not turning up, or withdrawing,
or coming very late, or playing moves at
allegro speed. Moreover, the easy draw or a
 His Games

casual attitude is almost as reprehensible. Vienna 1882). White has no more than
Cecil had a special worry in that his son was equal chances.
often a competitor in the same events. How­ 15. f3 Ng5
ever, at no time and in no event, regardless 16. f4
of the scores, was there any concession Or Bxg5 followed by Q,d3 with some
made toJohn P., or for that matter to friends slight advantage.
or proteges. 16. Ne4
Perhaps the most notable example of 17. Be3 Qe7
his principled attitude was the last-round 18. Rc1 Rac8
game Purdy-Rogers in the 1979 Sydney If .. a4, 19. Nd2 c5 20. Nxe4 and White
.

International, the last important game that is preferable.

he was fated to play. He was already last for 19. Bd3 c6
sure, whilst Rogers needed but half a point 20. a3
for his IM norm. A quick draw? Not bloody
likely! Any score has to be earned. The
course and eventual result of that game is
now history, but for his honorable approach
I respect him most of all.
Vale CecilJ.S. Purdy

(I)
Australian Championship (1931)
C. Purdy-G. Gundersen White tries for too much. He wants to
Ruy Lopez play Nc5 without the possibility of Black
equalizing by ...Bxc5 followed by ...d4, and
1. e4 e5 first moves the a- .1t out of range of the A.
2. Nf3 Nc6 But this .1t advance gives Black chances on
3. Bb5 a6 the � wing. Nc5 at once.
4. Ba4 Nf6 20. Qa7!
5. 0-0 Nxe4 21. Qc2 a4!
6. d4 b5 22. Nc5 Bxc5
7. Bb3 d5 23. dxc5 Rb8!
8. dxe5 Be6 24. Bd4 b4
9. c3 Bc5 25. Rf3 ! Rf7
10. Nbd2 0-0 26. Qe2! Rfb7
1 1. Bc2 f5 27. Ba6!
12. Nb3 Bb6 By these maneuvers White preserves
13. Nfd4 Nxd4 equilibrium.
14. cxd4 27. Rf7
Nxd4 is "book." 28. Bd3 Rfb7
14 . ..• a5 29. Ba6 Rf7
More energetic was 14 ... f4 15. j3 Ng3!! 30. h3
16. Rf2! Q!t4. This has occurred after 14. Avoiding a draw by repetition and pre-
Nxd4 Bxd4 15. cxd4 (Mackenzie-Fleissig, paring possibilities of �-side counterplay.

- 22 1 --
 The Search for Chess Perfection

30. lta8 51. a4 Bd7

3 1. Bd3 Rb7 52. a5 Be8
32. Kh2 b3 Black is in zugzwang.
Seeing that after all he can make noth­ 53. Re6!
ing out of the \1!lt-side (e.g., ... bxa3 33. bxa3 A neat stifler. Threatens RxeB, and if
Rh3 34. Bb2), Black decides to close it up ...Bd7, Re7, or .. .Bfl, Rxc6.
and seek fresh fields. This makes the game 53. •.. Qxe6
very drawish. 54. Qxb7 Resigns
33. Rff1 Rf7 If ...Bd7, 55. a6 e3 56. a7 e2 5Z Bc3 Qs4
34. Qe3 Qe7 58. OjB, etc.
35. Rf3
White was scrambling to beat his clock, (2)
which he had been racing for almost 20 Melbourne Annual Tournament (1932)
moves. F. Crowi-C. Purdy
35. Kh8 Polish Opening
36. Rcfl ltaS?
37. Bxe4 1. b4
After his 36th move White has time to Having a move in hand, White can
think, and he prepares an entire regrouping afford almost any freak. This is the Polish,
maneuver; he centralizes his i"(s, which alias Orang-Outang, Opening. The ad­
Black fails to do. vanced b- ft and the .\1/b2 are not without
37. dxe4 their effect, but the loss of time on Move 4
38. R3f2 Qf8 outweighs that.
39. Qc3 Rb5 1. ... d5
40. Rd1 Rd7 If . . .e5, Bb2 compels ... d6 or . . f6, as a
41. Rfd2 Qd8 b- ft is no compensation for a center ft .
42. Be3! 2. Bb2 Nf6
Black's position is now most difficult, 3. e3! e6
owing to the unhappy maneuver with his If . . .Bj5 first, [4 and the A is liable to
\1!l{- )"( . White threatens Rd6. get hemmed in by fts.
42.
.•.
Bd5 4. b5 Nbd7
43. e6! 5. N£3 Bd6
A surprise move which opens up av­ 6. c4 Qe7
enues of attack. 7. Nc3 c5
43.
•.. Bxe6 8. Qb3 Nb6
If ...Re7, 44. Qs5 Qj8! 45. Rxd5 cxd5 46. 9. d3 0-0
Rxd5 with good winning prospects. But this 10. Be2 Rd8!
gave Black more chances. Black wants to play ... e5, but at present
44. Rxd7 Bxd7 can only do so after dxc4 dxc4, which would
45. Qd4 Rb7 allow White later to post a 4J strongly at dS.
46. Qxa4 Qe8 Black therefore prepares ... d4 to drive away
47. Rd6 h6 the 4J first.
48. Qa6 Qc8 1 1. 0-0 Bc7!
49. Bd4 Kh7 12. ltadl
50. Be5 Be8 Best was Rac7 or e4.

- 222 -
 His Games

12. d4 Not .. .fxe4 33. Ne5.

13. exd4 cxd4 33. Qb3
14. Nb1 Primarily because of his exposed �,
If Ne4, Black gets a passed ft by ex­ White is forced to exchange ¥/!is at the cost
changing lt)s. of a tempo and doubled fts.
14. ... e5 33. Qxb3
15. Rfe1 Nbd7! 34. axb3 d2
Nimzovich was screaming for Black to 35. Rd1 Rd3
put this 4) on the blockade square (c5).
16. Bfl Nc5 �'l��
"iW'���� �
17. Qc2 Bg4 ���-��
���"��.,.0.��.t
�� �� �� �
'

18. Nbd2 Qd7

�j �� �, ��
······

White threatened Bxd4.

�z�ra:,z
19. h3 Bxf3
20. Nxf3 Re8
21. Ba3!
r���;.;�� ���
To induce the weakening ...b6.
21. b6 � �� � )�

22. g3 Rad8 36. Bfi

23. Bg2 e4! Black threatened to win in one by .. .Ng3!
And the fun begins. 36. •.. Rg3t
24. dxe4 d3 Black saw ...Re3 won easily, but thought
25. Qb1 Nfxe4 he could win still more easily by driving
26. Bb2 away White's W first; he overlooked the
26. Bxc5 Nxc5 2Z Rxe8 Rxe8 28. Re1 to ingenious idea in the next note.
simplify gave more chance. 37. Kh2 Re3
26. f5 38. Bc4t Kf8
27. Nd4 Qfl Black had thought to win offhand by
28. Nc6 Rd7 ...KhB, but now sees his error: 39. Rg1 Nf6
29. Ba1 40. Bxf6! gxf6 41. Rd1! and wins the passed
If 29. Nxa7, . . . Q,xc4threatening ... Bxg3. ft !
White could save his c- ft by 29. Bxe4 fol­ 39. Bb2! g5
lowed by Qs1, but his W position would be 40. Ba3t Kg7
left weak. 41. Bb4 Rxh3t
29. ... Qxc4 Owing to his tiny lapse on Move 36,
30. f3 Black's task is lengthened by about 20
Leads to exchange of two live pieces moves! If ...Re1, of course simply Rxe1.
for a dead � and two fts, but exposes the 42. Kxh3 Nf2t
w. 43. Kg2 Nxd1
30. ... Bxg3! 44. Bxd2 Ne3t
...Nd6is bad (Ne5), and if ... Nf6 31. Bxf6 45. Bxe3
Rxe 1 f 32. Rxe 1 gxf6White regains his ft by Better was Kf2, suggested by Mr. Wat­
Ne7f. son, but by ...Ng4 f followed by ...Kg6 and
31. fxe4 Bxe1 . . .h5 Black wins as in the game.
32. Rxe1 Nxe4 45. ••. Rxe3

- 223 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

46. Nxa7 ReS! 1. d4 d5

47. Nc6 Kf6! 2. c4 dxc4
Black resists the temptation to race 3. Nf3 Nf6
ahead with the h- .ft and develops his '3; in 4. e3 c5
accordance with correct principles. 5. Bxc4 e6
48. Nb4 Ke5 6. 0-0 a6
49. Nd5 Re6 7. Qe2
50. Ne3 Rf6 The i!Y-<tl is reserved for d2 in case of
...Rd6 is not good while the fork at c4 ...b5, a5, . . . b4.
looms. 7
• •• • Nbd7
51. Kf2 h5 8. a4
52. Be2 g4 White now prefers to stop ... b5 alto­
Keep your .fts on the same color as an gether, seeing that Black cannot fill the hole
enemy A. Then it cannot blockade them, at b4 by .. .Nc6-b4.
and they take squares away from it. 8. b6
53. Ng2 f4 9. Nc3 Bb7
54. Nh4 Rd6 10. Rdl Qc7
Aiming at ... Kf6-g5 to unblockade. 1 1. Bd2!
Black wants all three to advance. At least as good as b3. White's idea is to
55. Bc4 Kf6 utilize the c-file rapidly in order to avoid
56. Ng2 Kg5 having to play h3.
57. Nel Rd2t 1 1. Bd6
58. Kgl h4 12. dxc5! Nxc5
59. Bfl f3 13. Racl Qe7
60. Nd3 g3 If 73... 0-0 (threatening ...Bxj3 and
... h3 was more crushing; see note after ...Bxh2f), 74. b4! Ncd7 75. e4 Bxb4 76. Bxe6!
Move 52. fxe6 7Z Nd5, regaining the .ft with advan­
61. Ne5 Kf4 tage.
62. Ng6t Kg5 14. b4 Nce4
63. Ne5 t2t 15. Nxe4 Nxe4
64. Kg2 Rdl 16. Bel! 0-0
65. Nf3t Kg4 If 76... Bxb4, 7Z @2 Bxe7 18. Nxe1 and
66. NeSt Kf5 White recovers the piece with advantage.
67. Nc4 17. Bd3! Rfd8
If Nj3, ...R.xf7 and ... h3 wins. Not 7Z .. Bxb4? 18. Bxb4 Q:b4 19. Rc4.
67. Ke4 White had always to try to avoid b5, which
68. Nxb6 Rxf1 would release the pressure.
Resigns 18. Rc4 f5?
On Kxf!, mate in two. Weakening, ...Nf6 should equalize.
Thus, in spite of the utmost finesse, White
(3) has been unable to force an absolute advan­
N.S.W. Championship {1933) tage; this indicates that 8. Rd1!(allowing b5)
C. Purdy-G. Hastings is a shade better than 8. a4.
Qyeen 's Gambit Accepted After the text, however, White should
win.

- 224 -
 His Games

Black refrains from ... d5, as it means

playing White a move behind.
2. e3
e4 gives Black a favorable variation of
the Sicilian, while b3 could be met aggres­
sively by ... d5-d4!
2. g6
3. Nf3 Bg7
4. Be2 Nf6
5. 0-0 0-0
19. Nd4 Kh8 6. d3
20. f3 Adopting the formation which had
But here, less impatiently, Rdc1! worked well in the previous game, but per­
20. Nf6 haps better was Nc3, for b3, etc.
21. e4 fxe4 6. Nc6
22. fxe4 Nd7 7. Nc3 d6
23. Nc6 Bxc6 8. Bd2 Rb8
24. Rxc6 Bxb4 Preparing to build up command of the
25. Bxb4 Qxb4 �-side. In close games, the object is to get
26. Bxa6 Ne5!? command of space where you can, and
27. Rxe6 Qxa4 keep equilibrium where you can't.
28. Rxd8t Rxd8 9. a3 b5
29. h3 Ng6 10. Qe1 a5
30. Qb5! Qd1t 1 1. Nd1
Black is again in a quagmire; exchange To make ... b4 stingless, but Q,h4 at once
of�s gave some chance. Both players were seems better.
now fighting their clocks. 11. ••• Qb6
3 1. Kh2 Rf8 12. Qh4 d5
32. Qxb6 Qe1 To keep White cramped, and deliber­
33. Qd6 Qf2 ately offering him a tempting pseudo-free­
34. Qg3 Qa2 ing maneuver which will result in open
35. Rb6 Qa5 lines favorable to the better developed side­
36. Rd6 Qa1?? Black.
Through time pressure, Black loses in 13. Ne5 Nxe5
one, but the ft up would win. 14. fxe5 Nd7
37. Rxg6 Resigns 15. Qxe7 Nxe5
If ...hxg6, � checks, A checks, Qj7! 16. Nc3
forces a won ft ending. Hardly consistent, but White's game is
difficult.
(4) 16. ... Bb7
Match (1934) 17. Qh4
G. Koshnitsky-C. Purdy To save the �.
Bird's Opening 17..•. Rfe8
Prophylactic against e4.
1. f4 c5 18. Rae1 b4

- 225 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

Now that White has left the a-file. 32. g4? fxg4
19. axb3 axb3 33. Rh4 Bf3
20. Na4 Qc6 34. Nb2 Bg3
21. b3 Nd7 35. Rf1 Bxh2t
White has at least induced a temporary Black mates in two more moves.
retreat-he threatened d4.
22. Bf3 f5 (5)
23. c4 Match {1934)
Tempting, but creates fatal weaknesses. C. Purdy-G. Koshnitsky
Bel at once for Bb2 to challenge Black's OJteen 's Gambit
most dominating piece offered good resis­
tance. 1. d4 Nf6
23. Qd6 2. c4 e6
24. Bel Ne5 3. Nc3 d5
4. Bg5 Nbd7
5. cxd5 exd5
6. e3 c6
7. Bd3 Be7
8. Qc2 h6
9. Bh4 0-0
10. Nge2 ReS
1 1. 0-0-0
Made popular by Alekhine.
1 1. ... b5
25. Qf4 This, aiming ultimately at .. . b4 after
If 25. Be2, ... dxc4 26. dxc4Be4, winning. preparation by . . a5, ... a4, and ... Qg5, is the
.

25. NxfJt most energetic counter.

26. Rxf3 Be5 12. h3 Ne4?
27. Qh4 Bf6 All right on the previous move, but
Anti-clock. now inconsistent.
28. Qf4 Be5 13. Bxe7 Qxe7
29. Qh6? 14. Bxe4 dxe4
Loses immediately. White was some­ 15. g4
what clock-pressed. But after 29. Qh4 Black Prepared by White's 12th, this strength­
wins by 29... dxc4 30. Rh3 (if Q::c4t, ... Bd5 ens Ng3.
wins) cxd3!! 31. Q::h 7f Kj8. If now 32. Bb2, 15. ... Nf6
...Bd5!, and White's attack dwindles to a few 16. Ng3 a6
"spite checks." Black's idea is to play ...Be6 as soon as
29. dxc4 White plays Kbl (allowing . . Bxa2f), but
.

30. Rh3 Re7 had Black properly visualized the ensuing

3 1. dxc4 Be4 endgame he would have chosen . ..a5! as his
Threatens ...Bc2. White's game is hope­ waiting move, and drawn.
less, and his next move is a desperate red 17. Kbl Be6
herring, his opponent being mildly pressed 18. Ncxe4
for time. Ngxe4 is wrong. Why?

- 226 -
 His Games

18. ... Nxe4 37. Kb7 £5

19. Qxe4 Bxa2t 38. gxf5 K£6
20. Kxa2 Qxe4 39. a8=Q Rx:a8
21. Nxe4 Rx:e4 40. Kxa8 Kx£5
22. Rcl Re6 41. Rxb4 g5
23. Rc5 Rf6 42. Kb7 h5
24. f4 Re6! 43. Kc6 g4
44. Rb5t K£4
45. Rxh5 g3
46. Rh4t Kf3
47. Rg4 g2
48. Rx:g2 Resigns

(6)
Match (1934)
G. Koshnitsky-C. Purdy
English Opening
25. Re5 Rx:e5
Black had not foreseen his danger in 1. c4 e5
this ending. Had he played ... aS on Move 2. Nc3 Nc6
16, he could draw by ...Rae8 (followed by 3. Nf3 f5
. .f6), met by the terrible b4!, which now 4. e3 Nf6
holds three fts with one. And if .. aS first,
. 5. d4 e4
26. Rc1 forces ...Ra6 or ...Rc8, and the ag­ 6. Nd2 g6
gressive .§s should win. Losing a tempo, but .. Bb4 is well met
.

26. fxe5 c5 by NdS, while ... Be7 is obstructive. And 6...

If ...aS, 2Z Rc1 Ra6(if ...Rc8, 28. dS) 28. d6 is refuted by Z b4! with a big gain in
e4 Kf8 29. dS. space for White.
27. dxc5 ReS 7. Be2 Bg7
If ... aS, 28. Rc1 followed by c6, ReS, and 8. 0-0 0-0
then W development, winning. 9. b4
28. b4 a5? Not so good now. Black emerges with
...Kj8 gave more fight. the preferable game .
29. bxa5 Rx:c5 9. Nxb4
30. Kb3 Rxe5 10. Ba3 a5
31. a6 Rxe3t 11. Qa4 d6
32. Kb4 Re4t 12. Bxb4 Bd7
33. Ka5 13. Nb5 axb4
A valuable shelter! 14. Qxb4 c5!
33. ... Ra4t Black wants to open the long diagonal
34. Kb6 b4 for his w-.\l.
35. Rb1 15. Qb3 Qb6
Ending resistance. 16. Nc3! Qxb3
35. Rl8 17. Nxb3 Ra3
36. a7 Ke7 Gives strong pressure.

- 227 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

18. Racl Bc6 A marvelous instance of mental aber­

19. dxc5 ration. White forgot his � could go back!
Opening the diagonal, but correct. After 40. Kg1 Rd2! 41. Kh2, Black has only
19. dxc5 one clear-cut win, namely, 41... Nj2! (threat­
20. Nxc5 Nd7 ening . ..Nd1-c3). If then 42. fxe4, ...Nxe4
21. Nb3! wins, and if 42. Rh3 (say) , .. . h4!, threatening
For in order to regain the ft Black has .. .Rd1, ...Rxf1, and ...Rh1#.
to exchange the powerful .\1, and White 40. exd3
should be able to draw. 41. Kg3 Rc2
21. Bxc3 Resigns
22. Rxc3 Rxa2
23. Nd4 Nc5 (7)
24. Rb1 Rfa8 Match (1934)
25. Rc2 Rxc2 C. Purdy-G. Koshnitsky
26. Nxc2 Ra2 Nimzo-Indian Defense
27. Nd4 Kf7
28. Bfl 1. d4 Nf6
But this fatally hinders the develop- 2. c4 e6
ment of White's �. 3. Nc3
28. Ke7 Sharper than Nf3, if riskier. White was
29. h4 Kd6 not playing for a draw.
30. Nxc6 Kxc6 3. ... Bb4
3 1. Rd1 Rc2 4. Qc2
Playing for . . . Nd3 and . . .Rxc4 in order The only correct move!
to get a remote passed ft . 4. d5
32. h5 gxh5 5. cxd5 Qxd5
33. Rd5 b5! 6. Nf3 c5
34. Rxf5 b4 7. Bd2 Bxc3
If .. . bxc4, 35. Bxc4! draws. 8. bxc3 Nc6
35. Rf6t Kc7 9. e3 0-0
36. Rf5 Nd3 10. Be2
37. f3! b3 A casual suggestion of Tartakover's.
38. Rb5! b2 Capablanca played c4. The text preserves
39. Kh2! Rf2 the threat, thus inviting complications by
.. . c4.
10. b6
1 1 . 0-0 c4
12. Ne1!
Black's last was influenced by his score.
White's reply is knife-edged. Can Black
exploit his opponent's cramp, or will White
regroup in time? If White does, his com­
mand of the center will be demoniacal.
12. e5
40. Bxd3?? 13. f3 exd4

- 228 -
 His Games

39. fxe4 Ng6

40. Bxe4 Rxe4!
By giving up a second ft , Black gets
fighting chances. Koshnitsky's play is a les­
son in how to fight a losing game.
41. Rxb5 Rclt
42. Kg2 Qd7
43. RbSt Kh7
44. h3
Took White half an hour, leaving him
14 minutes for ten moves. Black threatened
... Qg4, or .. .Nh4ffirst.
44. ... Qe7
45. Rb2 Ne5
Loses. Koshnitsky suggested ...Be6- 46. Bxe5 Qxe5
much better, but then 16. Nc2 threatens 47. Re2
both a4 and e4, e.g., 16... Qg6 17. a4! a6 18. Forced.
axb5 axb5 19. @2!, or 16... a5 17. e4 Qg7 18. 47. ... Re1
Bg5! b4 19. Qs3 b3 20. Bxf6 gxf6 21. d51eads 4S. d6! Qa1
to White's advantage. Black has obtained the old �-and- �
16. a4! Ba6 attack with the � correctly in front, as
17. Ne2 RabS explained by Reti.
1S. axb5 Bxb5 49. e5t g6
19. Na3 a6 50. Re7t KhS
20. Bxe4 Qd7 51. ReSt Kh7
21. Nxb5 axb5 52. Re7t Kh8
22. Bb3 RdeS 53. ReSt Kh7
23. Qb2 Ne8 54. d7
24. d5 Ne7 Although pressed for time, White still
25. e4 Nd6 refrains from securing the championship
26. Bf4 Rb7 with a draw.
27. Rfcl Ne4 54. ... Rg1t
2S. Qd4 Ne6 55. Kf3 Rf1t
29. Qc3 Ne7 56. Kg4 Qxe5
30. Qd4 57. Rh8t Kxh8
Gaining on his clock. 58. d8=Qt Kg7
30. Ne6 59. Q3d4
3 1. Qc3 Ne7 and White won.
32. Bg3! h6 The finish was instructive: 59... h5t
33. Qd3 Ra7 60. Kh4 Qxd4 61. Qxd4t Kh7 62. Qa7t
34. Rxa7 Qxa7t Kh6 63. Qe3t Kh7 64. Qe7t Kh6 65.
35. Bf2 Qa3 Qe5 Rf8 66. g4 hxg4 67. hxg4 Rg8 6S.
36. Rb1 Qd6 Qf6 Rg7 69. g5t Kh7 70. Qf8! Ra7 71.
37. g3 f5 Qh6t Kg8 72. Qxg6t Kh8 73. Qe8t Kg7
3S. Bd4 fxe4 74. Kh5 Rf7 75. Qxf7t Resigns.

- 229 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

(8) 17. ... Ne6

Match (1934) 18. Rc2 b4
G. Koshnitsky-C. Purdy Changing over to . a5-a4.
. .

Reti s Opening 19. Bel Bg5

20. Ngf3 Be7
1. Nf3 d5 21. Ne1 a5
2. c4 e6 22. Bf3 Nhg7
3. b3 23. Ng2 Bc6
Not correct, but played to avoid the 24. Re1 Bd6
simplifying ...dxc4 (if 3. g3!). But "playing 25. g4
for complications" is two-edged! For air! By courting the opening of the
3. c5 g-file, White utilizes his 13th move. Black
4. g3 Nc6 must now abandon the 'i;¥-side temporarily
5. Bg2 Nf6 and try to put the opening up of the �-side
6. Bb2 d4 to his own advantage.
7. 0-0 Be7 25. ... f5
8. d3 0-0
9. e4 e5
10. h3 Qc7!
The game hinges on the possibility of a
White break by f4.
1 1. Qe2 Bd7
12. Nbd2 a6
Prepares for a break on the 'i;¥-side.
13. Kh2 b5
14. Nh4? g6
Proves White's last move a mistake, as 26. gxf5 gxf5
the .1£J is now only a target. But even after 27. Nfl f4!
14. Ng1! Black prevents /4 by . . .Bd6 and 28. Bg4 Kh8
. . . Nd8-e6. 29. Nd2 Be7
15. Nhf3 30. Rgl Be8
Black can force this anyway by . ..NeB, 31. Nf3 Bh5
which helps the �-.ltl into g7-its goal. White 32. Ngh4 Bxg4
considered this move for half an hour. His 33. Rxg4!
game is paralyzed, since f4 is ruled out White's recovery is rather illusory: the
forever-of course not 15. f4, because of � and A out of play must tell. Very plau­
... exf4 and . . .Nh5. sible was 33. hxg4 (for Nj5), but Black wins
15. Nh5 nicely by 33... Bxh4 34. Nxh4 Q57 35. Nj5
16. Ng1 Nd8 Nxf5 36. exf5 (forced) Rxj5!!
17. Racl 33. •.• Rf6!
In a very cramped game, any plan For ...RafB and ..Rh6 followed by
.

must turn out to be bad! For example, if 17. ... Bxh4 and ... Q57 or ... Qj8--to force White
Rae1 and Bel Black could attack on the 'i;¥­ either to play Nj5 and lose a ft or to retire
side, playing ...bxc4as soon as White moved into his former seclusion.
his 'i!¥-.ltl. 34. Ng5

- 230 -
 His Games

To make room for the VJ/- � , per f3. Kg5 55. Bel (for a stalemate joke) Rf1t 56.
34. Nxg5 Kg2 Rxcl 57. Kh3 Rhl t 58. Kg2 Rh2t
35. Rxg5 Rh6 59. Kf3 Rf2t (not ...Rxd2 ??) 60. Rxf2 Bxf2
36. Rxg7 Rxh4 61. Kxf2 Kh4, White resigns.
37. Rg4 Qd7!
38. f3 (9)
Best, since Rxh4?only helps Black's .Q. Australian Championship (1937)
into g3 when f3 comes. Not 3 8. Rxh4 Bxh4 C. Purdy-G. Koshnitsky
39. Q,h5??because of ... Qg7!! [Eel.: Perhaps Qyeen s Gambit
an hallucination. After 40. Qxh4 Rg8 Black
gets stopped with 41. Qg4, forever.] The following was about Purdy's only
38. Rxh3t good game in the tournament. It was played
39. Kxh3 h5 in the ninth round, when he had to win, as a
40. Qh2 draw was enough to make Koshnitsky al­
If, say, 40. Qj1 (for Rg2), ...hxg4f 41. most a certainty.
fxg4 Bh4!, etc. 1. d4 Nf6
40. hxg4t 2. c4 e6
41. Kg2t Kg7 3. Nc3 d5
42. Qh5 Qe6 4. Bg5 Be7
43. fxg4 Rh8 5. e3 0-0
44. Qf5 Qxf5 6. Rcl
Or ... Qf6!, forcing White to exchange A transposition, the idea being to take
(to avoid Black's ... Q,h4!); but the ending is the game out of the normal lines if Black
won for Black anyway, owing to White's plays the somewhat drawish Lasker De­
irremediable cramp. Not 44... Q,h6?because fense, ...Ne4.
of �e5f and Q!t5. 6. c6
45. gxf5 Bh4 7. Nf3 Nbd7
46. Re2 Bg3 8. Bd3
47. Rd2 Refusing to "play the score," White
The lost tempo makes no vital differ- chooses a line that allows simplification in
ence. preference to the more complicated Qs2. It
47. Kf6 sometimes pays to let an opponent with
48. Kf3 Rh1 drawish intentions "have his head" if his
49. Bb2 Kg5 style is not normally drawish.
50. a3 Rf1t 8. dxc4
51. Kg2 Re1 9. Bxc4 Nd5
52. f6 10. Bxe7 Qxe7
Taking the one chance-that Black, who 1 1. 0-0
was in clock trouble, might play ...Kg4 (cor­ Alekhine's Ne4, to avoid simplification,
rect) and then not see the win after 53. Rf2 has lost all its sting. White must permit the
(a problem for beginners). Black, being hur­ simplification and have faith in his superior
ried, took the slower way. development.
52. . . . Kxf6 1 1. ... Nxc3
and Black won. 12. Rxc3 c5
The finish was 53. axb4 axb4 54. Kf3 Koshnitsky had intended to play this

- 23 1 -
 The Search for Chess Peifection
in the 77. Ne4 variation ( 11. Ne4 N5f6 12.
Ng3 c5!, Euwe-Fine, Nottingham 1936) and
had got "mixed." But the text has been
played in this position, and may be safer
than 12... e5, which allows White such a
wide choice of reply.
13. Qc2
This works out all right, but Qs2 is
probably sounder. The '(g should nearly
always go to e2 in this opening. White's
idea was to storm the c-file.
13. cxd4
14. Nxd4 Nb6
15. Rcl! Bd7
To exchange would help White to the
seventh rank.
16. Qe4! Rfb8
The other � seems better.
17. Bb3
Much better than Bd3, when Black's 4J
has access to dS; Black now has only one
move . . .
20. R7c3
White had a pretty combination, start­
ing with 20. Nxe6!! It looks dubious, as it
leaves the 4J pinned and the � en prise. Of
course, Black cannot take either of these
worthies at once, nor can he play 20... RcB,
as White wins a .ft by exchange of � s
followed by Qs5! And if 20... KhB to get the
'3;1 off the line of the .\l, White wins delight­
fully by 21. Ng5!! White's immediate threat
- 232 -
is simply to unpin by 21. Qj4.
But the defense that made White worry
was 20... RdB! White must then give up his
"(ff by 21. NxdB! Q!e5 22. Rxd7. Now the
crushing answer to either 22... Nd6 or 22...
Q!b2 is simply 23. Rcd1. The point is to
reserve the option of taking atf7 with .\l, 4],
or � . Black could avoid immediate loss by
22 ... h6, but 23. Rxf7! Kh7 24. Ne6, threat­
ening mate by Bc2f and Rj8, is probably
decisive. Or 22... h5 23. Nxf7! Q!b2 24. Rcd1
Kh7 25. Ng5ffollowed by h4, and again the
attack should be hot enough to win.
However, White could be excused for
"funking" such complications, even after 40
minutes' thought!
Black had played 19... NeB with the
idea that the combination was unsound.
Otherwise 19... RcB, leaving White with
pressure but nothing clear. That is what
White still has.
20. Rc8
21. Qa5 a6
22. Qb6 Rxc3
23. Rxc3 e5?
Black is too impatient to free his game.
He gives himself a weak .ft and opens the
white .\i's diagonal. Open lines benefit the
better-developed army. Of course White
must not play 24. Q!b7??
24. N£3 Bc6
Black is lost. If 24 ... Bg4 or ... Bj5, 25.
Nxe4!! wins. If 24... RbB, 25. Qs5 wins.
25. Qc5 Qxc5
26. Rxc5 e4
27. Ne5 Rd8
28. Nxc6!
Simpler than 28. Nxj7 Rd2, etc., as
White can now force the exchange of �s,
or else have two remote passed .fts. .fts on
the '3;/-side are comparatively useless.
28. . . . bxc6
29. Rxc6 Kf8
The point! Black has to lose his tempo,
and White keeps his b- .ft .
 His Games

30. Kf1 Rd2 you just left it there? Here, Black is tempted
3 1. Bc2 f5 to take that very course, partly because after
32. Ke1 Rd5 12... f6! 13. exf6Bxf6 14. O-O e5 15.fxe5 Nxe5
For some reason Black thought this White's Yl!-A is freed. Black wanted to
less hopeless than ...Rd6, allowing the ex­ keep that A blocked by its own .ft /f4. But
change of �s. The continuation was 33. Black in the 12 . . . f6! line would have a free
Rxa6 Nf6 34. Ra8t Ke7 35. Ra7t Kf8 36. game and a good hold on the center-at
Bb3 Rc5 37. Rf7t Ke8 38. Rxg7, and after least an equal position.
a few more moves Black resigned. Black also had another, more logical
reason to ignore Nimzovich. He thought he
( 1 0) could gain the initiative in the center with
Australian Championship (1937) ... c5. But he finds he can't, and is left with
L. Steiner-C. Purdy extremely difficult problems to solve.
Sicilian Defense The moral is: Don't ignore a .ft /e5!
13. 0-0 Qe7
The feature of the game is an all-con­ After long thought, Black regretfully
quering passed .ft which Y!Js in the face of a decides not to play .. . c5 after all, because
whole army. White could compel either the c- .ft or d- .ft
1. e4 c5 to advance a step further, creating a weak­
2. N£3 d6 ness, e.g., 13... c5 14. Na4 Qs7 15. Qs3! c4 16.
3. d4 cxd4 b4! with a potential passed .ft . Or 14... d4
4. Nxd4 Nf6 15. Bj2 and White threatens b4, and if 15...
5. Nc3 g6 a5, 16. c3!
6. Be2 Bg7 14. Na4! a5!
7. Be3 Nc6 15. Qc3
8. f3 0-0 Leads to tricky play requiring very ex­
Black cannot yet play ...d5 because of act calculation by the defense; but Black
Bb5! Black assumed that White's idea was was more afraid of the quieter 15. c4. It
to induce him to castle and now play 9. g4! would carry no threat, but seems to give
for a 'ifil-side attack, central counterattack White a useful initiative.
by ... d5 being impossible on account of g5; 15. Ba6
and Steiner afterwards admitted that this 16. Bxa6 Rxa6
would have been his most energetic proce­ 17. Nc5 Raa8
dure. But he continues in a more positional 18. a4
style. To fix the isolated .ft . Not 18. Nb7?
9. Qd2 d5 Nxe5! nor 18. Nb3 a4 19. Nd4 Rfc8!
10. Nxc6 bxc6 18. ••• Rfc8
1 1. e5 19. Nb3
Steiner's favorite move! Too ambitious. White should have
1 1. ... Nd7 maintained the blockade by 19. Nxd7 OJ.d7
12. f4 e6 20. Bc5 Bj8 2 1. Rf3, but this seemed too
Have you not sometimes rebelled at barren of winning chances. Not 19. Nxd7
Nimzovich's insistence on centralization, OJ.d7 20. Bb6?, as Black wins a piece by
e.g., the necessity for dislodging a .ft Ie5 by 20... c5!, etc.
.. f6, and wondered what would happen if 19.••• c5

- 233 -
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection

20. Qel c4! Three ¥tis on the board as early as the

A deceptive move, as the ostensible 25th move are quite an uncommon sight.
idea is simply to cut off the �'s retreat after 25. Nxcl bl=Q
21. Nxa5. In making prolonged calculations 26. Rfb2 Qe4
on this basis, Steiner forgot to search for And Black won: 27. a.5 f6 28. exf6
any other devilry the move might contain, Bxf6 29. Re2 Bd4 30. Nb3 Bxe3t 31.
and thus overlooked its real purpose alto­ Rxe3 Q4b4 32. Rd2 Nc5 33. Nd4 Qd6 34.
gether. Nf3 Qdxf4 35. g3 Qf6 36. Qe2 Ne4 37.
21. Nxa5? Rc2 Qxa5 38. Kg2 Qa6 39. Qd1 Rf8 40.
The only move was 21. Nd4 with a Rb3 Ng5 and White resigned.
shade of advantage for Black after . . .Nc5.
21. c3! �) ( I I )
22. Nb3 cxb2 Australian Correspondence
23. Ra2? Championship (1938)
An attempt to keep the a- ft and thus C. Purdy-F. Crowl
maintain equal material. Who would dream Nimzo-lndian Defense
that the move loses offhand? But it does.
After 23. Rh 1 Rxc2 24. Nd4 (best) Rc4 25. 1. d4 Nf6
Rxb2 Raxa4 Black is a passed ft up, but the 2. c4 e6
game would not be easily won. 3. Nc3 Bb4
23. ..• Rxc2 4. e3 0-0
5. Nge2 ReS
Purdy favors 7. e4 in correspondence
play, but played 7. d4 against Crawl in
anticipation of this variation (a Nimzovich
one). Better is 5... d5.
6. a3 Bf8
7. e4!
The point! Against Condon in the South
Australian Championship ( 1937), Purdy
played 7. g3, which did not give much.
A paradox! Black has only one piece 7. ••• e5
actively in play, while all of White's are White had expected ... d6 first, and
available for defense. Yet White has not a would then have answered ... e5 with d5. His
single move on the board to avoid immedi­ a3 would have assisted the ¥11-side push
ate disaster! Can a passed ft have such Qj4, etc. But now 8. d5would be met by 8.. .
power? White pondered for 30 minutes in aS and 9 . . Bc5.
.

vain. 8. dxe5 Ng4

24. Rf2 Rcl! 9. Ng3 Qh4?
This was the pretty threat, which White With the good idea of sacrificing a ft
could have parried in only two ways: 24. to get an attack, but overlooking a tactical
Qg3?, losing a l:'=l forthwith, or 24. Qj 1 ?, point.
when Black wins a piece by 24 ... Rc3! The 10. Be2 d6
loose pieces, therefore, were the deciding Hoping for 71. exd6, which would give
factor-the lt the �' and the ):'=l/a2. Black a strong initiative.

- 234 -
 His Games

1 1. Nb5! Na6
12. exd6 cxd6
If 12... Rd8, probably 13. Bd2; and if
then 13 ... c6, 14. NcZ
13. (tc2 d5!
Black has a losing position, but this
sacrifice of a second .ft gives him counter­
chances.
14. cxd5 Nxh2!?
Creates weird complications, Black's
only hope. Finding it strangely difficult to exploit
15. Be3 Bd7 the pin, White now releases it, having
16. (td2 worked out a combination to win more
Gets White's 'lt!f off the exposed file material; but that should have made the
and threatens to win Black's. Black has a win very hard. White's worry was that Black
reply that seems to save him. was threatening ...Nxd5!, as a white recap­
16. ... Rxe4! turer would be subject to a pin by ...Be6. To
17. 0-0-0 obviate this the right move was 23. Ka l!!!,
White could not afford either Nxe4 or leaving Black helpless. Having already
Rxh2, but now these are threats, and Black played Kb 1-a2, however, this third � move
must lose at least the Exchange in all varia­ was extraordinarily difficult to see.
tions, e.g., 7Z .. Re5 18. QjA Q3d4 19. Bxd4 23. ••• (ta4
Rxe2 20. Nxe2 Bxb5 21. Nc3 and Black must 24. Rxh2 Bb5
lose one of the two pieces he has for his t:! . In this position White had counted on
Black decides to make a virtue of necessity. playing 25. Qj,4, which enables him to re­
17. Rxe3 main at least a clear � up in all variations.
18. (txe3 Bc5 Now, however, he saw that Black would
19. Nd4 Re8 sacrifice still more material after 25. Qj,4
20. (td3! g6 with 25... Rxe2!!! 26. Nxe2 Bc4f (not on with
There was a masked threat to Black's White's �/al) 2Z Kb 1 Nb5!Then White is a
h7, and Nj5 would also become a threat. � and 4) up, but is faced with a terrific
21. Kb1 concentration of force on his �, by which
White must evade ... Qf4f before he Black should at least draw.
can exploit the pinned 4). A wonderful lesson in the futility of
21. ... Bd6! mere material in chess!
It is amazing how, despite his pinned Baulked of his planned prey, White
4), Black continues to maintain a fight by has yet a resource that gives a steady win.
tactical finesses. If now 22. Nf3, ... Q3g3!! 25. Rh4!
22. Ka2 By introducing his hitherto dead � ,
White rightly chose this in preference White eliminates danger and keeps enough
to KaT to give less encouragement to ... Nc5. material plus to win despite the two �s.
22. Nc7 Black could have made a lengthy resis­
23. Nf3 tance, but preferred to keep complications.
25. (ta6
26. (td2 Bxe2

- 23 5 -
 The Search for Chess Perftction

27. Rcl! Nb5? Rg7 15. e5 with a decisive attack.

White has deliberately played to in­ 1 1. h4 Be6
duce this meretricious move. He allows his 12. h5 Qf6
own � to be caught in a mating net, but 13. hxg6 hxg6
wins the game before the net can close. 14. Nxe6 fxe6
28. Qh6 Bxa3 Preventing Bh6. Rather than lose a
29. Qxh7t Kf8 tempo to make that move feasible, White
30. Qh8t Ke7 abandons it in favor of a new plan of attack.
31. Re4t Kd6 15. f4! Rad8?
32. Qf6t Resigns

( 1 2)
Australian Correspondence
Championship (1938)
C. Purdy-R. Condon
Ruy Lopez

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 Nge7 An oversight, but in any case White
4. Nc3 has a winning attack starting with g4.
Not 4. d4, when Black gets a compara­ 16. f5 Nb4
tively easy game by 4... exd4 5. Nxd4 d5! This merely trappy move ultimately
4. ... g6 loses Black a tempo. His next move, giving
5. d4 up the exchange for a .ft. in preference to
Must be good. The customary move is having his �-side completely wrecked,
5. Nd5, but its merit is uncertain. should have been played at once.
5. exd4 17. Kb1
6. Nxd4 Bg7 Not Bg5? Nxa2f.
7. Be3 17. exf5
A point in White's system is that hav­ 18. Bg5 Qfl
ing developed his �-4) at e7, Black can 19. Bxd8 Rxd8
never threaten to hit this A by .. .Ng4. 20. exf5 gxf5
7. 0-0 Of course not ...Bxc3?? 21. Q!,c3 Q!,a2f
8. Qd2 d6 22. Kc1, as Black then has no move.
9. 0-0-0 a6 21. Qg5 Rf8
10. Bxc6! 22. Rh4!
Although this exchange frees Black a This, instead of the obvious a3, gains a
little and concedes the two As, a valuable tempo for doubling �s.
tempo is gained for White's attack. Besides, 22. Nc6
the A had no very good square (Ba4 or Bc4 23. Nd5 ReS
would have encouraged .. . b5). 24. Rdh1 Qxd5
10. ... Nxc6 25. Qg6! Kf8
If 10... bxc6, 11. Bh6 Bxh6 12. Q!,h6f5 26. Rh8t Bxh8
(else comes Nj3-g5!) 13. Nj3! Rj7 14. Ng5 27. Rxh8t Ke7

- 236 -
 His Games

28. Qxe8t Kf6 this opening, and often worth the white �­
29. Rh6t Kg5 �. Here, with the center so clogged by fts
30. Qh5t Kf4 on light squares, that � had little future.
31. Qh4t Ke3 9. . . . Bxc6
32. Re6t? 10. h3
White's last seven moves were posted A little calculation will show the stu­
as a series of conditionals with his 25th, and
dent that neither here nor on the next move
32. Re6f was inserted as a subvariation, could White win the e- ft without losing his
White having forgotten that the 4J could own and getting behind in development.
interpose. This slip prolongs the game, of The move played is better than it looks, but
course. simple and strong was 10. Nd5!If 10... Bxd5,
32. Ne5 11. cxd5 and Black has a backward c- ft .
33. Qe1t Kf4 10. . . . h6
34. g3t Kg4 Black prepares for ...BJB by first pre­
35. Re7 Qg2 venting the pin.
36. Rxc7 Nf3? 1 1. Qc2 Bf8
An oversight in a lost game. 12. b3 Bd7
37. Rg7t Kh5 A good point about White's exchange
If 3Z .. Ng5, 38. Qs1! If 3Z .. Kh3, 38.on Move 9 was that this � would sooner or
Rh7f and 39. Qj4f. later have to retrace its steps in order to
38. Qe8t Kh6 have any play, with consequent loss of time.
39. Qg6# Also, the merit of 10. h3 is now clear, as
...Bg4 would threaten to exchange off the 4J
( 1 3) that bears so powerfully on e5 and d4.
Private Match (1938) 13. Bb2 c6
C. Purdy-F. Crowl 14. Rad1 Qc7
Ruy Lopez Black now has the well-known Hanham
formation, which Crowl likes. In addition,
Notes marked (G) are by Goldstein, Black has the two �s. Strangely enough,
from the "West Australian." however, the absence of Black's �-4:'1 turns
1. e4 e5 out to be worse for him than the absence of
2. Nf3 Nc6 his �-� does to White. In such positions,
3. Bb5 Nf6 one usually sees a white � lounging life­
4. 0-0 d6 lessly on e2 or somewhere while the black
5. d4 Bd7 �-4:'1 either supports the point e5 from d7
6. Re1 Be7 or else meanders into e6 or g6 and pulls his
7. c4 weight.
"Apparently new at this stage. White 15. Rd2 Rad8
prevents for all time Black's freeing maneu­ 16. Red1
ver in the center, ... d5" (G).
7. 0-0
8. Nc3 Re8
9. Bxc6
The black 4), bearing on the central
squares e5 and d4, is an important piece in

- 23 7 -
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection

Rooks to enter the eighth rank" (G). The

ending is lost for Black because one of his
)::( s is tied.
31. cxb5
32. Bf6 h5
33. Rc3 Rc4
34. Re3 Be4
35. Rg3t Kh7
36. Rg5 a6
37. f3 Bb1
The position is interesting. Crowl was 38. Kg3 Rc6
under the impression that he had an excel­ 39. Be7 f6
lent game, while Purdy felt rather mystified, 40. Rxh5t Kg6
thinking that Crowl's game looked good on 41. Rh8 Kg7
general considerations but not seeing any 42. Rf8 Bg6
satisfactory move for Crowl. If 76... BcB 43. Kf2 f5
White wins a ft , and if 76... Nh7 (suggested 44. g4 fxg4
by Crowl) , then 7Z c5! Ng5 78. Nxg5 hxg5 79. 45. fxg4 Bf7
cxd6 Bxd6 20. dxe5 Bxe5 27. Nh5! with ad­ 46. h5 Rcxd6
vantage. Crowl's optimism finds expres­ Black blunders, but his game was past
sion in a wild '1!7-side pawnstorm. hope.
16. ... g5? 47. Bxd6 Rxd6
The best answer to a flank attack is an 48. Rxf7t Resigns
attack in the center if possible. So . . .
17. c5! g4 ( 1 4)
18. cxd6 Bxd6 Australian Correspondence
19. dxe5 gxf3 Championship (1938)
20. exd6 Q.a5 C. Purdy-A. Harris
21. Rd3 Nxe4 Sicilian Difense
22. Nxe4 Rxe4
23. Rxf3 One ofthe most interesting games from
"White is now a strong passed pawn to this tourney is one that did not count! Har­
the good. Black's only chance of saving the ris wrote down a move he did not intend,
game rests on 'Bishops on opposite colors' " and resigned on the following move. Purdy
(G). claimed that he had a winning advantage in
23. Bf5 any case, and the game was played out as a
24. b4! Q.d5! friendly challenge. Its interest lies in the
25. Rxd5 Re1t unusual but very successful method of coun­
26. Kh2 Bxc2 tering the Paulsen system.
27. Rd2 Bg6 1. e4 c5
28. Bf6 Rd7 2. N£3 e6
29. h4 Re6 3. d4 cxd4
30. Be7 Re4 4. Nxd4 Nf6
31. b5 5. Nc3 d6
"Decisive, opening a file for one of his 6. g3!

- 238 -
 His Games

Recommended by Becker, but we have 16. h3!

never before seen it tried. The .Q. usually White found this the hardest move in
finds its way to the fianchetto diagonal ulti­ the game. All the aggressive lines failed,
mately, via e2 and f3, but there it is some­ and he reluctantly decided that he must
times in the way of other pieces. quietly free his Yf/ from the defense of the
6. ... a6 g- ft .
7. Bg2 Qc7! 16. Nc5
First point: ...b5 is held up because of 17. Nd2 Rd8
e5. Black's last move crosses White's fell 18. Qc4! �d7
design of fianchettoing the other .ll also, Better to bring the .§ back to c8, but
when his two .\ls would rake the center. such a doddering policy did not appeal to
8. 0-0 Nbd7 Black. He hopes now for 19. b4?, when
9. Qe2 Rb8 comes 19... Nxa4!
10. a4 b6 19. Qb4!
Apparently places the Yff in jeopardy,
but she is all right. If 19. . . Qs7, 20. Nc4.
Black decides to give up freely that which
must fall.
19. d5
20. exd5 Nce4
21. d6
Important.
21. Bxd6
22. Qxb6 Nxc3
Unfortunately, Black wrote down 23. Qxb7
" ... b5, "a clerical error that lost him a ft and Without d6, this would not have been
position as well. After 71. axb5 he resigned on.
at once. The game that should have been 23. Qxb7
then proceeded. 24. Bxb7 Ncd5
White thought he should win because 25. Bf2
of his better command of space in almost all and won. Black's game was now lost, and he
parts of the board and the strength of his ceased work, finishing up with an oversight
forthcoming advance of the f- ft . And yet or two: 25... Rb8 26. Bxa6 Rxb2? 27. Nc4
Black has played quite in accordance with Resigns.
the Paulsen system!
1 1. f4 Bb7 ( I S)
White threatened e5. N.S.W. v. Victoria (Telex Match 1943)
12. f5! e5 C. Purdy-G. Lamparter
Black thought he could stand the back- Benoni Defense
ward d- ft .
13. Nb3 Be7 1. d4 e6
14. g4 h6 Lamparter is always keen to play some­
15. Be3 Rc8 thing unorthodox. Therefore White chooses
If Black castled there would be trouble a second move (e4) to which the only good
from h4, etc. reply is orthodox (2 ... d5).

- 239 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

2. e4 c5 had six moves to make in five minutes.

Transposing into the Benoni Counter 15. Qxe4? Re6!!
Gambit, but . .. e6 doesn't fit in well. The Lamparter touch. White has a
3. d5 Nf6 counter, however, which enables him to
4. Nc3 exd5 come out at least the Exchange up in all
This could be met by 5. Nxd5! (if 5... variations.
Nxd5, 6. Q:d5), giving Black a "strategically 16. Ne5 Qg5
lost game" with a backward .ft on an open
file. White's actual reply gives him less ad­ .• ��� �
vantage.
'%1.��
- %. ;� �
5. exd5 d6 �� ::�� �-- ��
6. Nf3 Be7 %%� ��-�i'
� _?f{;.�\�
-� ft �
" UJ t
�
7. Bd3 l�i.���- ��
To prevent the good development of � � � � ft
Black's ¥11-A at f5. Also, White rather hoped �� ���
'�·"" <i"� ..!!..a. � 'z"'f"�'r M
� ..!!. 00
that Black would now fianchetto his ¥11-A,
�-
, , � - ' "�
'-·"
- - - ,�
�
�
attacking White's d- .ft but getting his A �
cramped. This did happen. A player often spends most of his time
7. a6 on moves he never plays. Now, for in­
8. a4 b6 stance, having learned that he was not in
9. Bf4 Bb7 clock trouble at all, White pondered deeply
10. Bc4 Qd7!? over 17. dxe6, because in one variant it
White has three loose units (two ,ils would produce an "immortal" (chess slang
and the g- .ft ) and . .. Qg4 is a deadly threat. for a sacrifice of ¥11 and both .§s). Thus 17.
However, the move violates a principle, dxe6Bxe4 18. exj7f Kj8 (not ...Kd8 19.j8=Qj
and White finds a way to turn its edge Bxj8 20. � forks); 19. Nxe4 Q,xg2 ( ... Qj5 is
against the violator. another line) 20. Bd5!! Q:h1 f 21. Ke2 Q:a 1
11. h3 Qf5 22. Ng6#! or 21... Qg2 24. Rg1, etc.
12. Bh2 h5 Delightful, but if 20... dxe5 (21. Nc3
Without this, Black is always threat­ then), White's win is not as clear as in the
ened with g4 if ever he plays . . .Nbd7. simple line he actually chooses. On Move
13. Qd2 18. White again gave much time to dxe6.
And Black still can't play . ..Nbd7 be­ 17. h4 Qf6
cause Bd3 wins his ¥/J. Nor does he care to 18. Qe2 Rxe5
castle �-side after . . .h5. Having no inviting 19. Bxe5 dxe5
move, a player often hypnotizes himself 20. Qxh5 Nd7
into a blunder, and so here. 21. Qe2
13. ... Ne4?? Prevents castling and threatens to castle.
14. Qd3 Rh6! 21. ••. Qh6!
Black has no move to save his �, and 22. Rd1
therefore does not try, but plays the only White begins woodshifting. Here 22.
move to give White a chance to go wrong. If g4! would prevent any progress by Black
now 15. Nxe4, Black was finished. However, whatsoever (if 22 ... Bxh4?, 23. g5).
White had consumed a long time weaving 22. f5!
his nets, and now erroneously thought he 23. Qd2 Qg6
- 24 0 -
 His Games

24. Kf1 Nf6 on the spur of the moment presumably to

25. Qe2 Bd6 get Purdy short of time. After considering
26. h5 Qh7 the miserable position reached on his 22nd
27. Rd3 Kf7! move, I doubt whether Steiner will play it
Hatching a little plot which comes off again in a hurry.
and enables Black to make a spirited fight. 3. d4 cxd4
Both players were short of time. 4. Nxd4 Bb7
28. Rdh3? b5! 5. Nc3 g6
29. Ba2 6. Be2 Bg7
Refusing to give Black counterplay in 7. 0-0 Nc6
the a-file. 8. Be3 Nf6
29. ••• Qh6 9. f4!
Tempting is 29 ... c4, but 30. axb5 axb5 With a tremendous grip on the center.
31. Nxb5! Rxa2 32. Nxd6f Ke7 33. @c4 [Ed.: Black's b- ft blocks the normal reaction by
33. @e5 is more explicit and virtually elimi­ ... QJ6.
nates cheap shots by Black.] Ra 1 f 34. Ke2 wins. 9. .•. 0-0
If 34... Ba6, 35. Nb5. 10. Bf3 Na5
Ineffective also is 29... b4 30. Nd1, as White reaps a big advantage from this,
the cl- ft cannot be taken. though in any case Black's position was
30. Qe3 Qh7 inferior.
Black's fun is over. To regain his ft he 11. e5 Ne8
would have to swap ¥/Js. Or if 30... f4, 31. 12. Bxb7 Nxb7
Qs2! with no more troubles. 13. Qf3 Na5
3 1. a.xb5 a.xb5 14. Rad1 Nc7
32. Nxb5 Ba6 15. b3! Qc8
33. Bc4 Bxb5 16. Ne4 Nc6
34. Bxb5 f4 17. c4 Nxd4
35. Qcl e4 36. Ra3 Rxa3 37. bxa3 18. Bxd4 Ne6
Nxh5 38. Rh3 Qf5 39. Bd7 (White was 19. Ba1 Qc6
again racing his clock) Qxd5 40. Bg4 Nf6 20. f5! gxf5
41. Qd1, adjudicated a win for White. 21. Qxf5 Rad8
White's El. is now mobile. With "the 22. Rf3 Nc5
Exchange" up, the remote passed ft gives a White is already in a winning position,
sure win. A good rough-and-tumble. and Black has only a choice of evils.
23. Nf6t! exf6
( 1 6) 24. exf6 Bh6
N.S.W. Championship (1944) 25. Qh5
C. Purdy-L. Steiner White later pointed out a neat win by
Sicilian Defense 25. Rh3! Qs6 26. @5 Be3f 2Z Kh 1 h6 28.
(Notes by M E. Goldstein.) Re 1. Steiner then intended . . .Bg5!, giving up
his ¥/1; but White's material advantage of¥/1
1. e4 c5 and ft against El. and � must win in the
2. Nf3 b6 long run.
Klass states that there are "book" ex­ 25. Kh8
amples of this move, which Steiner played 26. Qxh6 Rg8

- 24 1 -
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
27. Rd5 Qe6
28. Bc3 Rg6
29. Qh3?
This gives Black real chances.
29. ..• Rdg8
30. Rd2
Now Black could force simplifying ex­
changes by 30... Ne4 31. Q;ce6 dxe6, and
Black recovers the f- ft with a slightly infe­
rior � ending. But, seeing that Purdy was
very short of time, Steiner preferred to keep
up the complications.
30 • •• • Qe4
3 1 . Rf1 Nd3
Now came the succession of incidents
which made chess history. Both players,
pressed for time and evidently flustered,
omitted to record their next dozen moves.
Noticing that Steiner's flag had fallen, Purdy
suggested stopping the clocks and recon­
structing the play from Move 32. Unfortu­
nately, before the existing position after the
clock race could be recorded it was disman­
tled by Purdy, suffering a natural reaction
from the excitement of the previous five
minutes. The players, after consulting with
spectators, found that they had apparently
completed 44 moves, with Purdy still a ft
ahead and in the better position.
However, as players could not agree
on the final position reached, it was referred
- 242 -
to the Games and Tournaments Commit­
tee. The game was ordered to be replayed
from Move 32, the times being estimated at
Purdy: one hour 56.25 minutes, and Steiner:
one hour 55 minutes. Both players were put
on their horror not to look at the position
during the adjournment.
When the players were about to re­
sume the following evening, Purdy's clock
several times started of its own volition,
assisted by vibration from the passing traf­
fic. After further clock adjustment, during
which time both players' nerves were on
edge, play continued.
33. Re2
Sealed and forcing Black's reply.
33. Qh4
34. Bel Qd4t
35. Khl Nd3
The obvious reply 36. Rd2 gives Black
good drawing chances by ...Nxe1! Ponder­
ing this, Purdy was suddenly told that his
time was up, and he spasmodically played
Re4. Purdy stated that he was intending 36.
Bfl!
It was then found that the Director, in
adjusting the clock before Move 33, had let
the seconds-hand run on, but had omitted
to put back the minute-hand. Mr. F. Ross
allowed Purdy one minute's grace, and play
was resumed.
The Committee afterwards pointed out
that this was Purdy's mistake. His proper
course, if he felt himself prejudiced through
the incident of the faulty clock, was to refuse
to continue play, and if then ordered to do
so by the Director, to consent only under
protest, and giving notice there and then of
an appeal to the Committee.
The game continued . . .
36. Re4 Nxdl
37. Rfxel! Qxf6
38. Qxf6t Rxf6
39. Re7! Rf2
40. Rxd7?
 His Games

White's last move to beat his clock; a first-class, as was Steiner's defense of a very
blunder, giving Black two E!s on the sec­ difficult middlegame position.
ond. Mter the natural 40. g3, Black still has
to fight for the draw, which he should ob­ ( 1 7)
tain by 40... Rj8! 41. Rxd7 Rxa2 42. Ree7 RaJ Australian Championship (1945)
(or ... R.h2!) 43. Rxa7 Rxb3 44. Rxfl Rxfl 45. C. Watson-C. Purdy
Rxfl R.h2 and 46... Rc2 (Steiner). French Defense
40. ... Rgxg2
41. Rxf7?? 1. e4 e6
White was past his clock trouble but My nerveless fingers were incapable of
was evidently badly rattled. The obvious pushing anything more than one square.
41. Rxa7 forces Black to take a perpetual 2. d4 d5
check. Both hands for this.
41. Rxh2t 3. Nc3 Nf6
42. Kgl Rxf7 4. exd5 Nxd5
43. Kxh2 Rf2t Better than the "book" 4... exd5, as
44. Kg3 Rxa2 Black's .:tl should not be at f6 in the Ex­
45. Re7 change Variation. If now 5. Nxd5, Black can
A miscalculation. Re3, followed by a quite well play 5... Q:,d5, avoiding symme­
� march, would give drawing chances. The try.
conclusion was: 45... Ra3 46. Kf4 Rxb3 47. 5. Nf3
Rxa7 Rb4 48. Kg5 (if 48. Rc7, ... b5!) Rxc4 Euwe, in his Theorie der Schaakopeningen,
49. Ra8t Kg7 50. Ra7t Kg8 (which White recommends 5. Ne4, but clearly Black's
had overlooked on his 45th move) 51. Ra8t game must be satisfactory, for Black then
Kf7 52. Ra7t Ke6 53. Rxh7 b5 (leading to has the 3 ... exd5 variation with �/d5 in­
a "book" win, White's � being too far stead of back at g8.
away. Reuben Fine in Basic Chess Endings 5. ..• Nxc3
gives the general rule that, for a b- or g- ft White evidently invited this to strength­
on the fourth/fifth rank, the hostile � must en his center. However, I hoped the doubled
be cut off at a distance of three files from the fts would also prove to have a weak side.
ft , i.e., on the f-file in this case) 54. Rb7 b4 6. bxc3 c5
55. Rb6t Kd5 56. Kf5 Kd4 57. Rb8 Kc3 7. Bb5t!? Bd7
58. Ke5 b3 59. Ra8 b2 60. Ra3t Kc2 61. 8. a4 Bxb5
Ra2 Kb3 62. Resigns. 9. axb5
In giving these details of a curious suc­ White has prevented the natural devel­
cession of incidents, I must emphasize that opment of Black's .:tJ/c6, while Black has
both players remained good friends. Both acquired hopes of obtaining a remote passed
were at fault in not recording their last 12 ft . But just now Black's position cries out
moves, a duty which is laid down in the for development. Not 9... Nd7 because of
F.I.D.E. rules. Purdy suffered grieviously 10. d5! The game hinges on Black's next
for dismantling the position in the heat of move. By breaking a fine old maxim, Black
the moment, but a player of his experience obtains the initiative.
should have known better. 9• ••• Qd5!
Considering the game itself, Purdy's 10. 0-0 Nd7
strategic maneuvering and .:tl sacrifice were Winning the offered ft would be play-

- 243 -
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection

ing into the hands of such a master of attack. ( 1 8)

1 1. Bf4 c4 N.S.W. v. Victoria (Telex Match 1945)
12. Re1 Be7 C. Purdy-F. Crowl
13. Ne5 0-0! Ruy Lopez
Now I breathed.
14. Re3 Nf6 This game was full of excitement after
15. Rb1 the slow opening. Critics thought Purdy
At last White is induced to vacate the was in peril at the adjournment; all missed
a-file to guard his ft . Now is the time to his spectacular sealed move, as did Crow!.
produce the trump. It was not at all deep, but rather surprising.
15. ••• a5! 1. e4 e5
If White takes in passing, he only gives 2. Nf3 Nc6
the b-file to Black later on. 3. Bb5 a6
16. Qe2 Rfc8 4. Ba4 Nf6
17. Rg3 a4 5. 0-0 Be7
18. Qf3 6. Re1 b5
7. Bb3
-�-� ���
d6

%� %� . �,�
8. c3 Na5
lWi
� .t m
� �
�f .t �
� �� ���":-{ � �
.t
....
9. Bc2
10. d4
c5
Qc7

,�,,����
1 1. a4!
An interpolation by Keres. It aims at
lWi
� lWi
%'�
� �
§ '{,9?',0
.M.�;

��"���ft'�"�·
��
"�r�ft'�
·'�'
disorganizing Black in some way; it must be
�
� ?�
played just at this point to have any effect.
11. ••• b4
12. Nbd2 Be6
Realizing he has overplayed his hand Better ... bxc3 followed by pinning, see-
somewhere and should lose, White stakes ing that White has omitted the routine h3.
all on a long chance, i.e., that Black will 13. d5 Bd7
refrain from immediately swapping '/trs. If 14. cxb4 cxb4
78. a3 (say), then comes the Watsonian
.. 15. b3 Rc8
coup, Rxg7f! 16. Ra2 0-0
18. ••• Qxf3 17. Bd3 Ra8
19. gxf3? Nh5 The §. 's oscillation has not been in
Looks as if White was blind to this, but vain. Had Black not played it to c8 on Move
the remote passed ft confers a winning 15, White would have developed freely by
advantage anyway. 76. Nfl and Ne3.
20. Rg4 f5 21. Bg5 fxg4 22. Bxe7 a3 18. Qe2 Qb7
23. Ra1 a.2 24. Nd7 gxfJ! (best way to 19. Rc2 Rfc8
dispose of the fork: be forked and get it Black's 4:)/aS, though quite immobile,
over) 25. Nb6 Re8 26. Bb4 Nf4! 27. Nxc4 ties the white 4J down. Hence White's next.
(regaining the Exchange leaves White help­ 20. Bc4 Rc5
less) Nd5 28. Bc5 Nxc3 29. Nd6 Red8 30. 21. Bb2 Qc7
Kf1 (if Nxb7, .. Rxd4!) b6 31. Ke1 bxc5 32.
.
22. Reel Rc8
dxc5 Rab8 33. White resigns. White's 20th was also to bar §. ex-

- 244 -
 His Games

changes. Black's last three moves seem to 38. Nxd6 Qb8

overlook what is coming. I expected Crow! 39. ReSt Qxc8
to move his �-4:) and go for .. .f5. 40. Nxc8 Relt
23. Nel! Nxc4 Disappointment for Black; 40... Rd2
24. Nxc4 Qb8 does not win the d- ft . Black can, however,
25. Nd3 R5c7 win the b- ft and obtain good drawing
Now the fun starts. chances. But he goes for counterplay, and
26. f4 Qa7t more excitement develops.
27. Khl Bg4! 41. Bgl Kf8
28. Qel exf4 42. h3 Rdl
29. e5 43. Nb6 Kf7
Not as powerful as it looks, as Crowl 44. Kh2 g5
unearths a strong counter-combination. Be­ 45. Bc5 h5
fore Black's Y!¥-A had a good square, White 46. d6 g4
should have seized the chance to play 29. 47. hxg4 hxg4
h3!, as a � sanctuary would have been a If now 48. d7??, Black mates in a few
godsend to him later. moves!
29. Bf5! 48. g3 f3
30. exf6 Bxd3 49. d7 f5
3 1. fxe7 Rxe7 50. b4 Rd2t
32. Qxb4 Bxc2 51. Kgl f4
And now 33. Rxc2 would lose after Again White is threatened with mate,
...RceB, but White has a saver. and 52. gxf4?is no defense. But again he has
33. Qc3 f6 a dramatic saver.
34. Qxc2 Rce8 52. Nc4! Rdlt
Again White has only one move. Not 53. Kf2 fxg3t
34. Qj1, . . . Qj2. 54. Kxg3 Ke6
35. Qd2! Re2 Black again threatens to patch up his
36. Bd4! Qb7 mating net. White can rend it by K.xg4,
Bearing on two fts. Black should have giving up his passed ft , but would need
secured equality with ...Rxd2, but his attack about 100 moves to win. Therefore White
looked promising. lets it close around him slightly again.
The game was now adjourned. What 55. Nb6! Kf5
move can White seal to stem the tide? 56. a5! Rd2
And this time the way out is obvious.
57. Bf2 Rdl
58. b5 Rhl
59. Bd4 Rh3t
White's last move ensures queening,
and Black's mating net is tom. The finish
was 60. Kf2 Ke4 61. d8=Q g3t 62. Kel
Rhlt 63. Kd2 Rh2t 64. Kc3 f'1 65. Qd5t
Kf4 66. Qe5t KfJ 67. Qd5t Ke2 68. Qe4t
Kf1 69. Qf3 Rh3 70. Bxf'l g2; White mates
37. Qxe2!! Rxe2 in two.

- 24 5 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

( 1 9)
Sydney Invitation Tournament (1946)
C. Purdy-A. Fryda
English Opening

1. c4 e6
2. g3 Nf6
3. Bg2 d5
4. Nf3 Be7
5. 0-0 0-0
6. b3 d4 Black's ft sacrifice has justified itself
Better to wait till White committed insofar as White's As have been deprived
himself to Bb2. Therefore 6... c5. These of most of their strength by the powerfully
"hyper-modern" openings are easy to cope situated and well-supported blockading lb .
with in theory, but in practice it is still easier The '{:¥-side fts (which can at any time be
for Black to make a slight error, and then changed into doubled fts) are quite immo­
the "hyper-modern" opening becomes bet­ bile. I found the position intensely difficult,
ter than a good opening. The term hyper­ and finally decided on a surprising scheme
modern was given to fianchetto openings for returning the ft in order to obtain an
when they suddenly became all the rage endgame with a mobile passed ft .
after the first World War. 22. Rc2! Rxc2
7. d3 c5 Else White doubles Ei s.
8. e4 dxe3 23. Qxc2 Ne3
Otherwise White would never fian­ Here Mr. Fryda rose from his chair as
chetto his '{:¥-A at all, but use it on its though expecting his game to be easier
original diagonal in conjunction with a later from this point; the position is very decep­
/4 and a �-side attack. tive.
9. fxe3 Nc6 24. Nc4 Nxc2
10. Bb2 Qc7 Not 24... Q3b5 or ...Rc8 25. Qj3. And
ll. Nc3 a6 24... Bxb5 merely transposes.
12. Qe2 Bd7 25. Nxb5 Bxb5
13. Rad1 Rfd8 26. axb5 Nxd4
14. d4 cxd4 If 26... Rb8, 2Z Rcl Rxb6 28. Rxc2 h6!
15. exd4 Be8 29. Rc8f Kh7 30. Bc6 followed by rapid
16. Kh1 b5 development of the �. Black can be al­
A bold .ft sacrifice for liberty, if not lowed to win the front passed ft by ...Nd5,
equality or fraternity. ...Bb4, and ...Nc3, but afterwards the rear
17. cxb5 axb5 one advances under royal patronage, and
18. Nxb5 Qb6 White should win.
19. a4 Rac8 27. Bxd4 Rxd4
20. Ne5 Nb4 28. Nc4 Nd5
21. Rcl Nbd5 To shut out White's A. I expected 28...
Rd3, when White could probably win by
sacrificing the rear ft ; but 29. Rbl is surer,
as White can still get his front ft to the

- 246 -
 His Games

seventh and without letting Black's � get create difficulties for himself. Above all, I
behind it, and the rear ft could become an wanted to avoid clock trouble.
additional weapon. 5. Bd3 Bb7
29. b6 Bd8 6. Nf3 Ne4!
30. b7 Bc7 7. Bd2
31. Ra1 g6 At once eliminating the strong f), as
32. Ra8t Kg7 Z . . j5 would lose a ft .
33. Bxd5 exd5 7. ... Bxc3!
34. Rc8 Resigns 8. Bxc3 Nxc3
Black-of course-has chosen the only
(2 0) way that promised him chances, as Rc7
Radio Match v. France {1946) threatened to give White a very comfort­
C. Purdy-S. Tartakover able game. The point is that from now on
Nimzo-lndian Defense White can secure his �-side from attack
only by exp osing the weakness of his
1. d4 doubled fts. This will be explained later.
Had I expected to play the famous 9. bxc3 f5
Tartakover, I should have prepared against Must, else e4 gives White his ideal
Alekhine's Defense, which he has been play­ formation in this opening.
ing lately, and adopted my usual e4. But I 10. 0-0 0-0
thought he was situated harmlessly in En­ 11. Qe2 Qf6!
gland. In view of the coming e4, Black wants
1. N£6 to avoid weakening his e- ft by ... d6, but not
2. c4 e6 to play ... Nc6till he can exchange .Q.s. White
3. Nc3 Bb4 has to dance to this tune, or Black might tie
Steiner had said that Tartakover was him up with ... Qg6. Or if 72. f) (moves), ... e5!
certain to spring a surprise in the opening, 12. e4 fxe4
and when I now pointed out that he had 13. Bxe4 Bxe4
played what is probably the theoretically 14. Qxe4 Nc6
most correct defense to the Yff's ft , Steiner The scene has changed. Black has a
answered, "That is his surprise." vital "pivot square" at/ f5; you must visual-
4. e3 b6 ize a � ending, and a black � pirouetting
This was to me the most worrying re- on f5, then dancing off to a5, battening on
ply. I had designed to play not at once White's weak fts.
Rubinstein's Nge2 followed by a3, but first But by playing e4 White has nipped in
Bd3 and then that, so that if his A retired the bud a �-side attack and created chances
when hit by a3 my �-f) would not obstruct for central counterplay. A reliable critic-or
my A and I should have an easy develop- was he a pundit?-said I had a "bad game,"
ment. Now it was goodbye to all that. Either but I had some faith in my freer position in
I had to play Rubinstein's way, with a corn- the center.
plicated game, or else develop in an easy 15. Radl! Qf4
way, but a way which would give Black no 16. Rfe1 Rae8
difficulties at all . I chose the latter because This came through just before 2 AM,
no one can make an opening difficult for and I had to seal with all the officials waiting
Tartakover-though he sometimes likes to patiently in the cold. However, there was

- 247 --
 The Search for Chess Perfection
too much at stake to hurry, and I had plenty
of time on the clock for once. Tartakover
wanted the ¥t!s off, and yet by accommo­
dating him I could make use of my tempo­
rarily better .§.s and attack him. Was it
sound? At any rate, I thought it gave better
chances than trying to hold the position
intact, because the Y!1-side was permanently
weak.
17. Qxf4 Rxf4
18. d5
Completely wrecked my Y!1-side, "yet
there is method in't."
18.
•.. Na5
19. dxe6 dxe6
Not the obvious ...Rxe6because of 20.
Rxe6 dxe6 21. Rd7!, for if then 21 ... Rxc4, 22.
Ne5! threatens mate and forces the .§. back
to f4, and then 23. Rxc7 with advantage.
And if 21 .. . Rf7, 22. RdBf RJB 23. Rd7 forces
a draw.
20. Ng5! e5
For if 20... Rxc4, 21. Rxe6 and Black
cannot take because of mate. So 21 ... RcB
(say) 22. Rd7!! Rxc3 23. h4 (to avoid mate).
Now if Black stops White's threatened Re7
with 23... Nc6, comes 24. Rxc7!, offering the
.§. . And if 23... h6, 24. Ree7! at least draws.
I fear that some students, when they
see notes like this, are discouraged by think­
ing the player worked them all out before
taking his plunge ( 1Z Q!f4, in this case).
Over the board, that is rarely done. The
player relies mainly on his judgment of the
attacking possibilities of a position, notes a
few important tactical points (such as the
mating threats in this example), works out a
main line or two, and leaves a little to
chance. To rely on sheer calculation, as
opposed to judgment, is actually very risky.
Even Alekhine admitted that he rarely
worked out more than two or three varia-
tions.
21. c5! h6
Black admits the success of White's
- 248
demonstration. For if his .§. crosses to the
Yl1-side, 22. Rxe5!, offering the .§. for the old
mate. And if 21 ... bxc5 ?, 22. Rd5with advan­
tage.
22. Ne4 Nc6
23. f3 Rff8!
The .§. has outlived his usefulness at f4
(if 23... bxc5, not 24. Nxc5 but 24. Rd7! Rf7
25. Rd5 with advantage). But why not 23...
Rf7, preventing White from taking the sev­
enth rank? Because Black wants to induce
the exchange of one pair of .§.s; otherwise,
White can threaten to control the only open
file. Crafty!
24. Rd7 Rf7
Now White's best course was 25. Rd5!
to double .§.s. Black could force an ex­
change by ...RdB, but less favorably.
25. Red1 Rxd7
26. Rxd7 Re7
27. Rd1
The 4) ending is bad for White with
two fts isolated, but with .§.s on it should be
a draw.
27. Kf7
28. Kf2 Ke6
29. Ke3 Rd7
The student will ask two questions.
Why has White not undoubled the fts?
Because that would open a file for Black's
.§. against the isolated a- ft . And why did
Black not try ...b5, keeping the fts doubled?
Because that would give counterplay for
White's .§. . Thus, 29... b5!? 30. Rb1 a6 31.
a4! bxa4 32. Ra1 Rd7 33. c4! a5 (to answer
Rxa4 with ...Rd1) 34. Nc3! followed by Nb5
or Nd5, tying Black up lugubriously.
I now exchanged the .§.s because the
4) ending is better now, and I did not like to
leave the open file to Black's .§. .
30. Rxd7 Kxd7
31. cxb6 cxb6
Black wants to have a passed ft as
remote as possible in case he ever wins one
of White's Yf1-side fts.
-
 His Games

White's next "think" was his longest in usual problems.

the game. It is bad to play for a double 4. a3 Bxc3t
attack on Black's e- .ft , e.g., 32. Nj2 ? Ke6 33. 5. bxc3 c5
Ke4 Na5 34. Nd3 Nc4 followed by ...Nd6f, 6. Qa4 0-0
driving the W back. 7. Bg5 h6
32. h4! Drawn 8. Bh4 d6
White offered the draw. The point of 9. N£3 Nbd7
etiquette that one should not offer a grand­ 10. e3 g5
master a draw but wait for him to do so Could well have waited ( 10... e5!).
would not be supported by the genial and 11. Bg3 Ne4
logical Tartakover, we feel sure, for it is 12. Rcl
obviously unfair to deprive the weaker
player of a right possessed by the stronger.

The Final Position

Hallucination: 12. Bd3 offers Black

nothing better than 12 ... Nxg3 13. hxg3 Kg7.
However, Black's chances remain good, as
White gets no time to attack in the h-file,
Black to play his 32nd e.g., if 14. 0-0-0, .. j5 15. Rh2 Nf6!for ...Ng4.
Or 14. e4j5 15. exj5 exj5 16. 0-0-0 Nf6, when
White's move here, like his sealed move 17. dxc5 fails because of 17. .. Ng4 18. Qs2
and its sequel, follows the sound principle Qg5. Or 14. g4 Nf6!
of trying to create counter-weaknesses rather 12. f5
than defend your own. The threat is h5, 13. Bd3 Ndf6
fixing Black's g- .ft . 14. 0-0 Qe7
15. Rfd1 h5
(2 1 ) 16. h4 g4
Australian Championship {1946-47) 17. Nd2 Nxg3
F. Crowi-C. Purdy 18. fxg3 d5
Nimzo-/ndian Defense 19. Rf1 Ne4
20. Bxe4 dxe4
1. d4 Nf6 White has emerged with what looks at
2. c4 e6 first a tenable position, but his 4) is bad and
3. Nc3 Bb4 his Y!f is tied to the protection of the a- .ft .
White now chooses the Samisch At­ Black can break through by .. . e5, and if d5,
tack, which provides immediate .ft support ultimately .. f4.
for the d- .ft against the coming . ..c5. The 21. Qb3 b6
followup is pure Crow!, and sets Black un- 22. Qa2 Qd6

- 249 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

23. Rf4? e5 And if now 9. Bxh7f, ...Kxh7 10. axb4

24. dxe5 Qxe5 Nc6 with equal chances.
White now has too many weaknesses; 9. Bxc4 Be7
his only hope is to prepare his &Ll for sacri­ Now that White cannot play c5.
fice, which he does. 10. 0-0 Nbd7
25. Qc2 Be6 Against the isolated d- it one tries, if
26. Rcfl Rad8 possible, to establish a piece on the "block­
27. R1f2 Rf7 ade" square d5. This is just routine Nimzo­
28. Kh2 Rd3 vich. Hence Black's rapidity.
29. Qa4 Rfd7 1 1. Bg5 h6
The finish is exciting. 12. Bh4 Nb6
30. Nxe4 fxe4 13. Ba2 Bd7
3 1. Qc6 Rxe3 14. Qd3 Bc6
32. Rd2 Red3 Here again, Black forced himself not to
Black declines the � for simplicity. If dawdle over calculations based on White's
now 33. Re2, ... Q3f4!! mating threat at h7, but relied on faith in the
33. Rxd3 exd3 34. Re4 Qd6 35. defensive setup with Alf6 (explained be­
Qa8t Kg7 36. Re1 d2 37. White resigns. low).
15. Rad1 Nbd5
(22) 16. Bb1 Re8
Australian Championship (1946-47)
B. Mills-C. Purdy
Nimzo-Jndian Defense

1. d4 Nf6
2. c4 e6
3. Nc3 Bb4
4. e3 0-0
5. Bd3 c5
In the A. C.R. of 1935, the sequence of
moves suggested was 5... d5 6. Ne2 dxc4 7. Creating a flight square at f8, so that
Bxc4 c5 8. a3 cxd4. I did not remember this, even if his f-&Ll is exchanged off and he has
but in any case I thought Mills would an- to recapture on f6 with the A, White cannot
swer 5... d5 with 6. Nj3! Once Black has mate him-Black can answer Q!t7fand Q!tBt
played ... d5White no longer has to fear the with ...Kj8 and . .Ke7. This defense nearly
.

doubling of his c- fts.
6. Nge2 d5
7. a3 cxd4!
This and the following it capture,
nonchalantly leaving the A en prise, give
this game its special interest for opening
students. To capture the A at either move
would give White a bad it position with
only barely compensating advantages.
8. exd4 dxc4!
always works. White's best now seems 17.
Rfe1, when Black could also develop with
...Rc8 with the better position. But White
tries to force things, and fares worse.
17. Nxd5 Qxd5
18. Nf4 Qb5
White had missed the force of this, and
his whole setup is wrecked. If 19. Qs2 ?,
...Be4. And if 19. Qg3, the it -grab is sound.
19. Bxf6 Qxd3

- 2 50 -
 His Games

20. Nxd3 Bxf6 is soon clear. It pays to treat winning posi­

2 1 . Ne5 Ba4! tions with extreme care if time permits.
Now, in order to preserve his advan­ 38. Bb5 Re4!
tage, Back proceeded to calculate almost 39. Be8 Kf8!
every move exhaustively. The obvious 21 ... And Black must win a third ft . 40.
Bd5 is feeble (22. Ng4 [A moves] 23. Ne3). Bb5 Rxe5 41. a4 Rf5t 42. Kgl e5 43.
22. Rd2! ReSt Kg7 44. Rd8 e4 45. g4 Re5 46. Rd6
Some said White should have seized e3 47. Kf1 Bf3 48. Rxb6 Rc5 49. White
the open file with 22. Rcl, but then 22... resigns.
Rad8! wins (if ...Red8, Be4 is annoying). White can save his position only by
22.•.. Red8 allowing mate.
23. Rel
Better f4 at once, reserving an option. (2 3 )
23.•.. Rac8 Australia v. England
24. f4 Bxe5! (Radio Match 1947)
A big decision: to cast aside the perma­ C. Purdy-H. Golombek
nent advantage of the two As for a ft win Caro-Kann Defense
extremely difficult to sheet home. This move
occupied nearly 30 minutes. This game will interest (a) students of
25. fxe5 Rc4 the opening, and (b) players who enjoy a
26. b3? hard fight even if unspectacular.
Mills thought that after 26. Be4! Rcxd4 1. e4 c6
2Z Rxd4 Rxd4 28. Bxb7 the ending should 2. d4 d5
be a win for Black (28... Rd2 and will soon 3. Nc3 dxe4
be a ft up again). A big factor would be the 4. Nxe4 Bf5!
weakness on e5. But the win would be very Capablanca, who thought highly of the
arduous. The text move, giving up a ft in a Caro-Kann, always depended on this move.
different way, was a brainwave based on an 5. Ng3 Bg6
optimistic hallucination. But White subse­ 6. Nt3
quently finds the most tenacious defense at Alekhine wrote in the Book of the New
every move. York Tourney of 1924: "The formerly so
26. Bxb3 popular 'attacking' move, 6. h4, which is
27. Rb2 Rc3 suitable only for a 4J attack and weakens
28. Be4 b6 the �'s position without compensation, has
29. Rd2 Bd5 been discarded little by little and rightly
30. Rd3! Rxd3 so."
3 1. Bxd3 Rc8 In later years, Lajos Steiner gave new
32. Re3 g6 life to 6. h4, afterwards playing Bd2 and
33. Be2 Rc2 0-0-0 and following with Kb 7, c4, and Bd3.
34. Kf1 Rd2 But I knew Golombek would be well primed
35. Rc3 Rxd4 in that.
36. ReSt Kg7 6. ... Nd7
37. Rc7 a5! Stops Ne5.
The sealed move, and much the stron­ 7. Be2
gest, though ...Ra4 was tempting. The point A new move of my own, which I had

- 25 1 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

already tried against Brian Reilly in the cially in a position which would have re­
world correspondence championship. My paid ten minutes' analysis. White acquires a
idea sprang from Alekhine's favorable com­ passed ft , but isolated and on a light square,
ments on Yates' 7. Bc4 in place of the usualan obstruction to his -'l.
7. Bd3. As Bc4 hinders c4, which White The best chance ofmaintaining a slight
wants to play later, I was led to think of Be2.
pull was probably 77. Rd2 for doubling §.s,
7. ... e6 e.g., if 77. . . RadB, 18. Redl and White is then
8. 0-0 Bd6! threatening dxe5. If Black is lured into ... e4,
The Reilly game shows better the pos­ all the better, as f3 would eliminate this ft ,
sibilities of my idea: B... Qc7 9. c4! Ngf6 10.
leaving White with a �-side majority while
Bd2 Bd6 11. b4, Reilly to move. I don't Black's 'it'-side fts would be immobile.
know if Golombek's move is really stronger 17. cxd5
than Reilly's, but it keeps open the possibil­ 18. cxd5 Qd6
ity of . . . h5-h4. This induced me to change 19. Bb5! a6
my original plan, with doubtful wisdom. Sealed move.
Actually, I ought now to have played, as 20. Ne4 Nxe4
against Reilly, 9. c4!, and if 9... h5!?, 10. Bd3 21. Bxd7 Qxd7
h4 11. Ne4 Bxe4 12. Bxe4 h3 13. g3, as the 22. Qxe4 Rac8!
weakening of the 'it'-side matters little since White has rid himself of his awkward
Black is now committed to castling on the -'l, but is now faced with the impossible
�-side, which is also vulnerable. task of holding both the open file and the
9. Re1 Ngf6 passed ft .
10. c4 0-0 23. Rc1 Qd6
1 1. Nh4 Qc7 24. Rc4
12. Nxg6 hxg6 Tempting was 24. g4, but I thought
13. Be3 Black's answer would be simply . . f6! aim­
No use trying to keep the two ,ils, e.g.,
ing at ...Kf7.
13. b3 e5, etc. 24. RedS
13. Bf4 25. Rd1 b5!
14. Qd2 Bxe3 26. Rxc8 Rxc8
15. Qxe3 e5 27. h3 f5!
16. Rad1 Rfe8 28. Qe3 Kf7
17. d5 Entering the " (d6) square" ofthe passed

�.t���
ft , and thus greatly reducing that infant's

J��
.t ,��
� M4l�t�
potentialities. Now White cannot face a §.
ending, nor even a � ending, with confi­

��"��-�
����···� , ·��
..

��
dence, because Black's r3] is a force while
his own is not. And a policy of masterly
inactivity, while superficially it looks all
� �
�� � ·�·�4. � �
�
..
'· right at the moment, is almost certain to
� '
' � ,§?� �
.il. % -�·' ��� � · a % ·� lead to some such unfavorable exchange .
�
� � � ' ' '� ' " ' White's next move cost him 25 minutes.
29. g4 Rc4
In my anxiety to play quickly and avoid White's sortie was open to the objec­
subsequent clock trouble, I played superfi- tion that it exposed his r3}, but it was logical

- 252 -
 His Games

in that it aimed at turning Black's devel­ (24)

oped � into an exposed � also. And there N.S.W. Championship (1947)
was a tactical point: if 29... Rc2?, 30. gxj5 C. Purdy-H. Klass
gxf5 31. Qj3! Qs6f 32. Kj7f4 (if ...Rxb2 ?, d6 English Opening
should win) 33. Q3g6f Kxg6 34. d6 and
White has the winning chances. What may happen if you try to bypass
30. b3 ReS a strong enemy 4J instead of trying to drive
31. Qd3 e4 it away or swap it off? This.
32. Qd4 Rc2 1. c4 e5
33. Rd2 Rc1t 2. Nc3 Nc6
34. Rd1 Rxd1 t 3. Nf3 Bc5
White should draw this '& ending, as Inferior to . ..Nf6.
enough lines have been opened up for his 4. e3 d6
-&. 5. d4 Bb6
35. Qxd1 e3! 6. h3
An ingenious little combination to ex­ Varying from 6. Be2, played against
pose White's � and retain winning chances. Lindgren in Adelaide. White is anxious to
If 35... fxg4, simplest was 36. Q.xg4 Q3d5 37. maintain his .ft. center.
QsB, drawing by virtue of Black's exposed 6. ... a5
�- Not yet necessary.
36. Qf3 exf2t 7. Nd5 Ba7
37. Kxf2 Qe5 8. Be2 Nge7
If 37. .. Q.h2t, 38. Kj7 Q3a2 39. Qs3! 9. 0-0 0-0
38. a4! b4 10. b3 Bb8
39. gxf5! gxf5 At this, I looked up to see if my oppo­
40. Qd3 Qh2t nent were Crawl in disguise. Black visual­
If 40... a5, White's '& and passed .ft. izes an eventual ... c6. However, White sud­
cooperate and force the draw: 41. @5, and denly changes the central setup entirely.
if then Black checks and wins a .ft. , White, 11. e4 exd4
after driving the black � well away, plays 12. Nxd4 Nxd4
d6, when loss of .ft.s no longer matters-a 13. Qxd4 Nc6
typical drawing motif in '& endings. With 14. Qc3 Ba7
only a few minutes left for ten moves, 15. Be3 Bxe3
Golombek at last gives up his valiant efforts 16. Qxe3 Re8
to win. 17. Bd3 Bd7
41. Kf1 Qh1t 18. Rfe1 b6
42. Kfl Drawn 19. Rad1 Ne5
Messages: "Thanks, most interesting 20. f4 Ng6
game."-Purdy. 21. Qg3 N£8
"Many thanks, hope to meet you over
the board Sydney some day."-Golombek.

- 253 - -
 The Search for Chess Peifection

Keres won after moving the same � eight

times in the first 15 moves. We believe that
was a world's record for the winner of a
serious game-anyone could move a � eight
times and lose.
In the game now before us, the winner
moves the same � six times in the first 15;
the � then proceeds on further travels, and
his tenth and last move is the winning one
{28th). It is an Evans gambit. Winning it
This was Black's last chance to hit the assured Purdy (holder) of first place in the
� with ...c6, but the reply would be 22. j5! Australian Correspondence Championship,
cxd5 23. fxg6 hxg6 24. Q3d6 with a winning either outright or in a tie with Koshnitsky.
advantage.
22. e5 dxe5 1. e4 e5
23. fxe5 Kh8 2. N£3 Nc6
24. Rfl Be6 3. Bc4 Bc5
25. N£6! Qe7 4. b4 Bxb4
The best hope. There is this to be said for accepting
26. Nxe8 Rxe8 the gambit-it enables Black to select some
27. Be4 Nd7 particular line which he may have prepared,
28. Khl! Qc5? because White is more or less tied down to
A mistake which avoids slow torture. specific methods of countering each form of
29. Rxd7 Resigns the defense. The Gambit Declined, on the
If .. .Bxd7, 30. Rxf7 Q3e5 37. Q3e5 Rxe5 other hand, allows White quite a variety of
32. Rxd7 and Black cannot regain the piece choice.
because of mate. [Ed.: A slip by Purdy because 5. c3 Ba5
32. Rf8 is mate.] 6. d4
Captain Evans, the inventor, used to
(2 5) (ltf' \ castle first; but that comfortable line is quite
Australian Correspondence spoiled by the Lasker Defense.
Championship {1948) 6. ... b5!
C. Purdy-M. Goldstein Leonhardt's Counter Gambit. It is one
Evans Gambit of the mysteries of chess that it has not been
played more often. M. C. 0. gives it as "theo­
The following Evans Gambit from the retically quite strong," which might imply
1948 Australian Correspondence Champi­ that practically it had some defect, but no­
onship was considered by both players to body has ever found it; and the lines given
be unusual enough to warrant very full in M. C. O. end in Black's favor, though one
annotations, making it into an article all on of them is given with the verdict of equality.
its own. The winner annotated it, but sub­ So, on the face of it, the Leonhardt was the
mitted the notes to the loser for correction refutation of the Evans, and naturally I had
and amendment. not ventured the gambit against Goldstein
We published in the A.C.R. of Decem­ in correspondence play without looking into
ber 1937 a game, Keres-Eliskases, which the Leonhardt very carefully. My conclusion

- 254 -
 His Games
was that the book play could be improved
on for White, though whether he could
permanently maintain an initiative was too
big a question.
7. Bd5!
M. C. 0. gives this as the weaker alterna­
tive, and Bxb5 as better; and Ulverstad in
his Chess Arts actually gives Bxb5 as a win for
White, but both authorities are wrong. M­
ter 7. Bxb5 Nxd4 8. Nxe5 Nxb5 9. Qd5 (here
Ulvestad ends up, assuming White wins
because he gets a � ), there follows 9... Qf6!
10. Qxa8 Ne7 (as in W.R. Morry-R.D. Wor­
mald). The white � is shut in. Wormald
won the game, and M. C. 0., which correctly
gives the line, has no justification for claim­
ing equality; White could be said to have
"drawing chances" at best.
7. ... exd4
Now M. C. 0. considers only the thor­
oughgoing "gambit" move, 8. Qj3, which is
superficially attractive but ends disastrously,
as shown by M. C. 0. itself. But White has no
need to be so rash.
8. Nxd4! Qf6
9. 0-0 Nge7
Now comes the crisis. Although the
players had left M. C. 0., they were not in
entirely uncharted waters. Both, as it turned
out later, knew Leonhardt's own analysis,
published in the B. C.M. of February 1906.
At this stage Leonhardt continues with
10. e5 Qg6 ( ... �e5? loses) 11. f4 Bb6 12. j5
Nxd4 73. fxg6 Ne2f 14. Khl Ng3f 15. hxg3
hxg6f and Black mates in two.
A very pretty variation, but unsound.
IfWhite plays 12. Kh1!instead of 12.j5?, he
wins! For if 12... Nxd4, 13. Bxa8 Nc2 14. g4!!
and Black cannot save the game. In my glee
at this discovery, I nearly went ahead with
it, and afterwards Goldstein asked me why I
had not, for he himself had also found the
flaw. My answer was that unfortunately there
is still another flaw in Leonhardt's analysis.
Instead of 11... Bb6? (which takes a useful
- 255 -
flight square from his �), Black can play
simply 77 ... Nxd4!with advantage. For if 12.
Bxa8, ... Nc2 (as g4 is now useless). In fair­
ness to Leonhardt, one should add that his
analysis was intended as illustrative only.
So I returned to the drab and unro­
mantic move which I had decided was best
a year before the game started. But there
was nothing drab about the sequel.
10. Nxb5!
I know of no previous instance of this.
Yet it seemed to me that one should forget
one is playing an Evans Gambit and just
play chess. And here is a perfectly good ft .
10. ... 0-0
I hoped Black would try to regain his
ft plus by 10... a6 11. N5a3! Bxc3; this
would eliminate my weak c- ft and unde­
veloped 4J and give me a strong initiative
well worth the ft minus. Also ineffective
would be 10... Ba6 11. a4.
1 1. Be3 a6
12. Nd4 Bb6
My main concern was always to be
sure, by painstaking analysis, that at each
move there was something to discourage
Black from playing .. .Nxd5, or to put it
another way, some solace to White for the
grief of parting with his "two Bishops."
It is on that idea that my variation ( 10.
Nxb5) was based. For example, 12 ... Nxd5
13. exd5 Ne5 14. Nd2! d6 (taking loses) 15.
N4b3 Bb6 76. Bxb6 cxb6 1Z f4 Ng6 18. Oj3 is
in White's favor. A nice problem now faces
White. See diagram.
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection

13. Nc2! Goldstein considers this doubtful. Pos­

It is remarkable that with three of his sibly ...Rb8 and .. .Bb 7 was better. White is
pieces still on their original squares, White's behind in development by counting pieces,
best move should be a retrograde step with but dominates the center.
this apparently well-posted i£l, which has 16. Qc2 Be6
already moved four times. It reminded me 17. Nd2 Rfb8
of Reti's words in his Modern Ideas In Chess. Black still relies on development, leav­
ing White's central domination intact. How­
From a careful study of Capa­ ever, if 7Z .. Bxd5, 78. exd5 Ne5 19.[4 and the
blanca's games I learnt in tbe end position of Black's ¥11 comes into question.
that instead of applying Morphy's 18. f4 Rb2
principle of developing all tbe 19. Qd3 Na5
pieces as quickly as possible he Black has reached a stage on which
was guided in his play by some White had built his hopes: Black has com­
plan based as much as possible on pleted his development and is at a standstill
positional considerations. Accord­ because White still dominates the center.
ing to that method, every move The text move stops trouble from White's
not demandedby tbe plan amounts i£ls, but gives White a new opportunity.
to a loss of time. 20. f5 Nxd5
Virtually forced now. Black hopes for
The natural move was 73. Bb3, pre­ 27. fxe6? OJ:c3 22. exj7f Kj8, when he is quite
serving the two .\ls. Over the board, one safe, e.g., 23. OJ:c3 Nxc3 24. Nj3 Nxe4! 25.
would play it almost automatically, and Nd4 Nc5 26. Rac7 Nab7 (Goldstein).
only a great deal of calculation persuaded 21. exd5 Bc8
me that my mysterious i£l move was better. Mter 27 ... Bd7 White gets a winning
The plan itself is simple: to establish the attack by Ne4, e.g., 22 ... f!!5 ? 23. Ng4 f!!8 ?
i£l/e3 commanding the vital square dS. 24. Nef6for 22 ... fl!7 2J. f6 (Goldstein).
Black should certainly have played now 22. Rael!
13... Nxd5 before the i£l could get there. A surprising ft sacrifice, as Black would
Then 74. OJ:d5! RbB (looks best) 75. Bxb6 not only win a ft but threaten to get two t!s
Rxb6 76. Ne3 d6 7Z Qj3 (threatening Nd5, on the second. However, if 22... Rxa2, 23.
the theme move) Be6 78. f4 and White Ng4 Qj8 24. Qg3! Kh8 25. f6 and the attack
threatens f5 and again Nd5. So in this line, should win. Black prefers a crafty retreat.
too, White would have kept the initiative 22. ••• Qd8
despite his retarded development. The main 23. Nc2!
secret of White's small advantage consists The peripatetic i£l is again drawn to
in his center it , which Black cannot easily this apparently futile position, but only as a
assail. jumping-off ground for further hops. One
Maxims about quick development, and could have bet that he would end up in a
all other maxims in chess, are valuable la­ W-side attack. Strangely enough, that is his
bor-saving devices for avoiding bad moves goal, but he selects an extraordinarily round­
rather than for finding good ones. about route. Reason: he mustn't let Black
13. Rb8 get two t!s on the second.
14. Bxb6 Rxb6 23. ••• Rxa2
15. Ne3 d6 Just what the i£l wants. Black's last

- 256 -
 His Games

fighting chance was 23... BdZ (26)

24. Nb4 Rb2 Australia v. New Zealand
25. Nc4! Cable Match (1948)
Again, a surprising move, because po­ C. Purdy-R. Wade
sitionally it seems bad to give Black a chance French Defense
to exchange off his miserable � on the
edge. But a combination overrides all such 1. e4 e6
bloodless considerations. 2. d4 d5
25. Nxc4 3. Nd2 Nf6
26. Nc6 Q£8 More fashionable than . . c5.
.

27. Qxc4 Bd7 4. e5 Nfd7

The � really wanted the !! to move, 5. Bd3 c5
and then he could have extended his tour in 6. c3
a blaze of glory, e.g., 2Z .. R8b6 28. Ne7f This, of course, is the point of 3. Nd2.
Kh8 29. Ng6f!!!, thus completing 1 1 moves Now Black sometimes plays 6... b6 to ex­
with a sacrifice which wins in all variations. change his "bad" .Q..
[Eel.: How does White win in the variation 6. Nc6
after 29 . . . fxg6 30. fxg6 Qg8 ?] If 2Z .. Ra8, 7. Ne2 Qb6
however, then 28. Ne7t and 29. 0Jcc7, win­ 8. Nf3 f6
ning less glamorously. Even as it is, the � If 8 cxd4, 9. cxd4 Bb5t 10. Kfl! (Ale­
•••

makes ten moves, more than a third of all khine-Capablanca, A.V.R.O. 1938) leaves
White's moves to date. Black rather stranded.
28. Nxb8 Qxb8 9. exf6 Nxf6
If ...Bb5, 29. Qs4!wins (Goldstein). 10. 0-0 Bd6
29. Qxa6 Bb5 1 1. Rb1
30. Qa3 Rd2 To free the .Q. (b3 is weakening).
If ...Bxfl ?, 31. Q,xb2! 1 1 . ..
. 0-0
3 1. c4! Bd7 12. Bf4 Qc7
If ...Bxc4, 32. Qs3, finis. An old game, Canal-H.Johner, Zurich
32. Re7 Qd8 1917, continued 12... Bxf4 13. Nxf4 Qc7 (if
Forced, as White gave conditionals to . . .Ne4, 14. Ne2 cxd4 15. Nexd4 Nxd4 76. cxd4
settle the slightly longer resistance by 32 ... with advantage [Tartakover]) 14. g3 e5 15.
h6. dxe5 Nxe5 16. Nxe5 Qxe5 17. Re1 Qd6 18.
33. Rxd7 Resigns Bc4! with advantage to White.
It was really a pleasure to lose this 13. Bxd6 Qxd6
game, in which Purdy broke all the classical 14. Re1?
canons of development to maintain his grip
on the center. I felt my loss due in no small
measure to the weakness of Black's c6 and
c4 squares (see White's 25th and 26th
moves), which in their turn were created by
Leonhardt's own move, 6... b5.
Hence Purdy's original treatment of
the opening makes the game of exceptional
theoretical interest (Goldstein).

- 257 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

White impatiently sent this rather su­ White's 4) finds the square formerly
perficial move as a conditional; had he occupied by the A a perfect defensive post.
waited until he had the position in front of A balance is thus achieved, which neither
him, he might have seen that the only way side can well afford to upset.
to retain any advantage was by 14. dxc5! 33. Kt3 b5
fl!c5 15. Ned4. Black could not then ad­ 34. g4 Nd2t
vance his e- .ft. (because of Nxc6), and after 35. Ke2 Ne4
15... Bd7 16. Re! RaeB 17. Nxc6 Bxc6 18. Ne5 36. Ke3 Ke6
White's initiative is clear ( 18... Nd7? 19. 37. h3 Kf6
Qs2). 38. Kt3
14. e5! Drawn by agreement.
15. dxe5 Nxe5
16. Nxe5 Qxe5 (2 7)
17. Ng3 Qg5 Australian Open (1948)
The salient feature now is Black's cen­ D. Armstrong-C. Purdy
ter .ft. . It is an asset, but also a liability Nimzo-/ndian Defense
insofar as it deprives Black's A of a central
diagonal. In masters' jargon, White has a 1. d4 Nf6
"good" A, Black a "bad" A -fair compen­ 2. c4 e6
sation for Black's central majority. Black's 3. Nc3 Bb4
ambition, after developing, will be to ex­ 4. a3 Bxc3t
change off the As. 5. bxc3 c5
18. t3 Bd7 6. e3 0-0
19. Qcl Qxcl 7. Bd3 Nc6
20. Rbxc1 Rae8 8. Ne2 d6
21. Kf1 g6 9. 0-0 Qc7
22. Rxe8 Rxe8 10. e4 e5!
23. Re1 If I did not do this, I was in for deadly
With only one open file, it rarely pays cramp. I therefore decided to invite the
either side to avoid exchanging §.s. following little combination in which White
23. Kf7 expends his energy on winning material at
24. Rxe8 Nxe8! the cost of position.
25. Ke2 Nd6 1 1. d5 Ne7
26. Ke3 Kf6 12. f4 exf4
27. f4 a5 To allow f5 would be fatal. If now
28. Ne2 Bb5! White recaptures, Black obtains control of
29. Bxb5 Nxb5 eS ( 13. Bxf4 Ng6 and 14... Nd7, or 13. Nxf4
Black has achieved the exchange of Nd7).
As, and White could now easily drift into a 13. e5 dxe5
loss. However, White now finds a maneu­ 14. d6 Qc6
ver which actually reaps some benefit from 15. dxe7 Re8
the disappearance of his A. White has gained a piece for two .ft.s,
30. Ncl! a4 but has a A and 4) without future. So far
31. a3 Nd6 from exploiting his material advantage, he
32. Nd3 Nc4t must seek salvation in a counter-sacrifice.

- 258 -
 His Games

16. Bc2! Bd7 45. B£8 g6

17. Nxf4! exf4 46. a4 Bc4
18. Bxf4 Rxe7 47. axb5 axb5
19. Bg5 Bg4 Fine again! Fine says it is more drawish
And if Q,d3, . . .Rae8. [Ed.: But then U'hite in these endings to have a single passed .ft
plays 21. Bxf6 and Black is in bad shape. Per­ than to have two .fts to one, for reasons he
haps a slip ofthe pen.] Had White sacrificed explains. However, Black's W is now too
without first playing Bc2, Black could safely near for comfort.
have answered 19. Bg5 with ...Re6. 48. Bg7t Ke6
20. Rxf6! Bxd1 49. Re4t Kd5
21. Rxc6 Re1t 50. Rd4t Kc5
22. Kf2 Re2t 51. Rd2 Kb4
23. Kf1 Rxc2 52. Rc2 Rd3
24. Rxc5 Be2t 53. Be5 Kb3
25. Kg1 Rxc3 54. Rb2t Ka3
26. Rc7 b6 55. Rb1 b4
27. Re1 Rxc4 56. Rcl Ba2
Better was . ..Bxc4. The two white E\s 57. Ke2 Rd5
on the seventh would be ineffective here, 58. Bf6 Rd6!
and the A will now be pinned on e2 far 59. Bg7 f6
worse than it would have been on c4. The
ending is in any case very hard, with �s on
opposite colors. But after 27. .. Bxc4! 28. Ree7
h6 29. Bh4 Rd8! it is certainly a win.
28. Re7 h6
29. Bxh6 Bg4
30. Bd2 Be6
3 1. Rcl b5
32. Rb7 Rxclt
33. Bxcl Rc8
34. Bf4 Rc4 60. Rc8 Bd5
35. g3 a6 61. R£8 b3
36. Rb6 Bc8 62. Rxf6 b2!
37. h4 Rc2 63. Rxd6 Bc4t
38. Rd6 Kh7 The point. Queening would lose the
39. Rd2 Rc3 ¥!! .
40. Bd6 64. Ke3 b1=Q.
White's regrouping since Move 36 was and Black won.
the result of looking up Fine's Basic Chess Returning to the diagram, note that
Endings during the adjournment. White still had drawing chances with 60.
40. Kg6 BJB, e.g., 60... Rd4 61. Ke3! Rg4 62. Kj3! f5
41. Kf2 Kf5 63. RcB Kb2. Black will get his passed .ft to
42. Bb4 Rb3 the third rank, but to get it to the second he
43. Rd4 Be6 will have to give up his g- .ft . Black will win
44. Rf4t Ke5 the A, but White will have possibilities of

- 259 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection
arriving at § -versus- § and � which is a
'
difficult book draw.
(28)
Australian Correspondence
Championship (1948)
F. Crowl-C. Purdy
King's Gambit
The Limited Bishop's Gambit (LBG)
At New York 1924, Tartakover thrice
played the LBG, and Dr. Alekhine recom­
mended against it a certain line, adding,
"Unfortunately, however, one must appar­
ently wait a long time before this interesting
defense will be played . . . " He assumed that
the LBG would not be resurrected very
often, and from that day to this we have not
seen a single game in this opening, until the
following one, played in the 1948 Austra­
lian Correspondence Championship. The
LBG game given by "Chielamangus" in
Among These Mates was a brilliant piece of
analysis by Crowl, not an actual game.
1. e4 e5
2. f4 exf4
3. Be2
Alekhine wrote:
This unusual move is based upon
two ideas: first, the white Bishop,
in case Black defends the gambit
pawn by ...g5, can be played to £3,
which makes possible the devel­
opment of Ne2, thereby avoiding
the eventual attack of ...g4. Sec­
ondly, the counter move of ... d5, if
not made at once, is less forceful
than in the ordinary Bishop's Gam­
bit inasmuch as in this case the
Bishop is not directly attacked. One
consequence, among others, is that
Black cannot well play ...Nf6, on
account of e5, which-with White's
Bishop on c4-would be met by
- 260 -
...d5. For all that, this backward
maneuver of the Bishop is not to
be recommended . . .
3 . ... f5!
This was Alekhine's recommendation,
never tried at New York. It is curious how
two great masters can contradict each other
on openings. Alekhine remarks, "The reply
4. e5 cannot very well be considered on
account of 4... d6, etc." Tartakover, on the
contrary, in Die Hypermoderne Schachpartie,
published a year after New York 1924, says,
"The antiquated defense 3... j5 4. e5! d6 5.
d4, etc., gives White the advantage."
This complete contradiction called for
some patient analysis. Following on Tartak­
over's moves I considered 5... dxe5 6. dxe5
Q3d1 t 7. Bxdl Be6! 8. Bxf4 Nd7 9. Nf3 0-0-0.
Or in this, 8. Nf3 Nd7 9. Ng5 Ke7!;if now 10.
Bxf4, ... h6. In either case, White's .ft. on e5
becomes a fixed weakness, and one had to
conclude that while 4. e5 might be the least
evil for White, it should lose!
4. exf5 Qh4t
5. Kf1 d5
Alekhine stopped here, except to men­
tion that 6. Bh5f Kd8! leaves Black standing
decidedly better, "inasmuch as it would be
easier for him than his adversary to domi­
nate the f-pawn, in addition to which the
open f-flle would afford him a welcome
avenue for a direct attack on the white
King." Crowl avoids this line, but finds
none better.
6. Nc3 c6
Of course not . ..Nf6, as the it! needs
that square.
7. d4 Bd6
8. Bd3 Ne7
9. Qe2 0-0
10. Nf3 Qf6
For White, now it is only a choice of
evils.
1 1. g4 fxg3
 His Games

12. Bg5 Qf7 28. Bxh7t Kf7

13. Bxe7 Qxe7 29. exf8=Qt Kxf8
14. Qxe7 Bxe7 White has had this little jest and could
15. Re1 Bd6 now resign, seeing that it is a correspon­
16. Kg2 gxh2 dence game, but prolonged matters thus:
17. Nh4 Nd7 30. c3 Bf6 31. Ng6t Kf7 32. Nf2 Bf5 33.
18. Ne2 Nf6 Nh8t Ke6 34. Ng6 (forced) Kd6 35. Kf3
19. Ng3 Ng4 Bb1 36. a3 Kc5 37. Ke2 Bf5 38. Nf8 Kc4
20. Rhf1 Bd7 39. Bxf5 Nxf5 40. Kd2 Kb3 41. Kcl d4!
21. Kh3 h1=Qt! 42. cxd4 Bxd4 43. Nd3 g5 44. Ne6 g4 45.
A surprising move which appears to Resigns.
gain nothing. Better might appear simply Crawl fell victim to his love of bizarre
...Nh6 at once, since 22. Kxh2 leaves White openings.
pinned.
22. Nxh1 Nh6 (29)
23. Kg2 Rf7 Australian Championship (1951)
L. Endzelins-C. Purdy
English Opening

When, at the opening luncheon,

Now the point comes. White's W has
been virtually forced to g2 instead of h2,
blocking the retreat of his other 4), so that
Black now threatens ...Be7, forcing the win
of the second ft and thus turning White's
almost playable game into a hopeless loss.
White's next move attempts to sacrifice the
Exchange rather than the second ft , as the
two central fts (after ...Bxe5 dxe5) would
give White some vague counterchances.
24. Re5 Re7!!
This second surprise-a most paradoxi­
cal move, yet quite correct-lifts the game to
publication standard. If 25. Rxe7, ...Bxe7
and wins the f-ft , leaving White with no
semblance of a counterchance at all.
25. f6 Bxe5
26. fxe7 Bxd4
27. Rf8t Rxf8
Brisbane's acting Lord Mayor drew Round
15 from a hat, it meant that Roundl5 be­
came Round 1. Another dive into a hat
meant that the first-named player in every
pairing would have black instead of white.
This first (lucky dip) round is always the
most nerve-racking, at least for the writer,
whose confidence was not improved on
learning that he had to meet Endzelins, a
shade the strongest of the "new Australian"
masters on European results. This was the
first tournament game ever played between
one of these masters and a representative of
New South Wales, and merits publication
on that score.
I think Endzelins, also, was affected by
first-round "nerves." At any rate, I hoped
so, and chose what I meant to be a surprise
defense, so that his clock would start piling
up minutes as early in the game as possible.
1. c4 d6
2. d4 e5
Exchange of fts and Y!Js is bad for
White now, despite Black's forfeiture of
castling, as White's c4 becomes meaning-

- 26 1 -
 The Searchfor Chess Perftction

less and, worse still, a source of weakness. concluded that Endzelins was nervous about
The idea of Black's early ... e5 is to induce the complications that might result from 8.
Nj3, after which the King's Indian Defense b3, but as far as I can see White always
( ...g6, etc.) is so much the better for the comes out with the better game. Evidently
obstruction of White's f- ft . he did not like leaving his 'it'-side undevel­
3. Nc3! oped so long, but he can live through it, e.g.,
It is Black who gets the surprise! A 8. b3 Bg7 9. Bb2 0-0 10. Bg2 Re8 11. Nh3!
quick look convinced me that in this move Thus it seems that in this instance first­
of Endzelins' lay the refutation of 1... d6 round "nerves" affected my opponent more
(and surely 1. . d6ought not to be as good as
. than me.
other more commonsense moves?) because 8. ... Bg7
it keeps White's position as free as possible, Now it's too late for b3 and White's
simply ignoring Black's "threat" of bringing setup loses its point.
White's Yf1 under fire by ... exd4. 9. Nf3 0-0
3. ..• exd4 10. 0-0 Re8
Or 3... Nf6, when White could still 1 1. Ng5 Bf5
refrain from 4. Nj3 ( 4... Nbd7!) and play 4. 12. Re1 h6
g3! Then 4... exd4 would transpose into the 13. Nf3 Ne4
game. Black starts punching, and White is
4. Qxd4 Nc6 already worried by his clock.
5. Qd2! 14. Qd1 Nc5
Suddenly I remembered I had seen 15. Be3!
this before in the same or at least a similar Offering the Exchange for counterplay.
position. At first sight the Yf1 is ill placed, but I did not want this-was hoping for a steady
she will be beautifully posted after b3 and crush, but he would not play ball.
Bb2, protecting the fianchetto ,il-the usual 15. ... Bxb2
disability of a YIJ-fianchetto is that the A is 16. Bxh6 Ne5
"loose." A few players thought Endzelins Clearly bad to accept the offer yet.
was "losing time" with his Yf1 moves; some­ 17. Nxe5 Rxe5
times very strong players are astray on fun­ 18. h4! Re6
damentals. White has lost no time: he has
made two moves in developing his Y!J, but
Black has equally lost one move in develop­
ment by . .. exd4, and-what is worse-aban­
doned his ft center. The position had me
worried.
5. ... Nf6
6. g3 Be6
Threatening to equalize by ... d5.
7. Nd5! g6
8. Bg2? Still wrong to take, I thought. I much
This after very long thought-but it quite preferred to keep him dock-worried rather
spoils his game. Compulsory was 8. b3 and than grab wood and give him obviously
Bb2 before it was too late. Of course he good moves. What was his best now? Would
could have played b3 on Move 6, also. I anyone care to dig into the complications

- 262 -
 His Games

and see ifWhite still had good counterplay? etc.

19. Nf4 ReS 42. Re2! Nc5
20. Nd5 e6 43. ReSt Kg7
21. Ne3 Be4! 44. Nb3 Ne6
22. Bxe4 Nxe4 Trying to be clever. The swap was sim­
23. Rbl Bc3 pler.
Not ...Nc3? 24. Qs2. 45. Bb8 d3
24. Qb3 46. g4 f6
Not 24. Rf7 ?, as Black then wins the 47. Re7t Kf8
Exchange without parting with his �. 48. Rd7 Rxa2
24. •.. Bxel 49. Rxd3 Ke7
At last Black has won the Exchange on 50. h5 gxh5
his own terms. Both players were racing 51. gxh5 a5
now, up till Move 36. 52. f4 a4
25. Rxel Re6 53. Nd2 Ree2
26. Rbl b6 54. Nf3 Ral
27. Bf4 d5 55. Re3 Rhlt
28. Rdl ReS 56. Kg3 ReS!
29. exd5 exd5 And if 5Z Ba7, ...Rg8t 58. Kf2 Kf7
30. Qd3? threatening ...Nxf4.
Of course 30. Rxd5 QsB, when White 57. Nd4 Rg8t
has a ft for the Exchange. In his wild clock­ 58. Kf2 Rh2t
scramble White was evidently under some 59. Kf1 Rhlt
hallucination. Black hurriedly returns his !! to a light
30. Nc3 square, for at h2 it is under a masked attack
31. Rd2 Rc5 from the �.
32. Ng4 Ne4 60. Kf2 Kf7
33. Rdl d4 61. Rxe6 Rxb8
34. f3 Nc3 62. Re6 Rxh5
35. Rd2 Qd5 63. Re7t Kg6
36. e4 Qe4 64. Ne6 ReS
The clock race is over. White's posi­ To return the Exchange.
tion has deteriorated through his having to 65. Kf3 Rh7
play even faster than Black. The game again With two ;§s against !! and 4J, a !!
becomes interesting at Move 41, with swap is the heart's desire.
White's ingenious bid for counterplay in a 66. f5t Kh6
losing position. 67. Resigns
37. Nf2 Q?cd3 The onlookers broke into applause,
38. Nxd3 Ra5 presumably atleast partly for White's plucky
39. Ncl Ra4 and ingenious fight in a losing position.
40. Kg2 Re6
41. Kh3 Nxe4
White has offered this ft just to get
some play. Steiner suggested declining it
and simply piling ;§s on with .. .Rcc4, ...Ra3,

- 263 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

(3 0) 0-0 Nxe2f 10. Qfe2 a5 White would have

Australian Championship (1951) played h3 as a preparation for Be3 in any
C. Purdy-R. Zile case, transposing into the game.
King's Indian Defense Fine says somewhere that 8 Nd4 is
•••

"refuted" by 9. 0-0 c5 10. dxc6 bxc6 11. Nxd4

1. d4 Nf6 exd4 12. Qxd4 as in Ragosin-Chistyakov,
2. c4 g6 Moscow 1939. The move refuted is not 8...
3. Nc3 Nd4, but the reckless follow-up 9... c5!??
Inviting the complicated Griinfeld (3 ... Masters with aggressive styles, like Chistya­
d5). Easier is 3. g3. kov, inevitably overstep the bounds of dis­
3. Bg7 cretion occasionally. Instead, Black should
4. e4 d6 continue like Zile here, and like Dr. Learner
5. g3 0-0 in Goldstein-Learner, Australian Champi­
6. Bg2 e5! onship, Melbourne 1948-49: 9. 0-0 Nxe2f!
Correct. No need for ... Nbd7 first. 10. Qxe2 a5 11. bJ Nd7 (still better was 11..
.

7. Nge2 Nc6 b6, keeping as long as possible the option of

Perhaps better still is Z .. exd4 B. Nxd4 . ..Ng4if Be3) 12. Be3 b6 13. a3 Nc5 14. Rjb1
Nc6; and if 9. Nc2, ...Be6. Indeed, although it f5 15. f3J4 16. Bfl Bd7; difficult game for
is seldom played, probably the best answer both sides, which Black, in this case, won.
to 6... e5 is an immediate Z d5! 9. ... Nxe2
8. d5 Nd4 Quite simply! Black has a slightly freer
game than in a normal King's Indian.
10. Qxe2 a5
11. 0-0 Nd7
12. Be3 b6
13. Qd2 Nc5
14. Bh6 f5
15. Bxg7 Kxg7
16. exf5 gxf5
This is the routine recapture in the
normal King's Indian, but here 16... Bxf5
Dr. Learner, of Melbourne, former Bir­ was better because it carries a direct threat
mingham Champion, won two fine games ( ...Bd3), and would thus delay White's [4
in Australiawith this Russian countergambit. and give, in our opinion, equal chances.
Here's one-it could happen to you, if you 17. f4 e4
accepted the .ft : 9. Nxd4 exd4 10. Ne2 (if Giving Black a superficially attractive
Qfd4 ?, Nxe4!) Re8 11.f3 c5 12. dxc6 bxc6 13. position; but the passed .ft is easily block­
Nxd4 Qb6 14. Nb3 Ba6 15. Qc2 d5 76. c5 aded, and White's .'£) obtains a splendid
Qd8 77. Bg5 dxe4 18.Jxe4 Bd3 19. Qd2 Nxe4 post. But if Black allowsfxe5, he gets "hang­
20. Bxd8 Nxd2t 21. Kxd2 Raxd8 22. Rag1 ing .ft s" and is far from happy.
Bc4t White resigns (C.G. Watson-A. 18. Nb5! Ba6
Learner, Interclub, Melbourne 1950). 19. Nd4 Qf6
9. h3 If ...Bxc4?? Black loses a piece: easy
Obviously more precise is 9. 0-0, as it exercise for students.
reserves more options. However, after 9. 20. b3 Rae8

- 264 -
 His Games

21. Qe3 Bc8 Though White may never succeed in play­

22. a3 Nd3 ing it, he must try at least to threaten it.
23. Rfdl h5 34. Rh7
Bastion against an ultimate g4. 35. cxb6 cxb6
24. Bfl Nc5 36. Qxb6 Resigns
Must you go, so early! The game was to be adjourned, and
25. b4 Nb7 Zile, displaying both realism and chivalry,
26. Be2 Rh8 adjudged it too hopeless to warrant drag­
27. Kh2 Bd7 ging his opponent back to finish it.
28. Racl Ref8 After 36... axb4 37. axb4 Kg8 the sim­
plest is 3 8. Q§3, winning a second it while
still retaining an attack (if 38 ... Re8, 39.
Rc4).

(3 1 )
Australian Championship {1951)
J. Hanks-C. Purdy
Dutch Defense

This game contained some of the best

An instructive position. It looks pretty moves (ifyou like '1!¥ sacrifices), and a few of
hard for White to do anything. But look the very worst, in the whole tournament.
more closely. White is positioned for a deci­ For sheer nervous tension, both players
sive breakthrough on the '�!¥-wing ifBlack would probably admit that it was the great­
moves his 'tl. That means Black's ltl is tied, est nightmare of their chess careers.
so that on the �-side he is a piece down. 1. d4
Therefore, by patient regrouping (calling Like Rubinstein, Hanks has always
perhaps for l==!, s/g2 and fl, A/dl, and �/ stuck to this. It is a policy that reduces the
gl), White should at last be able to break on element of chance.
the �-side with g4, and, having an extra 1. ... f5
piece there, probably win. I had played this only twice in my life,
29. Rd2 h4? losing both times. I hoped that in the many
This oversight makes it easy. Zile, who intervening years I had learned how to play
was usually too meek in this tourney, shows it, though the aberration at Moves 8 and 9
fight at the wrong moment. appears to belie this.
30. g4 fxg4 2. g3 Nf6
3 1. Bxg4 Bxg4 3. Bg2 e6
32. hxg4 Nd8 4. Nf3 Be7
Of course not ... f!!f4?? That's what 5. 0-0 0-0
Zile missed on Move 29. 6. c4 c6
33. Nf5t Kf7 7. Nc3 d5
34. c5 8. b3 Nbd7
When the eat's away! And note that 9. Qc2 Kh8
this move is the one that White keeps be­ Both players suffered the same slight
fore his eyes from the moment he plays d5. mental aberration. Black has played .. . Nbd7

- 265 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

prematurely, instead of .. QsB first. White,

. part of a plan he never carried out, I changed
however, both on his 9th and lOth moves, my plan and resuscitated the �. I had
misses Ng5 forcing the � home again. Of previously envisaged ...Bc6 and ...Rd8-d7,
course White's � would not be well placed leading this t=l to the w-side by devious
at gS, and the "gain of time" in develop­ paths.
ment would be illusory, but by the immedi­ 27. Rc1 Rgg8
ate withdrawal to h3 (best!) White would My previous plan had been simply to
produce a position traditionally good for protect the key squares of the c-file (mean­
operation against a Stonewall. ing c8 and c7, of course) with the minor
10. Bf4 Qe8 pieces. My new plan was the more ortho­
11. Rad1 Ne4 dox one of challenging the file outright.
12. e3 Qh5 28. Kg2?
13. Nd2 g5 Loss of time. The move was Kfl, so
14. Bc7 Bd6 that White need not fear the opening of the
15. Bxd6 Nxd6 g-file. Both players were playing rapidly
16. f3 f4 now, having consumed much time over the
Prevents White from getting a colossal very difficult earlier moves. I had the feel­
advantage in space by e4-e5 and f4. ing that Hanks was losing grip slightly, and
17. e4 Qfl that my position was developing better than
Must hold dS. it deserved.
18. Rfe1 Rg8 28. h5
19. cxd5 cxd5 29. Rh1 Qe7
20. g4 Nf8 30. Kf2 Rcf8
21. e5 Ne8 Another change of plan, perhaps opti­
This � is buried alive, like a character mistic but justified by results. Bitterly re­
in an Edgar Alien Poe story. You'll see that gretting my omission of 23... Nh4, I had
he has no possible future on the W-side. I feared I might have to close up the w-side
visualized using him purely defensively, i.e., forever by ...h4 to stop h4. But in view of
for guardingthe important square c7, where White's slight vacillation, it now seemed I
White might otherwise force an entry if might make the play on that wing.
Black massed on the W-side. Thus he might 31. Ne2 Be8
have pulled his weight, even though but a 32. Qc3 Na6
corpse. White's 20th, of course, was to bar This � is now in sight of a real square
him from fS. at last, a thing that formerly seemed only a
22. Bfl Ng6 dream. After playing a4, White could have
23. Bd3 Bd7 gone with b4 and kept the � out. During his
I was anxious to make up leeway in race against the clock he has somehow al­
development; but stronger was 23. . Nh4!,
. lowed Black to get a footing on both wings!
merely for the purpose of forever barring 33. Rcg1?
h4, while Black could prepare his own ... h5 More vacillation. White cedes his pres­
at leisure. sure on the c-file without giving the )::l a
24. Bxg6! Rxg6 useful post on the w-side. Apparently, in
25. a4 Rc8 his hurry, he had not yet thought of the
26. Qd3 Nc7 ingenious plan which he embarks upon next
Mter White's 25th, which looks like move.

- 266 -
 His Games
33. ••• Rg7
34. h3
For doubling on the h-file in prepara­
tion for h4, or alternatively to force Black to
block the �-side by ...h4. But it's just too
late; Black now has the bit between his
teeth.
34. �4
35. Rh2 Bg6
36. Rghl Rh7
White now had to seal. Should he play
passively and hope for the best, or boldly?
Either course was risky. He chooses the
latter.
37. h4!? hxg4
38. fxg4 £3!
Black, if he wants to win, must answer
boldness with boldness. However, my brief
adjournment analysis had not shown me
the way to follow up this ft sacrifice, and
Hanks was surprised when I took about an
hour over my next two moves. Search as I
would, every line seemed to fail, until sud­
denly the winning combination burst upon
me. The grandmasters see these things quick­
ly, and that's their main secret.
39. Nx£3 Nd3t
This unpins White, and is good only
because of the combination involved. White
now has a choice of two moves, both need­
ing calculation. One is 40. Ke3, which we'll
look at later.
40. Kg3! Be4!
For a long time this pin had seemed
futile because ofthe obvious reply, by which
White wins a second ft and hits a .§ .
41. Nxg5
- 267
41. ... Qxg5!!
This gets two marks only because it's
spectacular. It's not at all deep, and the play
after 42. hxg5 is easy to see when you're told
it's there, but not so easy on Move 39, ¥/1
sacrifices being so rare in practical play.
The same temporary ¥/1 sacrifice oc-
curs after 40. Ke3. Thus 40... Be4 41. Nxg5
Bxh1 42. Q::d3 (if 42. Nxh7, ... Q::h 7 43. Rxh 1
Q§4f, etc.) f}Jg5f!!, and this time th e play is
even simpler.
Feeling rather smug about the ¥/1 sacri­
fice, I was expecting a babel of excited
whispering to burst forth among the on­
lookers. But Hanks-the cad!-hardly gave
them 30 seconds to begin taking it in before
his large fist crashed onto the board to steal
my thunder with . . .
42. Qxd3!
The spectators were probably puzzled
how two players who could ponder so long
over dull regroupings of pieces could fling
away their ¥/Js instantaneously and with
gay abandon. (Black had made his previous
move almost before Hanks had quitted the
4) .)
However, I was so taken aback by
Hanks' swashbuckling gesture that I now
failed to see that I had within my power a
means of making him gnash his teeth in
impotent rage with still a third ¥/1 sacrifice,
42... Q,xg4f!! However, it leads only to a
winning f(s' ending and requires calcula­
tion at that ( 43. Kxg4 Rg7t 44. Kh3 Bxd3 45.
Ng3 Rf3 46. Rg2 Be4! 4Z Rhg1 Rxb3 and
-
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection

Black has regained his ft and must win feverish speed, and perhaps it was hard to
more). So even had I seen 42... Qfg4f I pause and think.
would not have played it, as I was short of 60. Rcl Qb3t
time and wanted a line with lots and lots of 61. Rc3 Qbl
checks in it, which I obtained with . . . This is where the second tempo comes
42. Qg6 in.
43. Qe3 Rf3t 62. h5 Qe4t
44. Qxf3 Bxf3 63. Kd2
45. Kxf3 Qe4t This is where the incident occurred,
46. Kf2 Rf7t described under "Misguided Chivalry"; then
47. Kel Qblt followed Black's second "panic move." Sev­
48. Kd2 Qb2t eral moves give a better chance than the
49. Kel Qxb3 text, e.g., 63... b5.
A sign that my brain was already crack­ 63. ... Qf5?
ing under the strain, as I missed the obvious 64. g6
chance of repeating my last two moves Black now sealed, in what has become
before taking the ft . This omission nearly a losing position.
cost me the game, as things went.
50. g5 Qb4t
51. Kdl Qxa4t
52. Kd2 Qb4t
53. Ke3 Qb3t
54. Kd2 Qb2t
55. Ke3 Qa3t
56. Kd2 Qa5t
57. Ke3 Qa3t
58. Kd2 Qa2t
59. Ke3 Qc4??? Although depressed after throwing
A glance at the score sheet would have away a win and perhaps a draw, I took
shown me that I could still check again at enormous trouble over my sealed move,
b3. Then, after 60. Kd2, there is a quick win trying to find one which seemed to give
by 60. . Rf3. But presupposing I was too
. least opportunity for clear-cut analysis, did
short of time for such niceties, and wanted a not look very good, and yet was not bad. I
move to change the position, moving the Y/!1 have several times followed such tactics
was utterly absurd; obviously, the thing to with success when sealing in bad positions.
do was to make some move of future value, Theoretically best was probably ...Rg7. I
e.g., 59 ... b5. If 60. Rc7, ... b4 with an easy chose . . .
win. But of all possible Y/!1 moves, the text 64. ... Rd7
was the worst, as White can now hit the Y/!1 Success crowned my efforts, insofar as
with a developing move, gaining two vital Hanks, on resuming, consumed about 35
tempi, certainly assuring a draw, theoreti­ minutes over his next two moves; they were,
cally, and with winning chances. As I had however, both excellent.
more than 1.5 minutes, there seems little 65. Rhh3! b5
excuse for such a panic move. But I had During the adjournment I had inexpli­
made my last dozen moves, perforce, at cably overlooked White's 65th move. My

- 268 -
 His Games

blindness at least saved me from a defeatist on till Move 90, when he was mated.
outlook. I was lucky to save this game, let alone
66. Rc£3 to win it-though had White won it, he
If it goes to g3, as was suggested, then would have claimed to be even luckier. Of
. . .Rg7. What then? such games one can say the loser won it
66..•• Qg5t once, but the winner twice. Such a pro­
67. Nf4? longed war of nerves I have never been
This 4:'1 does want to come here, but through before, and Hanks felt the same.
the ,!":( should go in front of it first. The more
patient 67. Kd1 is a winner. Could White (3 2)
still have forced a win after the text move? Australian Championship {1951)
67. Rc7 C. Purdy-L. Steiner
68. Rhg3 Qh6 Q,ueen 's Gambit Declined
69. Kel
An annotator suggested Kd3, threaten­ 1. d4 Nf6
ing Nxe6. However, 69... b4 (for ...Rc3f) 2. c4 e6
leaves things not very clear. 3. Nc3 d5
69..•• b4 In Europe it is notorious that Steiner is
70. Ne2 Kg8 less happy with Black against d4 than e4,
White, realizing his mistake on Move hence White's choice. Steiner's third move
67, has-rather unwisely-retracted it, at the surprised me, as he rarely plays the Ortho­
cost of two tempi which Black has utilized dox Defense; but it was logical enough in
to advance a passed ft dangerously. the state of the score, there being no point
71. Rh3 a5 in striving at all hazards for a full point-as
72. Rf6 Steiner usually does.
This position would be terrific for White 4. Bg5 Be7
had he obtained it earlier. Now he should 5. N£3 h6
not even draw, but Black, short of time, Sensing that this might come, I had
decides to play safe. He could afford 72. .. moved the 4:'1 (instead of the routine 5. e3)
a4! so as to have the option of playing e4 in one
72. b3!? hop. Of course, Black could have trans­
73. Rxb3 Qxh5 posed into the normal line by castling first
74. Rfi3 a4 ( 5... 0-0 6. e3 and then 6... h6, when White's
Hanks, who was "rattled" now in much best is certainly 7. Bh4). Even as it was, I
the same way as I had been near the end of played 6. Bxf6 only because of the score; it
the second session, now made the move I seemed right to "mix it," to gamble, to get
had hardly dared to hope for. With 75. Ra3 out of stereotyped lines as soon as possible,
he had good drawing chances. come what might.
75. Rh3?? axb4 6. Bxf6 Bxf6
The third ¥11 sacrifice in the game, this 7. e4 dxe4!
time obvious. Unerringly selecting the one way to
76. Rxh5 b2 attempt to capitalize on his two �s-by
And Black won. avoiding a fixed ft position even though it
As Black had 14 moves to make in meant retarded development.
about three minutes, White naturally played 8. Nxe4 Be7

- 269 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

9. Bd3 Nd7 tended to move with almost nervous haste.

Injudicious would be 9... Bh4t 10. Ke2, The text move is wrong because it shuts the
putting White still further ahead in develop­ A away; he can be happy only if Black
ment. Black would be too far in arrears to exchanges fts. White has an advantage in
attempt to hurt White's �. space, but, with two As to cope with, it
10. 0-0 b6 usually pays to try and swap one off or at
1 1. Qe2 Bb7 least neutralize it. Therefore 20. Be4!I should
12. Rad1 0-0 then prefer White's game. As it is, the initia­
13. Ne5 Qe8 tive passes to Black.
Black is cramped. White can claim 20. Rfe8
excellent compensation for his opponent's 21. Rfe1 Bh4!
"two Bishops." 22. g3 Be7
14. f4 Rd8 23. h3 h5!
15. Bc2 f5! 24. Qf3 Qg7
Mter long thought, Black selects by far 25. Kh2 h4
the best method of getting someplace-stu­ 26. g4 Rf8
dents must have noticed how often this idea 27. Re2 Bg5
occurs in Botvinnik's games. If the "weak­ 28. Bc2 Qh6
ness" of Black's e- i cannot be turned to 29. gxf5 gxf5
account, the scheme must be good. 30. Rf1 Rg8
16. Nc3 Nxe5 3 1. Qf2 Rg7
The point is that if 77. Q3e5 keeping
,

the possibility of a frontal attack on the e- i ,

17. .. Bf6 and White's d- i becomes at least
as weak as Black's e- i ( 18. Q3c7?? would
lose the '(1:{ to 18... Rd7).
17. fxe5 Kh8
18. a3
In case Black answered d5 with ...Bb4.
18. Qf7
19. d5 g6
A position difficult to size up. Bowman

��
%'?.
.t.·�: �: �
··· · !���
� - - �
· �
.. gave an excellent popular discussion of it in
the Courier-Mail. It certainly looks healthy
�����,���
�� :
for Black, with his two As and White's
"�r�·� i� . . .
� �;� �
� exposed �. Against this, all that White can
boast of is his great command of space in

�\�·�A������ the center. This is always a nebulous sort of

·� r� r�·
asset, impossible to evaluate with precision.
� � � ?� Another example occurred in Botvin­
nik-Bronstein, 1951. There, too, Black
20. Bb3? (Bronstein) appeared to have a splendid
White was playing unusually rapidly; attack on White's � yet White should have
'
being desperately anxious not to get short drawn. Quoting our note: "This is not sur­
of time against Steiner-just for this once-I prising, since, despite all Black's ingenuity,

- 2 70 -
 His Games

White always had a little central superiority
to offset the insecurity of his King." That
also applies here.
Black's lastmove, threatening to double
B:s, looks very strong.
32. dxe6!
This undoubtedly came as a surprise to
Steiner. At first it looks bad. White deliber­
ately abandons his pretty central phalanx
and-worse still-removes the obstruction to
Black's second �. In particular, the move
invites the fairly obvious combination 32...
Bg2. A postmortem showed, however, that
after 33. Bxj5 Bxf7 34. Q3fl White does not
stand badly; he has two fts for the Ex­
change (doubled but central) and his 'tl can
come in well.
The strategical idea behind White's
White a terribly difficult game.
This is a good illustration of the fallacy
of judging positions on first appearances.
After throwing away his attractive ft pha­
lanx, White appeared to have made his
position worse, whereas he had in fact saved
the situation-that's not counting Black's
blunder, which, of course, alters things com­
pletely.
33. Qxf5 Rdg8
34. Be4 Bxe4
35. Nxe4 Bglt
36. Khl Bd4
37. Nf6
Sealed. I saw a steady win this way and
was too tired to work out the pretty smash
that Baay demonstrated afterwards by 37.
Qf6! Qjt5 38. Q3g7f!! Kxg7 (after . Rxg7 the
..

abandonment of his ft center is that it gives win is obvious) 39. Rg2 f Kh6 40. Rf6f Kh7
life to his two minor pieces. His 4), from 47. Rflf Kh6 42. Rh7f!! Kxh7, and now
being a mere defender of a ft , now has White wins back his B: and ¥11 with succes­
access to d5; his � instead of "biting gran­ sive checks.
'
ite," bears upon a real target. It's just a 37. Rg5
question of whether White can survive the 38. Nxg8 Rxf5
momentary insecurity, and it seems that he 39. Nxh6 Rxflt
can. But if White waited until Black doubled 40. Kg2 Rglt
B:s, it would be too late. Shakespeare, as 41. Kh2 Rg6
usual, sums it up: "To jump a body with a 42. Nf5 c5
dangerous physic, that's sure of death with­ If 42... Bc5, 43. b4!and mustwin the �.
out it." 43. Nxh4 Rxe6
However, the move was not so good as 44. N£3 Kg7
to deserve the windfall it actually produced. 45. Kg3 Kf8
32..•. Be3? 46. Kf4 Rh6
A case of "chess blindness." The � 47. h4 Ke7
itself cannot be taken, but Black has some­ 48. Kg5 Rh8
how missed the obvious counter or miscal­ 49. h5 Rf8
culated it, and his game is ruined. 50. Kg4 Rg8t
Now to return to the position one more 51. Kf4 Rf8t
move before the diagram, i.e., after 37. Qfl. 52. Ke4 Rg8
After a postmortem, Steiner finally con­ 53. h6 Rh8
cluded that he ought to have prevented 32. 54. Nxd4 cxd4
dxe6 by the quiet withdrawal 37... Be7! A 55. Rh2 Resigns.
hard move to play, because 32. dxe6 looks
at first sight something to invite rather than
prevent. But it certainly would have given

- 27 1 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

(33) 1 1. d4 (tc7
Australasian Championship Match 12. Bg5
{1952), 4th Match Game Suddenly bursting from super-ortho­
C. Purdy-0. Sarapu doxy into the unorthodox. Usual is 12. Nbd2,
Ruy Lopez with a snake-in-grass development. The idea
of the text move is "to develop the Qside
Two down and seven to play looked to quickly and if possible to bring the Queen's
most people a gloomy prospect for Aus­ Bishop back to g3 with pressure on Black's
tralia's emissary. Twenty years ago I had the e-pawn."
idea that such a disadvantage in a short 12. ... cxd4
match between two masters meant certain Black hypnotizes himself into an illogi­
defeat, because the leader "only needed to cal move, opening a file onto his ¥11 . It is
play for draws." Then, in 1934, came the good play after 12. Nbd2, but not here where
Botvinnik-Flohr match {12 games) in which White is developing quickly. In the World
Botvinnik was two down with only five to Correspondence Championship Dr. Balogh
play. Did Botvinnik gamble wildly? No, he played against me 12... h6 13. BM Nc6,
coolly played the French Defense in Game which Lajos Steiner considered to be Black's
8. Drawn two down and four to play! Then strongest answer.
he won the 9th and lOth games, and, wind­ 13. cxd4 Nc6
ing up with two draws, halved the match. 14. Nbd2 exd4
Yet I could not understand how such a Black cannot escape the slight but tell­
thing could happen between grandmasters ing consequences of his 12th move.
until long afterwards, when experience of Black could delay White's seizure of
top-line correspondence chess convinced the c-file by 14... Nb4 15. Bb 1, but his own 4:)
me that "machine-like accuracy" in over­ would be out of play, leaving White an
the-board play was impossible. At last I saw absolutely free hand in the center.
why it was so hard to "play for a draw," 15. Racl
especially with Black, and saw how easily it Developing and thus avoiding my mis­
was for Flohr to fail to win that match. take in Game 3, rushing to recapture a weak
Consequently, it was not so much the score .ft. . Here if 15. Nb3, ...Nb4 is most annoying.
that worried me as the problem, could I 15. ... (tb6
play better chess? If 15... Be6 16. Nb3 Bxb3 1Z Bxb3 QjJ6,
Now in the fourth game, I played good either 18. Bd5 {simplest) or 18. Rc2 regains
moves, but not fast enough; a very good the .ft. with a big advantage.
save by Sarapu. 16. Nb3 ReS
1. e4 e5 17. Nbxd4 Nxd4
2. Nf3 Nc6 18. (txd4
3. Bb5 a6 I felt that either recapture should win,
4. Ba4 Nf6 and preferred the simpler. Sarapu feared
5. 0-0 Be7 Nxd4 more. The text move, by the way,
6. Re1 b5 follows the general principle, recapture with
7. Bb3 d6 a developing move.
8. c3 0-0 18. (txd4
9. h3 Na5 19. Nxd4 h6
10. Bc2 c5 20. Bf4 Nh5

- 272 -
 His Games

21. Be3 maintaining a blockader, a la Nimzovich:

Gain, not loss, of time, as Black's 4J 28. e5! Bc5! 29. Be3 Nd7! ( ...Re8is worse) 30.
has been lured from the center. Nc6 (now) Re8 31. Bxd5 Nxe5 32. Bxc5 Nxf3f
21. Bb7 33. Bxj3 Rxe 1 f 34. Kf2, and White has two
22. Nf5 B£8 pieces for � and ft , which is advantageous
23. f3 Rac8 here because he has the As, and the three
24. Bb3 Nf6 minor pieces can combine. If 34... Rc1, 35.
Bd4! Be6 36. a3 Kf8 37. Bc3, and Black has
an extremely difficult and perhaps losing
game, with his � rather bottled and his
a- ft rather weak.
28. Re8
29. e5 Bb7
30. Rcl Nd7
31. Bxd5 Nxe5!
The point of Black's well calculated
defense. Although his game seems only to
Theoretically, White has a winning hang together by bits of string, it does hold.
position, and without any obvious errors by 32. Bxe5 Bxc6
Black after his 14th move. This vindicates 33. Rxc6 Rxe5
White's judgment on Move 18. Practically, 34. Be4 a5
White did not have a winning game at all, 35. Kf1 g6!
as he had played too slowly and now had 21 An amateur would have played 35...
moves to make in a quarter of an hour, not Rc5 to get the �s off, thinking thus to make
quite enough for the accurate play still re­ the draw surer; but it would in fact make it
quired. Here I wanted to play 25. Bd4!, harder, White being well ahead in � devel­
clearly a powerful centralization, but some­ opment, which is more important than any­
how 25... Nd7 seemed to me an adequate thing else in opposite-A endings, e.g., 36.
reply. I failed to see that it could be refuted Rxc5 Bxc5 37. Ke2 Kj8 38. Kd3 Ke7 39. Bc6 b4
by 26. Bxg7!, a combination pointed out by 40. Kc4 Kd6 41. Be8f6 42. Kb5 gaining a .ft.
the backroom boys, and absolutely deci­ and at least some excuse for continuing
sive, as students should verify as a valuable play.
exercise. Instead, I attacked the d- .ft. . This 36. Rc8 Kg7
was less logical. The important thing is to 37. a3 Be7
ensure that Black can never safely play Drawn by agreement.
...d5; Black should thus die by slow torture. It was a mistake to say, as many did,
25. Bf4 Red8! that White "should have won." A player
26. Rxc8 Bxc8 who gets short of time is always taking a
27. Nd4 d5! risk. It is good luck if he continues to find
28. Nc6 the best moves, rather than bad luck if he
A move hard to avoid under time pres­ doesn't.
sure, as the obvious 28. e5 seems so well met
by 28... Bc5. However, this was actually
White's last chance to win, which is very
instructive as showing the importance of

- 2 73 -
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
(34)
Australasian Championship Match
(1952), 5th Match Game
0. Sarapu-C. Purdy
Sicilian Defense
This was the game in which I took the
advice given by CJ.S. Purdy in a lecture at
Morrinsville. The results were such that, as
Spielmann said when he suddenly went
over to the d- it opening and achieved the
greatest success of his career (second at
Carlsbad 1929), "I myselfwas almost speech­
less."
It may be of interest to some that, since
a score of two down and only six to play,
and the Black pieces to come, seemed to
demand some new form of preparation, I
went to a cocktail party the night before the
game. It is important to time these things
well; years of experience are necessary in
order to judge exactly at what point, if any,
in a chess event a cocktail party may be
attended with good results.
1. e4 c5
2. N£3 Nc6
3. d4 cxd4
4. Nxd4 g6!
This is what I call the Uninhibited
Dragon. Normally, to avoid the Maroczy
"Bind" (5. c4) Black prepares the way with
4... Nf6to force 5. Nc3. That in turn makes it
necessary for him to play ... d6(to prevent e5
hitting the �). Yet Black wishes to play ...d5
ultimately, so ... d6loses time. I have always
suspected that the Maroczy Bind is a bit of a
"have."
If the Maroczy Bind is okay for Black,
quite obviously the best way of playing the
Dragon is the one adopted here.
5. Nc3
Sarapu suggested either 5. Nb3 or 5. f4
as better. In either case, the advantage of
delaying ...Nfti would still be evident.
5. ... Bg7
- 2 74 -
6. Be3
Certainly Nb3 is better here (see note
to Move 7).
6. ... Nf6!
Black no longer fears 7. Nxc6 bxc6 8. e5
Ng8 because White has, in a sense, lost a
tempo, in that his Be3 does not fit in with the
defense of his outpost it . If 9. Bf4, ... Qg5
just about wins. If 9. f4, ... d6.
7. f3
This idea against the Dragon (Nd5 in
view) is better with the ¥11-A at home, pro­
tecting the b- it for the time being. Better
now was 7. Be2 and 0-0, but Black would
. . . 0-0 and free his game by . . .d5with at least
easy equality. In the Dragon, ...d5 usually
equalizes even ifplayed in two steps. Black's
idea in this game is to play it in one step.
7. 0-0
8. Nb3 d5!
9. exd5 Nb4
10. Qd2
Sarapu could have gained a lot of clock
time here by playing 10. Bc4, the answer to
which I had not worked out-1 merely felt
that 8... d5had to be right. The only answer
to 10. Bc4 is 10... BJ5 (I intended that any­
way) 11. Nd4 Qf8!This move is not obvious,
but regains the it with advantage in all
variations, e.g., 12. Bb3 Rd8 13. g4!? Nfxd5
14. Nxd5 Nxd5 15. Bxd5 Rxd5 16. gxf5 Bxd4
17. Bxd4 Q3f5 and Black must regain the
piece with a winning game.
White's actual plan, of¥!1-side castling,
is positionally very attractive, but all posi­
tional ideas must be checked against pos­
sible combinations.
10. Bf5
1 1. Nd4 Nfxd5
12. Nxd5 Nxd5
13. Nxf5 gxf5
 His Games

(shortest) way to win is the one that gives

the opponent rope-to hang himself.
18. Bd3
Virtually forced, else he might as well
resign at once.
18. Qxh1
19. Qg5t Kh8
20. Qxe7 f6!
21. Bxf5 Qxh2
22. Bxc8 Qe5t
14. 0-0-0?? The point.
There must be something fatally easy 23. Qxe5 fxe5
about this blunder. I showed the position to Because now White can play neither
several strong players, and they all chose Bxb7??, losing the .,\},, nor Bj5??( ...Rxj5 and
castling for White! Bad luck for Sarapu that ft queens). Therefore he must lose a ft in
his h- ft was not on h3, as 0-0-0 would then addition to the Exchange, and can make no
have been, instead of a blunder, a move of fight.
extraordinary brilliance. 24. Be6 Rxf3
A curious feature is that White has, in 25. Kcl Rf2
any case, no quite satisfactory move. Mter 26. Kd1 Kg7
14. c3 Qg5! (Sarapu) Black is threatening to 27. a4 Kf6
sacrifice his 4), and White's best defense 28. Bc8 b6
then is 15. Bh6, but after 15... f4! (Sarapu) 29. a5 Kg5
16. Bxg7 Kxg7 it is clear that White is at a 30. c4 Rf4
serious disadvantage, no longer having the 3 1. Be6 Rxg4
two ..\ls as partial compensation. In a corre­ 32. Resigns.
spondence game, Black could consider him­
self in a winning position. (35)
14..•• Nxe3 Australasian Championship Match
15. Qxe3 Bxb2t! 6th Match Game
Obvious, of course; but before playing C. Purdy-0. Sarapu
it, Black had to make sure White could not Ruy Lopez
retaliate with an "immortal," i.e., routine
sacrifice of two �s. Once the spectators had In some ways the most interesting game
seen ...Bxb2f, most of them probably won­ of the match. It had the spectators puzzled
dered why Black spent several minutes over from start to finish; and even Sarapu, just
it. after the game, confessed that he could not
16. Kxb2 Qxd1 see where he had started to go wrong. That
17. g4 Rac8! was before he had studied it, of course. For
I worked out that the quickest way to my part, it was the best Lopez I can remem­
win was to compel White, now, to try an ber playing over the board, not counting
"immortal," having first made absolutely some wins against weaker opposition. It
sure that it was unsound. Thus, one more takes two to make a genuinely good game.
principle, "destroy counterchances," goes 1. e4 e5
by the board. Very often the most artistic 2. N£3 Nc6

- 275 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

3. Bb5 a6 As the game goes, this appears to be a

4. Ba4 d6 loss of time, but AL. Fletcher in the New
5. c3 Bd7 Zealand Chessplayer showed that had Black
6. Bb3 continued with 75... Na5 instead of the way
I had not prepared against the Steinitz he does, the value of the text move, putting
Defense Deferred, and wished to avoid pre­ pressure on the e- it , would have been evi­
pared lines. The text move has some point, dent.
inasmuch as Black cannot immediately play 15. ... Be6
...Nf6 (because of Ng5). Nevertheless, there 16. Nh2!
can be only one really good move, 6. d4. If With Black's A no longer able to go to
6... Nge7, then 7. Bb3, threatening Ng5, is b4 (after ...Na5), White embarks on a highly
strong. Steinitzian central setup- its on e4 and c3-
6. g6 an extremely difficult one to assail.
7. d4 Bg7 16. Rad8
8. Bg5 Nf6! 17. Nhf1 b5
9. dxe5! 18. f3 Na5
Decidedly best. It prevents Black's fi­ By ...b4, Black might give White an
anchetto � from blossoming out, and also isolated c- it , but as he would get a weak
rules out a frontal attack on White's e- it . a- it himself it would not help much, and
9. ... dxe5 meanwhile 79. Bj2would worry Black, since
There was much to be said for 9... . .. Q95 would be spoiled by Nc4.
Nxe5, and here we have an additional virtue 19. Bf2 Qc6
in 6. Bb3. With White's � still on a4 Black 20. Bxe6 Rxe6
would certainly have played ...Nxe5, facing 21. Ne3 Red6
White with a freeing exchange of �s (free­
ing Black).
10. Nbd2 h6!
Facing White with a difficult decision:
h4 or e3? I have not made up my mind yet,
but incline to e3.
1 1. Bh4 0-0
At least Black should reserve the op-
tion of . . . 0-0-0, which would make the ad-
vance ...g5 a Good Thing. Therefore 77...
Qs7. The onlookers, I heard afterwards, al­
12. Qe2 Qe7 most all thought Black's position very strong
13. h3 here, and Sarapu himself was inclined to
To force Black to play ...g5 at once view it fairly optimistically. I had been un­
(with some weakening effect on his castled der the impression ever since Move 14 that
<;f;l) or else to abandon it entirely, because my position was superior. This seems about
once White is allowed to play g4 his � can right. The illusion of Black's advantage is
go to g3 without fear of .. Nh5.
. created by his formidable doubled )::'! s, as
13. Rfe8 compared with White's, which are still in
14. g4! Qc5 the corners. But the latter trouble can be
15. Bg3 rectified in one move. Less obvious is the

- 2 76 -
 His Games
feebleness of Black's minor pieces on the
�-side, which now have no bearing on the
center or '*-side at all, while White's minor
pieces are well centralized. The upshot is
that Black's l==!, s, insufficiently supported by
other units, can be held at bay while White's
l==!, s get into the game. White's delay in 0-0-0
is typical of this maneuvering type of game.
22. 0-0-0 b4
23. c4 Qa4
Black continues in aggressive vein.
24. Kbl b3
Which, however, only facilitates
White's task. It is indeed difficult to sayjust
where Black started to have a losing game,
but undoubtedly his premature 11 . . . 0-0set
him difficult problems from then on. Even
at this stage, so prevalent was the notion of
a Black advantage that White was expected
to close things up with 25. a3, a bad move,
as it would enable Black's A to "talk" at
once by ...Bj8, threatening a subsequent
sacrifice. I must confess that I had previ­
ously thought I might have to play a3 at this
stage, and only when the position cropped
up did I see the simple solution.
25. Nxb3 Nxb3
26. axb3 Qxb3
27. Qc2 Qb7
Now that the l==!, s are doomed to ex­
change, Black's only consolation is the
slightly exposed position of White's �;
therefore Black keeps the '*s on. The end­
ing with '*s off should be lost for Black,
because White's minor pieces and � are in
play and Black's are not.
28. Rxd6 Rxd6
29. c5! Rd8
30. Rdl Rb8
Choice of evils, but leaving White's !!
on the open file seems the greater. Sarapu
had realized the inferiority of his position
right from the nasty surprise on Move 25,
and was not "playing to win" as some
thought, but desperately trying to stem the
- 277
tide.
3 1. Nc4
Point of White's 27th. To play Nd5
would swap off one of Black's bad pieces.
3 1. . . . Nh7
32. Bg3 Ng5
Excitement was at fever heat now be­
cause White had 13 moves to make in un­
der ten minutes-stop me if you've heard
this before.
33. Bxe5 f6
Not ...Nxj3, losing a piece.
34. Bg3 Nxf3
35. e5!!?
It was curious that, being now in fairly
serious clock trouble, this rather fantastic
method of winning should occur to me,
rather than the simple win of material
pointed out by the umpire, A.E. Turner.
These umpires are cagey fellows. Had
Turner troubled to mention his idea to me
at the time, I should have adopted it, namely
35. Na5! Any reply loses either the c- ft or
the Exchange, and without giving Black
any serious counterplay.
35. Nxe5
36. Bxe5 fxe5
37. Qxg6 Qb3???
An extraordinary attack of chess blind­
ness; he was only moderately short of time.
38. Rd7 Resigns
Of course 3Z .. Qf3! Then 38. Qf6f
followed by 39. Rd7 invariably won easily
in the postmortem. Sarapu always answered
38. Qf6f with the natural ...KhB, and he
would very likely have played it. But try the
self-pin, 38... Kh7! 39. Rd7 and now 39...
Rh4! This makes the win quite difficult, as
White cannot now check at d8 and g8 and
then fork � and '*. Instead, he has to play
40. Na3. This probably wins still. White
threatens Q3e5. Failing that, RxcZ And,
Black's '* must continue to guard against
mate by Qj5f, etc. We see no defense, but
Black could make a long resistance.
-
 The Searchfor Chess Peifection

This was the first time in his life that c-file with the idea of gaining further time
Sarapu had lost two successive games! by hitting the white <it?-A ( ...RcB). The inter­
vening years of further analysis have con­
(36) firmed that White can still hope for a shade
Australasian Championship Match of advantage.
(1952), 8th Match Game 13. cxd4 Bb7
C. Purdy-0. Sarapu This Russian idea has had a fair vogue
Ruy Lopez for some years. The idea is subsequently to
liquify the center completely by ... d5, or
Sarapu was one up and three to play. alternatively to induce White to close up
This time, it was his turn to make a mistake the center by 14. d5. The latter is White's
in the opening. But only one, and a very simplest, and it is not yet certain who has
keen struggle developed. the better chances. Black's intention was to
1. e4 e5 regroup by 14... Bc8.
2. N£3 Nc6 14. Nfl d5
3. Bb5 An error, though not as serious as at
Most players, when badly needing a first appears. Black should play 14... Rac8,
full point, think it necessary to play some­ the point of playing 12... cxd4 in the first
thing extremely unusual to avoid the "risk place. Sarapu's reason for omitting it was
of a draw." But you are not playing a ma­ that he thought White could afford the re­
chine. A draw comes about only through ply 15. Ne3, advancing his development,
failure to play better than your opponent. but he realized afterwards that it would be
To play wildly in the opening certainly in­ refuted by 15... Nxe4 since 16. Nj5 0Jc2 17.
creases the element of chance, but why Nxe7f Kh8 18. Nxc8 is answered nastily by
should it increase it in your favor? 18. . . OJJ2f, etc. In fact, the best reply to 14...
3. a6 Rac8 seems to be 15. Bb1, and I had spent
4. Ba4 Nf6 some time studying this line before the
5. 0-0 Be7 game, from Euwe's Archives. After 15. Bb 1,
6. Re1 b5 then 15... d5, and knife-edged play follows.
7. Bb3 d6 15. exd5 e4
8. c3 0-0 16. Ng5! Rac8
9. h3 Na5 Now there is no need for White to
10. Bc2 c5 retard his development by Bb 1.
1 1. d4 (tc7 17. Ne3 Rfd8
12. Nbd2 18. Nxe4 Nxd5
Completely orthodox so far. This move 19. Nxd5 Bxd5
initiates what I describe as the snake-in­
grass development, as compared with the
unusual 12. Bg5 which I played in the 4th
Game.
12. ... cxd4
Many years ago, this was hailed by
Flohr as almost a refutation of the orthodox
snake-in-grass line. Because White's il¥-side
development is retarded, Black opens the

- 278 -
 His Games

Black has largely rectified his slight would have had to rely on steady play by
error on Move 14 because, with the disap­ 23. Be3, probably.
pearance of White's � from e3, White is 23. Bxc5
faced, after all, with some loss of time over 24. dxc5 Rxc5
his c:a;-A. Therefore Black has considerable 25. b4 Rc3
compensation for his ft -at least 2.5 tempi 26. Be4 (tc8
in development. It was a great temptation 27. Be3
to me here to save some time by 20. Nc3. The point of the whole combination is
Black would then have to withdraw his A the threat of Bc5f now. Black's next move
from d5, presumably. This, however, would sets an ingenious trap. Both players were
actually be a gain to him, as it would dis­ clock-pressed now.
close pressure on the "isolated cl-pawn"'. 27. Rd4!
But 20. Bd3 would also weaken the cl- ft by 28. Reel! Rxe4
preventing its protection from the rear. Fi­ 29. Rxc3 Nc4
nally, 2 0. Re2 allowed the combination 2 0.. . The trap was that if Racl ?? on Move
Bc4 21. Rd2 Bb4 22. Nc3 Be6 and apparently 28, instead of Ree l, 29.. (}}c l would win
.

Black at least regains his ft with a good here, for although the � would be lost,
game. Black would get tons of wood. But now
20. Bd3 Black has nothing.
Finally I decided that as Black's pieces, 30. Rdl f6
though well developed, were massed mainly 31. Rcd3 Kf7
on the �-side, I should play whatever move 32. Rd8 (tc6
gave the best chances of a ®-side attack, 33. Bc5 g6
even if the valuable passed ft fell in the 34. (tb8 Re5
process. Therefore the � should not volun­ Clock trouble, but it was hopeless any­
tarily withdraw from its strong post. Over way.
all these problems I took 40 minutes. 35. (ta7t
20. (tb7 and Black overstepped his time.
21. Qg4 Be6
22. Qg3 Kf8 (3 7)
White's reward is swift. Already Black Australasian Championship
is on the defensive. Not 22... Rxd4 23. Bh6 {1952), lOth Match Game
g6?because of 24. Q§5. Or, in this, 23... Bj8, C. Purdy-0. Sarapu
when Nf6f is strong. French Defense
Black's choice of the text move instead
of . . .KhB reminds one of Tarrasch's dictum Once again Sarapu had the lead. This
that when tempted to "play for the end­ fmal game was the only one not played at
game," one must remember that "the gods night. It was played on a Saturday after­
have placed the middlegame before the noon, and because of big outdoor sporting
endgame." One can almost always treat attractions and the general desire for excur­
...KhB as the lesser evil. sions on the first fine weekend seen in Auck­
23. Nc5! land for a month, the attentance was ex­
By means of a combination, White is pected to be the lowest of all. But it was the
able to show in a few moves that Black's ® highest by a few heads-total 104.
move was wrong. After 22... KhB White The New Zealand Chess Player credits

- 279 --
 The Search for Chess Perfection
Chess World with stating that the match cre­
ated a record for attendances for any event
of the kind ever held in Australia or New
Zealand. What we said was that the match
pulled the biggest average daily "gate" of
any chess event ever held in Australasia.
"Gate" is ambiguous; we meant it as gate
receipts. For actual numbers, there was one
event that beat it, only the admission charge
was slightly lower. That event was the Aus­
tralian Championship held in Sydney in
1945, organized and conducted solely by
the Sydney Chess Club. For that event,
1200 people paid a gross total of about 1 15
pounds. With 15 rounds, the average paid
attendance was 80 per day. The Auckland
average was that, or very near it, and, con­
sidering that the populations are in the ratio
of something like four to one, Auckland's
figures certainly constitute a record propor­
tionately.
It was indeed a momentous game­
from an international viewpoint the most
momentous of both players' careers. Sarapu
had the comfort of knowing, however, that
whatever happened, he could not emerge
as the vanquished. Above all, a draw would
give him victory.
On the other hand, I had the white
pieces. This is always an advantage in prac­
tice, but especially when giving "the odds of
the draw."
1. e4 e6
This was easily foreseen. I knew Sarapu
liked the French Defense, especially the
Winawer Variant, and the circumstances
favored it. He had fared badly as Black in
the Lopez.
2. d4 d5
3. Nc3
Statistics would show, I am sure, that
fewer games are drawn with this than with
3. Nd2. A draw was a loss for me. Therefore
the choice was clear.
3. .•. Bb4
- 280
I knew Sarapu favored this. He does
not care for 3 ... dxe4, preferring if possible
to make every move strengthen his hold on
central squares. In this respect Sarapu tends
towards dogmatism, but that is actually an
advantage for over-the-board play. A ten­
dency to be systematic in the opening saves
time later in the game. The one disadvan­
tage is that one's moves can be more easily
foretold. For instance, had I been more
familiar with Sarapu's style in the early
stages, I would have saved a vital tempo in
Game 3 (where I played h3 to stop a move
he would not even have considered in that
position, ...Bg4).
4. e5
This is best, and yet the other moves
( 4. Nge2, 4. a3, and 4. Qg4) which Alekhine
tried in his 1935 match with Euwe should
appear more often than they do; most play­
ers have forgotten the correct play against
them.
4. ... c5
5. a3 Bxc3t
Acceptance of the ft gives White ample
compensation in position, and is rarely tried.
As yet not fully analyzed is 5... Ba5.
6. bxc3 Qc7
This move, usually credited to the Rus­
sians, was first discovered by G.H. Hastings,
the Western Australian player, about 1937,
the year he shared in a quadruple tie for the
Australian title; it was extensively analyzed
by him and played by several Australians.
About ten years later, it was reinvented by
the Russians, and occurred in the tourney
for the World Championship 1948. The
idea is simultaneous protection of g7 in
anticipation of Qg4 (White's theme move in
the Winawer) and masked attack in the
c-file.
7. Qg4 f5
8. Qg3 cxd4
Golombek queries this move of Bot­
vinnik's (Book of the World Championship,
-
 His Games

1948), and points out that 8. . . Nc6 would favor of ultimate i:¥-side castling ( 10... Nbc6
force White to play 9. Nj3, losing the possi­ is okay because 11. Q,xg7?would lead, after
bility of the strong maneuver Ne2f4. My ...RgB, etc., to an obvious pseudo-sacrifice
opinion is that White's superior .ft. position, of the i:¥-4:'1), but still a4 followed by Ba3
which gives him much more maneuvering and probably Bd6 is rather strong.
space than Black, is his chief asset, and this 11. a4! �c6
remains wherever his 4:'1 goes. And Botvin­ Black might exchange off one of
nik's method (withholding the 'l:¥-4:'1) en­ White's two ,ils by 11 ... b6, but his own e- .ft.
ables Black to threaten White's c2 and thus becomes a glaring weakness, e.g., 12. Ba3
gain time on Move 10. Ba6 13. Bxa6 Nxa6 14. Ne2 and Black can­
9. cxd4 Ne7 not stop Nf4, after which his position is very
uncomfortable.
12. Nh3 Ng6
To stop the powerful Nf4. If 12... Na5,
we have the reason for the early a4. White
must play Ba3 before .. .Nc4. Mter 12... Na5,
13. Ba3 Nc4 14. Bxc4 (okay, because Black
cannot now recapture with his 'l:¥) dxc4 15.
Bd6 QP 16. a5! and Black's cramp is pre­
served. Remember in coping with a cramped
opponent, don't attack, simply keep him
The g- .ft. can be left undefended pro cramped.
tern, and Black himself threatens .. . Q3c2 13. Be2 f4!?
(because Bd2 in reply could now be an­ White cannot accept this .ft. (because
swered simply by castling). White is de­ of subsequent obvious sacrifices and ulti­
barred from any good developing move mately 17. .. Qs3f), but a new weakness is
(Bd3?? would lose a §). Reshevsky now created in Black's game. Nevertheless,
played 10. Bd2, which is technically a de­ Sarapu showed his usual good positionjudg­
veloping move, but a concession, in that the ment in estimating his plight as already
,il gives up the possibility of taking its ideal desperate enough to try desperate remedies.
square a3. Further, the d- .ft. will still need White's control of the dark squares is so
protection. Sarapu had closely studied Re­ vast and permanent that there could not be
shevsky-Botvinnik, and believed Black any really satisfactory defense.
could obtain a very satisfactory game after 14. Qd3 Bd7
10. Bd2. 15. 0-0 Rac8
10. c3! 16. Ba3 Nce7
Surely a distinct improvement on Re­ 17. Bh5! Rf7
shevsky's move, for although the white i:¥ is Sarapu had evidently intended ... Rj5
now tied to the protection of c3, it is not for here, when playing .. f4, but after thinking
a great many moves, while White's other 50 minutes he worked out that by extremely
pieces are all freer. Subsequent analysis has precise play White could obtain a winning
failed to reveal any clear equalizing de­ position. In such cases one often discards
fense. what is really the best chance, forgetting
10. ... 0-0 that passive moves involve almost certain
This could safely be delayed still, in defeat-better to take the chance of the op-

- 28 1 -
 The Search for Chess Peifection

ponent not finding the precise win. Sarapu White still had a minute or more and
gave as the main line 7Z .. Rf5 78. Bg4 (8:c3 only three moves to make, and no prob­
79. (8:c3 Rxc3 20. Bxe7 Nxe7, and now 27. lems, so that "Resigns" was sound.
Rfc7! with a winning game. Here White's
threat of winning the Exchange is stronger {38)
than the execution. Eastern Suburbs Invitation
18. Rfc1 (tc4 Tournament (1953}
19. (tb1 b6 V. Walsh-C. Purdy
Black is in a sad way. However, White King's Indian
had 26 moves to make quickly, so there was (Notes by M.E. Goldstein.)
still some practical hope.
20. Bxe7 Rxe7 1. d4 Nf6
21. Bxg6 hxg6 2. c4 d6
22. (txg6 Be8 3. g3 e5
White has not only a ft plus, but still a 4. d5
far superior position. However, much hangs After exchange of center fts and '#Is,
on White's next move. Is the win to be easy Black has a minute advantage for the end­
or rather tricky? game because White's c- ft is advanced and
23. (!g5! Rf7 potentially weak when his rat-A is fianchet­
The point was, if 23 ... Rec7 24. Nxf4 toed.
(8:d4 (offering '#! for mate), White obtains a But psychologically, when playing
treble fork. against a master like Purdy who may not be
24. Nxf4 Rf5 in top form in the first round, 4. dxe5 and 5.
25. Qg3 Bt7 (8:d8fmight be preferable. (But Walsh, also,
26. h3 (tb3 was not in top form. What then? -Purdy).
27. (te3 g5 4. ••• g6
28. Ne2 Bg6 Now Black transposes into a King's
29. g4 Rf7 Indian in which the tension in the center
30. (txg5 llg7 has already been resolved. White retains, as
Black is three fts down, but he had to against that, an advantage in space.
continue, as White was now getting both 5. Nc3 Bg7
hands to his clock and moving with his 6. e4 0-0
teeth, in effect. 7. Bg2 a5
3 1. (tf6 Rf8 8. Nge2 Na6
32. (txe6t Bt7 9. 0-0 Nc5
33. (th6 Rg6 10. h3
34. (te3 (tc4 A line practiced by Bronstein is 70. j3
35. Ng3 Be6 followed by Be3. If Black then pushes .. .J5-
36. Nh5 (tc8 f4, White's '#!-A can withdraw to f2, with a
37. t3 (td8 '#!-side ft push to follow. The '#!-A also
38. Nf6t Rfxf6 helps in the defense of his rat-side.
39. exf6 (tx£6 10. Bd7
40. Ra2 (th4 11. Be3 b6
41. Kg2 Rh6 12. b3
42. Rh1 llesigns Not 72. a3? a4! paralyzing White's '#!-

- 282 -
 His Games

side fts-an artifice which should be care­ which has pitfalls for both sides.
fully noted by the student.
12. ... Nh5 (39)
13. Qd2 Victoria-NSW Telex Match {1953)
Consistent with White's 12th would J. Hanks-C. Purdy
have been 13. a3, for b4. King's Indian Defense
13. f5
14. Rad1 f4 At Board 2, Hanks opposed the King's
Indian in original style, but his 7. g4, a move
rather in tune with modem aggressive ten­
dencies in the opening, proved premature
here.
1. d4 Nf6
2. c4 g6
3. Nc3 Bg7
4. e4 d6
5. Be2
This and the next move are good. The
Positionally a killer. White should have idea is to meet . . . 0-0 with a quick rush of the
played 14. exj5 gxj5 15. Racl, preventing . . f4 h- ft 0

by supporting the 4) on c3. 5. Nbd7

15. Bxc5 bxc5 6. Be3 e5
16. g4 f3 7. g4
17. gpdh5 Qh4! But this is premature, Black not having
18. Bx£3 castled. I incline to the simple 7. Nf3, as 7. . .
With the disappearance of the white Ng4 would accomplish nothing ( 8. Bg5[6 9.
�-.Q. the weakness of White's light-colored Bel and Black has lost as much time as
squares soon proves fatal. White). But there were also 7. h3, 7. f3, 7. d5,
18. Fbd3 7. Qd2, and even 7. f4 to be considered.
19. Ng3 Bxh3 7. ... h5
20. Nce2 Raf8! Black must keep an equal share of the
White is already dead; he now elects to board.
grab fts to fill in time during his burial 8. g5 Ng4
service. 9. Bxg4 hxg4
21. Qxa5 Bh6! 10. d5 f5
22. Qxc7 Be3! White was banking on Black's inability
23. fxe3 to play, as Black would wish, 10... Nc5 {be­
Or 23. Nhl 0$4f 24. Neg3 Rxg3f and cause of b4). However, the text is quite safe.
mates. Then we have a position in which the over­
23. ... Rxg3t riding feature is White's terribly weak h- ft .
24. White resigns 1 1. gxf6 Nxf6
A good example of the venom in the 12. Qd2 Qe7
King's Indian when White fails to get his 13. 0-0-0 a6
counterattack going. Purdy gives a fine dem­ 14. Nge2
onstration of Black's possibilities in this line, If, instead, White freed his �-side by

- 28 3 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

j3 it would be at the cost of giving free rein lose.

to Black's light-squared 1,l. 20. gxf3
14. Bd7 21. Rxf3 Rxf3
15. Kb1 Rh3 22. Q xh6 Rxd3
23. Rg1
Not 23. Rf1 Rh3. Now Black can give
back some wood, remaining only the Ex­
change up for a ft , but in a position where
the § is powerful.
23. Bg4
24. Rxg4 Nxg4
25. Qh7t Ke8
26. Qxg6t Qfl
27. Qxg4 Kd8
Not wishing to tell White yet whether 28. Kc2 Rf3
he will castle, Black plays the first move of 29. h4 Rf4
doubling on the h-file. If 16. Ng1, at least 30. Qg1 b6!
Black can lose no time. Quite tempting was 3 1. Qg3 Kc8
15... b5 ( 16. cxb5 axb5) followed by a policy 32. Qh3t Qd7
of playing on both wings. However, Black's No need to allow tricks by Q!6 at some
c- ft would become weak, and besides, such stage, as might occur if the 'iff went away at
strategy requires finesse and may involve once.
clock trouble. In general, act on the wing 33. Qh2 Qg4
where you have the initiative (as Emanuel 34. h5 Qh4
Lasker impressed upon Edward, vide Chess 35. Qxh4 Rxh4
Secrets). 36. b4 Rxh5
16. Ncl 37. a4 Rh2t
Massing too obviously for an attack 38. Kb3
against Black's castled (he hopes) 'iff . Or Kd3, permitting ...Rh2.
16. ... Kf7 38. Rd2
This leaves White with virtually no 39. a5 bxa5
option but to give up the h- ft , and very 40. bxa5 Rd4
little prospect of compensation. Establishing paralysis.
17. Nd3 Rah8 41. Kb4 Kd7
18. Rdfl Bh6! 42. Kb3 Ke7
It was a wrench to part voluntarily with 43. Kb4 Kf6
"the two Bishops," but if ...Rxh2, etc., a 44. Kb3
subsequent pin was unpleasant. In vain would be 44. Nb5, etc. Black
19. Bxh6 R8xh6 takes the �, then the e- ft , and still stops the
20. f3!? ft .
Black's immediate threat was ...Kg7, But if now 44... Kg5, then Na2 b4!would
-

making things safe. The text move is a prolong it.

rather desperate combination designed to 44. Rd3
obtain drawing chances. Black can just go 45. Kc2 Rxc3t
ahead and grab everything, as he cannot 46. Kxc3 Kg5

- 284 -
 His Games

47. White resigns that I was deliberately inviting. Black could

Black wins the e- .ft. by the Abbe
Durand's rule of limits (see Guide to Good
Chess, Part IV)-just as in the finish to the
game at Board 1. If the c- .ft. marches, Black
ignores it.
win a .ft. , but of course only pro tern.
10. 0-0 g5
Later on, this appeared in M.C.O. (9)
with an equals sign. That only means that
the editor did not like to assert that either

(�.,\
(4 0 ) � :J!
side had any advantage. Personally, I prefer
White slightly.
World Correspon ence 1 1. Bc2
Championship (1953) This A maneuver is vital. He becomes
C. Purdy-M. Napolitano "good."
Nimzo-Indian Defense 1 1. Nf4
12. Ba4 Bd7
1. c4 13. Ng3 cxd4
In all games as White I opened with The "improvement." It releases the
the English, except two in which I played pressure and deprives White of the two As,
the Lopez. Today if I had the same task but it undoubles the .ft.s.
before me-which heaven forbid-my first 14. Bxc6 bxc6
thought would be to play 7. e4 in all the 15. cxd4 Qf6
White games, and I should probably end 16. Be3 h5!
up doing so. 17. dxe5 dxe5
1. ... Nf6 18. Rb1 Rd8
2. d4 In his all-out attack on the � Black
'
White has gained nothing by his trans­ seeks to gain time by sacrificing the a- .ft. .
position except the dubious satisfaction of He has to, really. If 18... h4 19. Nj5 Bxj5 20.
having avoided a Queen's Gambit Accepted. exf5, of course not 20... �f5?Because of 21.
My main idea, actually, had been to lure a Qj6.
few opponents into the Reversed Sicilian, 19. Qc2 h4
as this gives a complex game with good 20. Nf5 Bxf5
possibilities for both sides. In C. C., a simple 21. exf5 0-0!
style won't win a world title. 22. Rfd1 Nh5
2. e6 The white f- .ft. is an obstruction to
3. Nc3 Bb4 Black's ¥!f. "Attack is the removal of ob­
4. a3 structions." (Emanuel Lasker.)
This is at any rate the fiercest line 23. Bxa7 Ng7
against the Nimzo. In the next decade it 24. a4 Nxf5
slipped back a little, but it is still popular.
4. Bxc3t
5. bxc3 c5
6. e3 Nc6
7. Bd3 e5
8. Ne2 d6
9. e4 Nh5
This is the aggressive scheme that
Napolitano was playing for all along and

- 285 - -
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection
White was now faced with a question
Tarrasch discusses in one of his books,
whether to let a ft come on to h6/h3 or to
stop it in its tracks with h3/h6. Tarrasch says
that letting it come on and then playing
g3!g6 is "better for the endgame." It is then
that he makes his famous crack, "But the
gods have put the middlegame before the
endgame." And he therefore concludes with
the wise general advice to bar the march by
h3/h6. Looking at the game coldly and ob­
jectively now, I conclude that it bears out
Tarrasch's counsel.
True, by defying it here White gets a
passed ft rapidly to the seventh rank, and
thus restricts Black's !:is. But a disruption of
the castled position is in general not out­
weighed by a considerable asset gained on
a far wing. Threats of mate start looming
up, and it is no use being able to 'if1 a ft in
answer to mate.
Over the board, I should recommend
25. h3 unhesitatingly, leaving White with a
small but sure advantage. Such reasoning is
also applicable to C.C., since a position of
immense complexity cannot be analyzed
right out, no matter if you spend days and
days.
25. a5 h3
26. a6 Ra8
A compulsory retirement into obscu­
rity. The trouble is, Black's "lff and .tJ will
acquire vast nuisance value unaided.
27. Bc5 Rfe8
28. a7 e4!
And the rt;- !:! , now, is not entirely
restricted to defense.
29. Rb7 Nh4
The effect of .. . h3 begins to be felt.
Black threatens . . .Nj3f.
30. Qb3 Qf5 !
- 286 -
Here I analyzed and analyzed without
being able to find a win for White. And
indeed, many players would feel happy to
escape from such rtf trouble with a draw. If
31. RhB, ... Qg4 32. g3 e3!
31. Rdd7!
In playing this I almost resigned my­
self to a draw. And yet I realized that a
player of Napolitano's style is usually opti­
mistic, so I had good hopes of his going
after a win.
31. ... Nf3t!!?
If 31... Q:c5, one of the sheets of analy­
sis that I kept shows 32. Rxfl Qs5 33. Rfd7!
Qp 1 f 34. Rd1 Rxa7 35. c5f KhB 36. Rhd7!!
QJ-3 37. Qj7 and wins.
However, after 31... Q:c5 32. Rxflwhat
I thought would draw was 32... e3!, e.g., 33.
@2 exj2t 34. Q:f2 Q:j2t, etc. In this, White
can vary some by !:! checks first, but might
only jeopardize the draw by so doing.
It was understandable that Napolitano
should refrain from forcing the draw, as on
all the positions as he knew them, it would
give me the title. Probably right. With this
game out of the way, I should almost cer­
tainly not have made my subsequent
quasiclerical blunder against Mitchell.
32. gxf3 exf3
33. Kfl!
ThE miserly move 33. Be3 allows a
draw by <3... RadB 34. Qg1 Qg4f 35. Kf!
Q:c4f, e•c. Each player was probably
pleased to see his opponent refraining from
forcing him to force a draw.
 His Games

33..•. Qxc5
34. Qc3!
If 34. rJ!f3, ... rJ!c4f. Or if 34. Rxf7,
...Re2.
34. ..• Rf8
Black's .E!s are powerless, but only tem­
porarily, and the drawing threats remain if
White treads unwarily. If the it /£3 is cap­
tured, the one on h3 lives on.
35. Qd3!
Renewing the threat of Rxf7! Both 'it's are under attack.
I now wrote out and analyzed 20 pos­
sible 40th moves for White. At first I could
not make a single one of them win. On the
sheet of analysis, I have given No. 15 as 40.
c5, with a query and the following sequel:
40... Qs4t 41. Kg2 rJ!c5 42. Qg3 Qj5 43. RbB
rJ!d7 44. rJ!g5f and White can have two
¥!1s but cannot win.
However, there was a very attractive
feature about this quiet decoy move 40. c5.
35. •.. Qe5! After capturing on his c5 (instead of c4),
Indirectly parrying the threat and start­ Black would be deprived of checks.
ing new devilment. Also, it involved a beautiful variation,
36. Qxf3 Rae8! namely 40. c5 Qs7f 47. Kg2 Re7 apparently
In permitting 25... h3 I had slightly winning for Black or at least drawing, but in
overrated the effect my passed it would fact not, because of 42. Qj3! Rh7 43. Q3f7f!!
have on Black's ,E!s. They have almost trading in an old ¥11 for a brand new one.
laughed it to scorn. And in this, if 42 ... Rg7 f 43. Kh2 g4 the
37. Rbl same ¥11 sacrifice wins.
White himself has .E! trouble now. Cheered up by this, I looked again at
37. ••. Qxh2 40. c5 Qs4f and now saw a curious win.
And the h- it even becomes a potential 40. c5!! Qc4t
¥!1. At this stage, I was covering sheet after 41. Kg2
sheet with scrappy but useful analysis. I was
���t! �·-�
t � �
:%1������""-�
not sure White could win, but at least was
sure I was finding the best move available �
each time.
38. Rb3 Qe5 � -�
�"��� "� ""'u �'�
39. Qxh3 Qf4!
��ur �
� �
�� - �
�

� �� �� � �
And now if 47... rJ!c5, the curious win

- 287 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

was 42. Q.h6. If 42... g4 (to stop Rh3), 43. Rg3 always used to say that ...a5 was "Purdy's
Re4 44. Q.h4 (and if then 44 ... Oj5, 45. RdB). favorite move." Perhaps 8. Nd5was White's
41. Re4 best now, virtually forcing exchange of .ll s.
42. Qf5 Qxb3 8. 0-0 h6!
43. Qxe4 Kg7 Black now plans to answer Nd5 with
44. Qf5 g4 the complicating move ...Bc5, but for that
45. Qxg4t Resigns he must first prevent the pin, which after
If ...Kh7, 46. Rd1 mates or gets ¥1!1 for Nd5 would be deadly
�. 9. f4 d6
When such a wild game develops in 10. Nd5 BeSt
cross-board play, even in grandmaster class, 1 1. e3 Be6
it is usually diverted from its logical course 12. Nf2 Qd7
by inevitable miscalculations on both sides 13. Rcl Qfl
caused by clock trouble. Moreover, annota­ 14. fxe5 Nxd5
tors cannot afterwards afford the time If .. dxe5, 15. Nxf6f Q3f6 16. Ne4.
.

needed to discover just what the logical 15. cxd5 Bxd5

course was. Only the C.C. player has both 16. Ne4
the time to analyze deeply and the incen­ Enables White to maintain almost
tive to take that time. equality, but his having to play for that
Therefore it is possible to learn much shows his conduct of the opening was open
by correspondence play. But it does take a to improvement somewhere.
lot of time that not all can afford. 16. Bb6
1 7. exd6 Qe6
{4 1 ) 18. Nc5 Bxc5
SA-NSW Telex Match (1956) 19. Rxc5 Bxg2
L. Endzelins-C. Purdy 20. Kxg2 cxd6
English Opening 21. Rb5 Qxa2
22. Rxb7 Ne5
1. c4 e5 23. Qb3t
2. Nc3 Nc6 White would have to lose a move some-
3. g3 f5 how, to save his � from the fork.
This is the Tacacs, which obeys the 23. Qxb3
" Guide' rule of getting out two adjacent 24. Rxb3 a4
center fts two squares. 25. Rb6 Nxd3
4. Bg2 Nf6 26. Rxd6 Nxb2
5. d3 Bb4 27. Bc3 Nc4
Apparently new here. Euwe's Theorie 28. Rd7 Nxe3t
gives Capablanca-Bogoljubov, Nottingham In clock trouble-which is not fatal in
1936, which ran 5 d6 6. Bd2 g6 7. RIJ 1 Bg7
••• these matches because the time lag in trans­
8. b4 0-0 9. b5 with initiative for White. mission allows you to calculate between
6. Bd2 0-0 moves-1 could not make up my mind
7. Nh3 a5 whether this or the simple ...Rf7, giving
This ft is for impeding a White ¥�!!-side back the ft , gave the better winning chances.
push by b4, which served Bogoljubov well And now, with time to analyze, I still can't.
against Capa (see previous note). Woinarski 29. Kf3 Rfc8

- 288 -
 His Games

Of course not ...Nxfl ?allowing a forced lery, umpire in Sydney for South Australia,
draw. afterwards pointed out that it would have
been all the better on Move 40! Black,
however, only had a few seconds then. If
White takes the .§ , ...h2 and the next five
moves on both sides are forced; then White
must resign, his .§ + being useless.
44. Ke5 Rg2
45. Kf6 Rxh2
White can only play for "tricks," and
Black can calmly ignore them. The best
chance now is 46. Rxa4, giving Black a
30. Kxe3? chance to go wrong with 46... g4? (student
White, in more serious clock trouble, to work out draw then). But 46... Rg2 wins.
wastes his .§ -.il combine that he has gone 46. Rg7t Kf8
to such trouble to get. He cannot afford 30. 47. Rxg5 a3
Rxg7f??, but the right play was 30. Rcl Ng4 48. Rxf5 a2
31. Rxg7f Kj8 32. Rh7 and the question is, 49. White resigns
can Black win? In the actual game, Black Interesting game. White never got clear
could only calculate far enough to see that of his opening disadvantage.
he could not lose in that line and had win­
ning chances. (4 2)
30. Rxc3t Australian Championship (1956-57)
31. Kd2 Rc5 L. Endzelins-C. Purdy
32. Rel Rc6 Sicilian Defense
Black had to play too quickly to see
32 ... Kj8! If then 33. Reel, ...Rd5f!, return­ 1. e4 c5
ing one ft for a "book" win. 2. N£3 g6
33. Ree7 Rg6 3. d4 cxd4
34. Ra7 4. Nxd4 Bg7
It is no use "fooling about," as ...Rg4, 5. c4 Nc6
etc., is coming anyway. 6. Be3 Nf6
34. Rxa7 7. Nc3 Ng4
35. Rxa7 Rg4 8. Qxg4 Nxd4
36. Ra5 g6 9. Qdl
37. Ra7 h5 A well-worn path.
38. Ke3 h4 9. ... e5
39. Kf3 h3
40. Ke3 Rb4
41. Kf3 g5
42. Ke3
(Ra5 is futile.)
42. . . . Rb3t
43. Kd4 Rxg3!
A touch of color. However, T.C. Gal-

- 289 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

Bxe4 Q,xc4), it ought not to prove adequate.

18. b5
19. Bxg7 Kxg7
20. hxg6 Bxg6
21. Qh6t Kg8
22. Ng5 Nf5!
By sacrificing the Exchange for a it ,
Black suddenly changes from defender to
attacker.
23. Qh2 bxc4
But this was something rather new from 24. Ne6 Qfl
Smyslov-Botvinnik, Alekhine Memorial 25. Nxf8 Rxf8
Tourney, which I had just seen. Certainly 26. Be4 Nd4
more energetic than either 9... Nc6 or 9 ... 27. Qg3
Ne6 (Nimzovich). The natural and obvious move, and it
10. Qd2 should have drawn. Also good enough was
At least more aggressive than Smyslov's 27. Rc7.
10. Bd3 (Smyslov got a bad game and drew
it only because of inexact play by Botvinnik
later on) ; it makes way for the Yfi- .§ , and
thus turns Bxd4 into a threat.
10. ••• 0-0
And if 11. Bxd4, ... exd4 72. Nb5 Re8.
1 1. 0-0-0 Qa5
12. Kb1 f5
13. f3 fxe4
14. Nxe4 Qc7?
An example of how crazy a player can 27. ... c3!
get when overanxious to avoid a draw. Black This combination at least draws, and
gives up a whole tempo to avoid an ex­ contains one very pretty variation. This is
change of Yfjs which he ought to welcome 28. bxc3 Rb8f 29. Ka 7 Qs4. Now the
with glee, since his own � is more vulner­ problemesque point is that White's .§ must
able than White's, or certainly will be with defend c3 either at d3 or c l. If d3, he shuts
the tempo lost. It is curious that the same off his A and allows the � to mate; if c l, he
player also gambled somewhat against unguards d5, and this allows the � to sacri­
Ozols, and there also it came off. fice itself at b3 without White afterwards
15. h4 d6 being able to win the Yf1 by Bd5f. So Black
16. h5 Bf5 wins.
17. Bd3 a6 28. Bxg6 hxg6
A bit slow, but in any case Black's 29. Rde1??
game is difficult. Both sides were in clock trouble, and
18. Bh6 White misses the draw by 29. Rxd4 exd4 30.
Endzelins pointed out that 78. g4 was OJ:d6.
the way to carry on the attack, and although In his hurry, Endzelins probably took
there is counterplay (e.g., by 78... Bxe4 79. it for granted that Black's menacing its

- 290 -
 His Games

would suffice to ensure a win, and I think 6. exd5 exd5 7. �d5! "offering" the ¥11 .
Pikler must have made the same assump­ 6. B£4 e5
tion, else he would not have considered the 7. Be3 N£6
game seriously for the brilliancy prize. In Better than 7. .. a6 8. N5c3 Nf6, as White
the actual game, I also made this assump­ can then transpose into the game (by 9.
tion, but Black's own et; is too exposed. Na3) but need not. The text position was
29. ... Rb8 formerly thought bad for Black without
White is helpless now, for if b3, ...Rxb3f. analysis because of the backward .ft , but
30. Qt2 Qf5t since the NajdorfVariant came in, that idea
3 1. Re4 Rxb2t has been laughed out.
32. Qxb2 cxb2 8. N1c3 a6
33. Kxb2 d5 9. Na3 Be6
34. Re3 Qc2t
35. Ka1 Qd2
36. Rxe5 Nc2t
37. White resigns

(43)
N.S.W. Championship (1963)
C. Purdy-M. Fuller
Sicilian Defense

1. e4 c5 I myself thought this an improvement

2. Nf3 Nc6 on the "book" 9 . b5, which was thus con­
..

3. d4 cxd4 tinued in a Fischer game (Fischer White) :

4. Nxd4 e6 10. Nd5 Nxd5 (forced) 11. exd5 Ne7 12. c4
The Taimanov, now usually answered Nf5 13. Bd2 Be7 14. cxb5 0-0. It is hard to
by simple development, 5. Nc3. Then the see that Black has more than bare compen­
system move is 5... Qs7, which has the im­ sation for his .ft at best.
mediate purpose of stopping e5 (after Nxc6) 10. Nc4 b5
before playing ...Nf6. It all looks "artificial," 11. Nb6 Rb8
but nobody knows enough about chess to 12. Nbd5 Ng4
condemn moves on appearances. Tarrasch's Very complicating. Simplest was 72...
standards of"correctness" have taken many Bxd5, as White could not recapture with the
knocks. The Meran, for example, is highly 4:) (Bb6 being no longer "on"). Black evi­
artificial, yet is still in vogue after 40 years dently didn't like to concede "the two Bish­
of intensive trial. ops."
5. Nb5 13. Bd2 £4
Formerly regarded as the automatic The "logical sequel," but logical sequals
answer, and the reason why the line now sometimes only prove the original idea
called the Taimanov was rarely seen in clas­ wrong.
sical times. It just appeared as a footnote, 14. ex£5 Bx£5
"Not 4... e6because of, etc." 15. Bd3!
5. ... d6
Virtually forced. Of course not 5... d5??

- 291 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

But flinging pieces away is usually not

so good. They are useful for "swindles."
Fuller usually shows excellent judgment in
lost games-one of the hallmarks of every
master.
27. fxe3 fxg3
28. QfJ gxh2t
29. Kh1 Rb6
30. Qf7t Kd8
31. Rf5 Qh4
Simple but effective. Now if 15... Bxd3, 32. Rxd5t Kc7
16. cxd3 Nf6 1Z Bg5 Be7 18. Nxf6t Bxf6 19. 33. Rd4 Qf6
Q!t5f and Black must forfeit castling (in a 34. Rf1!
position where it is serious) or lose a ft by and White won.
19... g6 20. Qj3 Bxg5 21. Q!,c6t. In this, if
16... Qj7, 7Z Ne4 (threat Q!,g4!!) Be7 18. h3 (44)
Nj6 19. Nexf6f Bxf6 20. Q!t5f, and again NSW Championship (1964)
Black must forfeit castling or lose a ft (20... C. Purdy-M. Fuller
Qj7 21. Nc7f). Chigorin Defense
Again, on Move 16, ... Q,h4!? 7Z Ne4!
(threat f!3g4!) Be7 18. Nxe7 Nxe7 19. Nxd6f In anthropology, it is not true. But in
or 19. Bg5, etc. chess it is true, that White is superior to
15. Be6 Black. I have often quoted statistics which
16. Be4 Nd4 prove that in master chess White scores
17. 0-0 b4 approximately 54 to Black's 46, in an aver­
Better 7Z .. Be7 18.J4! Nf6(not . . . 0-0 19.
age 100 games. The percentage of draws
j5) 19. Nxf6t Bxf6 20. Nd5 0-0 21. Nxf6t varies according to the standard, but the 54
Rxf6, but White gets a decisive-looking ad­ to 46 remains practically constant.
vantage by 22. Bc3 Nc6 23. Q,d3! (two As If the standard is such that about three
and an attack). games in every ten are drawn, it means that
18. Ne2 Nf5 White wins almost 4 to 3. If only about one
19. Nef4! in ten is drawn, the wins are more like 5 to
Must strike quickly or there is nothing. 4. It boils down to this, that if two experts
19. exf4 are dead equal, and bets are off if the game
20. Qxg4 Nd4 is drawn, you will make money, in the long
21. Qdl run, if you lay 6 to 5 on White. If you think
Sometimes a crushing move! chess is a game of equal chances, you're just
21. Bxd5 a square.
22. Bxd5 Qg5 I know that many players, like many
23. Bc4 d5 nonplayers, are impervious to simple logic,
When desperate, Fuller usually flings and also to simple arithmetic. It is useless to
fts away-an excellent idea. argue with them. If for some explicable or
24. Bxa6 Be7 inexplicable reason they dislike a fact, they
25. c3! Nf5 will not accept it. But the fact remains a fact.
26. g3 Ne3? It is particularly when an opponent is

- 292 -
 His Games

ahead of you in the score that the white
pieces are balm to the spirit. This was my
case against Max Fuller in the 1964 New
South Wales Championship. He informed
me that he had spent the whole afternoon
preparing against me with the assistance of
Crowl. I replied, of course, that this could
not fail to produce results harmful if not
fatal to his chances. But my real consolation
was that no matter how hard he had pre­
pared, he still had to play Black. In chess, at
any rate, gentlemen prefer blondes.
Let us see if the game illustrates all this.
It was about Round 5, Fuller half a
point ahead.
1. d4 d5
2. c4 Nc6
So this is what the conspirators had
plotted!
3. Nf3
Pachman believes that 3. Nc3 may be
better. The text gives rein to the characteris­
tic Chigorin move, ...Bg4. Chigorin's name
is much linked with early exchanges of A
for �.
3. ... Bg4
4. Nc3
Knowing very little of the opening, I
selected a move which l-and therefore, I
hoped, my opponent-had never seen, but
which obviously could not be bad. This is a
great thing about playing White-that a
simple developing move is always adequate.
4. ... Bxf3
Pursuing the Chigorin theme-capture
while a ft must recapture. White must ei­
ther accept a position where he cannot castle
safely or accept a weak d- ft . White does
not hesitate, but plays the developing move,
and the one that offers safe castling.
5. exf3 e6
6. cxd5 exd5
7. Bb5 Nge7
At first glance I was not rapturous about
my position, as I visualized a battery trained
on my weak d- ft , forcing pieces to defend
it. Then I began to see the effect of the time
factor. Were it Black's move now, what a
delightful game he would have! e.g., 7. .. g6
8. 0-0 Bg7 9. Bg5 0-0. We shall see what a
vast difference the move makes.
Fuller suggested 7. .. g6 at once, but this
doesn't save him, e.g., 8. 0-0 Bg7 9. Re1f
Nge7 10. Bxc6 bxc6 11. OJ2! and we have a
routine type of attack against an uncastleable
w. If Black accepts the d- ft , we have 11 ...
Bxd4 12. Bh6 followed by Rad1 with a win­
ning attack.
8. 0-0 g6
9. Bg5 Qd6
10. Qd2 Bg7
11. Bxe7!
Very simple strategy; make Black's W
move.
1 1. ... Kxe7
12. Bxc6
Before checking, White makes Black
choose how to capture. If with ft , check
will force Black to f8, blocking his 1"!. , as
...Kd7 would invite Na4-c5f.
White has sacrificed two As for two
�s in return for either an exposed black W
or retarded Black development.
12. ... Qxc6
13. Rfe1t Kd7
To free his l"!,s, but the move behind
always beats him, so . . . Kf8 was the lesser
evil.
14. Qf4 f5
15. Racl Rae8

- 293 -
 17ze Search for Chess Perfection

16. Ne4 Qb6 egy. Any early faltering by White would

17. NeSt Kc8 have given Black a terrific game. Black just
Black has succeeded in freeing his �s had to be stopped from getting going. And
and withdrawing his �, but now a new he could be stopped.
Gorgon rears its head.
18. Ne6 Rxe6 (45)
Or 18... Re7 19. Nxc7 Rxe1 f 20. Rxe1, NSW Championship (1964)
and if . . . O!c7, Rc1. B. Berger-C. Purdy
19. Rxe6 c6 Ruy Lopez
20. Reel Qxd4
Come what might, ...Bxd4 gave the The 1964 New South Wales Cham­
only chance, yet not a good chance. pionship produced this interesting clash
21. Qd6 Rd8 between the then ( 1963-66) and past (1960-
22. Re8 Bf6 63) Champions ofF.I.D.E. Zone 10-South­
23. g3 Qxb2 East Asia and Pacific. It provides an inter­
24. Rxd8t Bxd8 esting illustration of the distinction between
25. Re8 Qb6 strategy and tactics.
26. Qe6t Kc7 1. e4 e5
27. Qt7t Kc8 2. Nf3 Nc6
28. Qxh7 c5 3. Bb5 a6
29. Rg8 c4 4. Ba4 d6
30. Rxg6 Qblt 5. c3 Bd7
31. Kg2 c3 6. 0-0
White had to calculate carefully. Strategy is the choosing of aims. You
32. Rg8 d4 can also speak of "a strategy," meaning the
33. Qe7 Qb6 kind of position aimed at in a particular
34. Qe5 a6 case. The move c3 usually indicates the aim
35. Qxf5t Kb8 of building an aggressive ft center by d4.
36. Qd5? But it can be part of the quieter Steinitz
Badly pressed for time, White missed system of attack ( fts on e4, d3, c3) which
the obvious kill. aims at holding the center and slowly ma­
36. Kc8 neuvering pieces to the best advantage.
37. Qf5t Kc7 By avoiding 6. d4, White keeps the
38. h4 Qc6 option of either strategy. Sounds good. But
39. Qe5t Qd6 it isn't. The more aggressive 6. d4 is the only
Also pressed for time, Black indulges way White can hope for an edge against the
his passed fts in delusions of grandeur, but Steinitz Deferred (see Barden's book, The
there was no defense anyway. Ruy Lopez).
40. Qxd6t Kxd6 6. ... Nge7!
41. Rxd8t Kc5 Reserving options is always good, pro­
42. Kf1 vided you don't lose more options than you
and won. reserve, or concede a valuable option to
It must be admitted that White's ad­ your opponent. Having consulted Barden
vantage of the move persistently made itself just before the game, I knew that after 6. d4
felt against Black's otherwise excellent strat- the text defense is dubious, but only be-

- 294 -
 His Games
cause of either of the sharp lines Z Be3 (and
if Z .. Ng6, 8. h4) or Z Bb3 (and if Z .. Ng6, 8.
Ng5 winning). But now White has deprived
himself of both these options, since h4 would
now be absurd, and Z Bb3 is meaningless,
as Z .. Ng6 cannot be answered with Ng5.
Thus, Black has been granted the valu­
able option of a very solid defense. The
strategy of .. .Nge7is the build-up ...Ng6with
.. .Nf4 in view, or in some lines ...Bg5 (from
e 7) in response to a <£) maneuver to e3 by
White.
Strategy is inseparable from tactics.
Black knows his strategy is right only be­
cause of the tactical points mentioned. The
simplest definition of tactics in chess is "Cal­
culation of moves and replies." All good
players must be good tactically. All masters
must be good both tactically and strategi­
cally. Someone who is good strategically
and not tactically may understand the play
of masters up to a point, but cannot possibly
play well himself.
7. d3
The Steinitz setup loses some punch if
Black can freely play .. .j5. Here we have
Steinitz Attack against Steinitz Defense!
7. Ng6
8. Re1 Be7
9. Nbd2 0-0
10. Nfl f5
The Ruy Lopez is worthless to White
unless played with great precision. Then
perhaps it is the best of all. Here, Black has
at least equality. If now 11. Ne3, .. .fxe4 12.
dxe4 Kh8 and Black has a solid basis for
�-side play. White loses a little material if
he plays 11. @3f Kh8 12. Q;tb7, but I hardly
think Berger bothered to work that out-he
would just know it could not be good, from
the "look" of the position. Is that strategy or
tactics? Well, tactics; only a weaker player
would probably carry the move-by-move
calculation further and, of course, lose clock
time.
- 295
11. exf5 Bxf5
This way, White at any rate gets his <£)
to d5 before Black gets his to f4. But White's
Steinitz setup goes, showing that his whole
idea was faulty. Again, probably neither
player wasted time thinking about 12. @3f
and 13. Q;tb7?, but it is a useful exercise (in
tactics) for students to prove it bad.
12. Ne3 Bd7
Once again Black can offer his b- .ft .
Why?
13. Nd5 Kh8
Earlier the pin ...Bg4 could have been
met by @3 but now it threatens, leaving
White a difficult choice. In practical play,
the question of how big or how small a
theoretical advantage one side has is not
important. If one side's moves are easy and
the other's hard, that is important. To have
an easy game means to have a clearly good
aim or strategy (Black's is based on the
f4-square, mainly) and no difficult tactical
problems to solve in achieving it.
14. Nxe7 Ncxe7
Easy choice, as it brings a second <£)
nearer the key square.
15. Ng5
With a threat, White transfers the <£)
from its weak post (weak because on the
f-file). This is strategy-defensive strategy,
though it starts with the fierce threat of Q!t5.
15. ... Bxa4
16. Qxa4
The sacrifice @5 fails.
16. ... Qc8
-
 The Search for Chess Perfection

17. Be3 h6 But the '31 can't run away. He is exposed

18. Ne4 Nd5 and will stay exposed. On the other hand,
The pressure mounts. The immediate there is one fully open file, and if Black can
threat is ... Qg4 pinning. get control of it, this advantage with the
19. Ng3 Ndf4 exposed '31 thrown in means a certain win.
20. Bxf4 exf4 26. Qg4
An interesting instance of a clash be­ If White stays on the long diagonal,
tween strategy and tactics. In chess, as dis­ Black pursues his strategy, using as tactics
tinct from war, a plan is only something to the offer of the b- ft , e.g., 26. Qj3 Qs8! 2Z
follow if nothing better turns up. Position­ Q:cb7 (if Kh 1 as in the game, then quietly
ally-or strategically-obviously it would be ... c6 now the file is secure) Rb8 28. Q:ca6
decidedly better to have a 4J or � on f4 Rg6f 29. Kh 1 Qj7! 3 0. j3 (not Qs6? d5) Rxb2
than a ft . But because of the tactical point with a crushing attack. Or in this, 28. Q:cc7
that the threat of .. .fxg3 forces a 4J move, Rxb2 and wins, as 29. Rab 1 leads to mate
Black has the opportunity to break up (two checks, then ...Rxb1).
White's castled position, and this is better 26. Qe8
than a mere superior placement of pieces. 27. Kh1 Qc6t!
21. Nfl f3 28. f3
It is not easy to see why 22. g3 won't If 28. Qg2, ...Re2 and the ending is a
work now, yet any expert would think, "It win. Also 28... Q,xg2 first might win, but it
just can't be playable." However obscure seems better not to lose the tempo.
the knockout, it must be there. Not 22... Q,h3 28. Rae8
23. Ne3 (and if ...h5, 24. Kh1}, but 22 ... Nf4! 29. Rf2 Qd5
(threatening ...Nh3f, and if 23. gxf4, ... Qg4f! 30. d4 R8e7
24. Ng3 Q,h3 and mate). If 23. Ne3, simply Black now had to play fast, but reck­
.. Nxd3 wins a ft and keeps the attack.
. oned he had a winning position and only
White selects possibly the least evil, ashad to hold it.
it brings about a game of ¥!1s and four �s, 3 1. b3 b5
traditionally drawish. 32. Rg1 Re3
22. Qe4 fxg2 33. Qf4
23. Qxg6 gxfl=Qt If 33. Rc1, swap [Ed.: i.e., 33. . . Re1f 34.
24. Rxf1 Rf6 Rxe1 Rxe1f 35. Kg2} and ...Rc1.
25. Qe4 Re6! 33. ... Qfl
Wins a ft .
34. Qxfl Rxfl
35. Rcl Rfxf3
36. Rxf3 Rxf3
37. c4 b4
38. c5
Oversight. Could be hard after 38. Re1
Rj2 39. Re7. Best 39... c6! to get White off
the seventh, e.g., 40. Rc7 Rxa2 41. Rxc6 a5!
42. Rb6 (forced, else ... a4 wins with second
An important decision in strategy. Shall rank absolute, see Nimzovich's My System}
Black try to attack the '3;? Very speculative. Kg8 43. c5 dxc5 44. dxc5 Kj7 45. c6 Ke7 and

- 296 -
 His Games

wins easily. somewhere) e5 15. Ne2 Nfxe4 16. Bd5 BbZ

38. •. . Rc3 White has missed the bus and is in a typical
and Black won. Sicilian mess.
White loses a second ft and has no 13. . . . Bb7
counterplay. 14. exd6
Best was 14. exf6, getting three pieces
6
(4 ) for ¥11 and ft . White's minor pieces would
Ararat (1964) be much impeded by Black's fts, but it
M. Fuller-C. Purdy would be terribly difficult for Black to win.
Sicilian Defense 14. Bxd6
15. Qh3 Nxb3
1. e4 c5 16. axb3 Bb4
2. Nf3 d6 Fuller thought 16... b4 simpler and bet-
3. d4 cxd4 ter. Right.
4. Nxd4 Nf6 17. f5 e5
5. Nc3 a6 18. Nde2 Bc5
The Najdorf, favorite of Fischer. 19. Ncl Bxe3t
6. Bc4 e6 20. Qxe3 Rfe8
7. Bb3 Be7 Better than ... b4. The passed ft is a
8. f4! 0-0 valuable asset.
9. 0-0 Nbd7 21. Nd3 Rac8
10. Qf3 22. b4
I was more worried about 10. j5. Origi­ An alarming move; threatens Nc5.
nally my intention was 10... Nc5, but prob­ 22. ... a5!
ably I'd have played 10... e5 11. Nde2 (or -j3) 23. Re2
Nc5, and if 12. Bd5, ...Nxd5 13. OJ,d5 Bd7 for Not Nxb5? Qs6. If 23. bxa5, I had not
...Bc6. Here Black emerges satisfactorily. decided whether to play 23... OJ,a5 or 23...
10. ... Nc5 b4 or 23... e4, and as Fuller was short oftime
I was fairly sure he would be equally uncer­
tain. White's game was very hard under
time pressure.
23. axb4
24. Nxb4 Qc4
25. Nd3 e4
26. Nf4 b4
27. Na4 Qb5
28. b3 Qxf5
Good ft to win.
1 1. Be3 29. Nb6 Ng4
Here again if 7 7. j5, ... e5 probably. But 30. Qg3 Qc5t
it was best. 31. Kh1 Qxb6
1 1. . . . Qc7 32. Qxg4 Ba6
12. Rae1 b5 33. Nd5
13. e5 Curious incident here. Black picked up
Too late now, e.g., 13.j5 b4 14. Nb1 (or his ¥11 in mistake for the � to capture the
'
- 297 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

� . Fuller just looked up from his score But this is outside the scheme. The §
sheet in time to see this and claimed Black is better at f8, supporting .. .j5 in answer to
must move his VJ1 (no hardship as it hap­ d5. Correct is Z . e5. If 8. Nge2, .. .Nd7 clears
.

pens, Black still wins). However, Director the decks for .. .j5 (in answer to d5).
Harkin pointed out that Black had first 8. Nge2 e5
picked up the � . Therefore Fuller's only 9. d5 Ne7
claim could be that Black must take the � , 10. Bh6!
the first piece touched. Therefore, The purpose of playing this so early is
33. •.. Bxe2 to block ...h5 as an answer to g4. White can
34. (txe2 (te6? afford it because Black is unable to play .. .j5
Oversight in time trouble. However, as yet.
not too serious. 10. .•• Bh8
35. Nxb4 e3 Imprecise, as White would not play
36. h3 (te4 Bxg7 yet. Better 70... c6 at once. In that
37. Nd3 Rc6 event, more exact than 77. g4 would be 17.
38. Rf4 (te6 0-0-0, which would also be good in the
39. Rf3 Ra6 actual game.
40. Rf1 Rc6 1 1. g4 c6
41. White resigns. 12. Ng3 cxd5
A well-judged resignation. With Plausible is 72... b5 73. dxc6 bxc4 74.
White's VJ1 so tied, the win is not really Bxc4 Nxc6, but the trouble is 75. g5! Nh5 76.
difficult, and White would only tire himself Nxh5gxh5 7Z Nd5!with the terrible threat of
out to no purpose. To play on against some­ Nf6f opening the g-file. Or if 75... Nd7, 76.
one floundering to beat his clock is one Qf-5winning a piece. Better on Move 13 the
thing; to play against someone fortified with ft sacrifice, 73... Nxc6 74. Nxb5 Nd4 75.
adjournment analysis and stacks of time is Nxd4 exd4, but it is none too bright.
quite another. 13. cxd5 a6
14. 0-0-0 b5
(47)
Australian Championship Playoff
(1965)
C. Purdy-0. Hamilton
King's Indian Defense

1. d4 Nf6
2. c4 g6
3. Nc3 Bg7
4. e4 d6
5. f3 15. Bd3
The Samisch (pronounced Zaimish). In the Samisch, it usually pays to defer
Just about the favorite nowadays. the development of this .Q. and rush ahead
5. ..• 0-0 with the ft storm. Here 75. h4!, etc., would
6. Be3 Nc6 have won without allowing serious counter­
This is probably best. play.
7. (td2 ReS 15. ... (ta5

- 298 -
 His Games

16. Kb1 Rb8 Qj6 30. Bd4:

17. h4 b4 (a) ... Q:f3 31. Bxh8 Kxh8 32. Rhg1 Qj6
18. Nce2 Nfxd5! (if . . e3, Qd4fand Rdf1 wins) 33. Rdfl Qe6(if
.

This counter-sacrifice (impossible if . . . Qe5, Nxe4; or if 33... e3, 34. Q:e3!!) 34.
White had omitted Bd3) gives Black a real Qj4f Kg8 (if ... Qe5, swap and Nxe4) 35. Rf6
fight. Defensive play would be merely a Qe5 36. Q:e5 Rxe5 3Z Nxe4 with a piece for
slow kind of resignation. In games of oppo­ two is; difficult win.
site castling, if one pawnstorm is far ahead, (b) If 30... Qxd4, 31. Qxd4 Bxd4 32.fxg4
that side must win in the normal course. Be5 33. Ne2 Rhd8 34. Nd4, again a piece for
19. exd5 Nxd5 two is with a difficult win.
20. Ne4 Be6 27. Ka1!
21. b3 Nc3t This is what White ought to have played
The best chance. when he had the position earlier, but put­
22. N2xc3 bxc3 ting Yf1 and 4J in a skewer goes against
23. Qxc3 Qa4! anyone's conscience. Hamilton had calcu­
Threatening ...Bxb3. lated on its being bad, but actually it wins.
24. Bc2 d5 27. ... Qb5
25. Nc5 If 2Z .. Qg3, 28. Qs5. If 2Z .. Qd7, prob­
White does not yet find the win, but is ably best is 28. Bg5.
given the same position again on Move 27. 28. Nd6 Qd7
25. Qc6 29. Nxe8 Qxe8
26. Ne4 At Move 26, Black had overlooked
that Nxe8 enabled White to meet ... e4 with
Nf6f.
30. Kb1
The white '31 thought al was all right
for a holiday, but he wouldn't like to live
there.
30. ... e4
31. Qe3 Bxg4!
The same sacrifice as in the note to
Move 26. But now it is more easily an­
26. ... Qa4 swered.
Black for once makes a tactical miscal­ 32. Rxd5 Bxf3
culation. He thought 2Z Ka1 would be bad 33. Rh2 Qe6
for White. Black should have tried 26... 34. Rhd2 Qf6
@6, when White's task is much harder. In 35. Qd4 Qxd4
criticizing a game, the main thing is that one White threatened mate. White's ma­
move is better than another, and the pos­ neuver is based on the good old adage,
sible sequel is of secondary interest. But destroy counter-chances. Small material ad­
advanced players may be interested in the vantage and safe '31 is better than large
following lines after 26... @6, especially material advantage and the '31 with nitro­
those who were present on the night. Best is glycerine in his shoes.
2Z Ng3! e4 28. Qj2, and now Black's best try 36. R5xd4 Bxd4
is 28... Bxg4!threatening ... Qj6. Now 29. Be3 37. Rxd4 ReS

- 299 -
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection

38. Be3 Re7 bring about a second ft exchange without

39. Rd6 Be2 compromising one's position can be diffi­
40. Kcl f5 cult.
41. Kd2 Bfl A single-open-file game that became
42. Ke1 Bd3 very exciting was mine with Michael Wood­
43. Bxd3 exd3 hams in the 1967 Australian Championship
44. Kd2 Re4 in Brisbane.
45. Rd4 Re5 1. d4 Nf6
46. Kxd3 Resigns. 2. c4 g6
3. Nc3 Bg7
(4 8) 4. e4 d6
Australian Championship 5. Be2 0-0
(Brisbane 1967) 6. Bg5 c5
C. Purdy-M. Woodhams 7. d5 Qa5
King's Indian Defense Tempting where White has played Be2,
since 8. Bd3 would involve moving this
A single open file is a drawish thing, piece twice. White's actual reply also in­
God wot. The 14 fts keep the game closed volves moving a ii twice, but the tempo
except for the open file; the four �s tend to will be regained some time, as Black's ¥11
come off, then usually the ¥tts also, and any cannot remain permanently under a masked
attempt to win the probably balanced mi­ threat. Perhaps ... e6 is better.
nor-piece ending is likely to be risky. It may 8. Bd2 e6
happen that even a marked plus in develop­ 9. Nf3
ment fails to overcome the inherent drawish­ I did not then know that in Round 6 of
ness. the tournament Fuller had played against
The commonest example is the Ex­ Woodhams 9. f4. But after 9 exd5 Fuller
•..

change Variant of the French Defense, 1. e4 could not safely play 10. cxd5, so his game
e6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 exd5. So inherently drawish got out of tune. I decided to rely on quick
is this opening that at the age of 16 and development, hoping to win in spite of the
playing in my first tournament, the New drawish effect of the single open file.
South Wales Championship of 1923, I suc­ 9. ••• exd5
ceeded in drawing in 70 moves with the 10. exd5 a6
holder A.E.N. Wallace, who invariably See note to Move 23.
played the Exchange Variation against the 1 1. 0-0 Bg4
French. Black gives up the light squares to get
Morphy did the same, and usually won important dark ones.
because his opponents neglected develop­ 12. h3 Bxf3
ment. Of late, Larsen has found a way of 13. Bxf3 Nbd7
twisting into a winnish game for White, and 14. Be2 Ne8!
Alekhine even did this with Black, often Else f4 with the possibility off5, tradi­
castling ¥!1-side. tional 'it;>-side winner. Now Black can meet
A player trying to win such a game f4 with .. .f5.
often does best to try to turn it into a game
of 12 fts instead of 14, to remove the dead­
ening influence of the single open file. To

- 300 -
 His Games
15. Qc2
Not yet having read my own remarks
at the top of this game, especially the fourth
paragraph, I go here for simple develop­
ment, neglecting a magnificent opportunity
for twisting the game out of its drawish
tendency, quite safely because of the black
YIJ's voluntary exile. Thus, 15. f4 j5 16. g4!
This threatens either to open the g-file or to
play g5 and later break open the h-file with
h4-h5. If 16... fxg4, White has the choice of
Bxg4 or hxg4. Either is good, but hxg4 would
have the merit of again threatening g5. It is
hard to imagine how Black could defend
himself.
15. ... f5
16. Rfe1 Qe8
Here Woodhams makes the mysteri­
ous remark, "Black now has full equality."
How come? Apart from the small asset of
the .Q. pair, White is at least 2.5 tempi ahead been to keep out of it. So he played it cool,
in development. More reasonable would
be a claim that it is difficult for White to
exploit his plus in development. But even
this would be wrong, as White can still
afford the attacking maneuver f4 and g4,
even though Black has ... Q!z4 available now.
If 17./4!, ... Q!z4!? 18. Kh2 for g3.
17. Qcl
This would make more appeal had 10.
White not moved his ¥11 already. The idea is
that f4 is going to obstruct the ¥11- .Q., so get
him to gS first. Quite good, but the forth­
right 17. f4! was better.
17. ... Ne5
- 30 1 -
Woodhams queries this for a wrong
reason. It is wrong because it gives White
the chance to play f4 with gain of tempo so
that he could still follow with g4 attackingly.
Woodhams gives 17. . Nc7 18. Bg5 Nf6. But
.
then Black renounces eS and White keeps
the edge with the two ..Q.s. In this, if 18 ... Bf6,
19. h4.
18. Bh6
It is not a law of chess that Bd2 and Qs 7
must be followed up with Bh6. It may be
done simply to hold the dark squares. In
any case, in chess opportunism comes be­
fore planning. So 18. f4! But at least 18. Bg5
was preferable to Bh6. If 18... Bf6, 19. Bh6
Bg7 and now exchange �s with gain of
tempo. And then still f4 and g4.
18. Nc7
19. Bxg7 Kxg7
20. f4 Nd7
21. Qd2 Qf6
22. Rad1 h6
Now it is Black who tries to twist the
game out of its drawish character. Unjustifi­
ably, since he is behind in development.
After 22... Rfe8, as Woodhams says, there is
no reason why Black should lose. His 4:'1/c7
is poorly placed, but the game is drawish.
Having got into clock trouble in some games,
White's main concern in this game had
neglecting earlier opportunities to attack.
Now White should be penalized by being
held to a draw, but he is saved by his
opponent's optimism.
23. a4
At last Black has extorted this move,
justifying his ... a6, which, however, there
was little point in playing as early as Move
23. g5
24. Bfl gxf4
25. Ne2! Ne5
The routine riposte is .. .f3, but then 26.
Nf4 threatens a fork. If 26... Qg5, 27. Re6! Or
 The Search for Chess Perfection

if 26... Kh7, 2Z Ne6! In Variation (b), the !! sacrifice 36...

26. Nxf4 Qg5 Rxd7, or 37. .. Rxd7, does not force a per­
27. Qt2 Kh7 petual, though it takes some working out.
The open-file strategem won't work, 3 1. d7 Rcd8
2Z .. Rae8 28. Re3 with threats. 32. Qxc7 Qe3t
28. Rxe5! dxe5 33. Khl f4
The Exchange can be sacrificed more 34. Qxb7 e4
lightheartedly than is generally supposed. I 35. Qd5 f3
did not spend much clock time on this, 36. c5 Rg8
because (a) it was the only chance to win, 37. Qf5t Kh8
and (b) I felt at least fairly sure of not losing. 38. Qf6t Kh7
The Exchange is overrated. If the sacrificer 39. Qe7t
gets a ft and can keep one !! tied a long White goes to the trouble of calculat­
time, he is compensated. ing that Black's virtually forced sacrifice is
29. Qxc5 Rac8 now unsound. Foolproof was g4.
30. d6 39. Rg7
40. Qxd8 fxg2t

�- ·a· ��
��·� * 41. Bxg2 Rxg2
Kxh8
�� ' %'"' ���%'"' 42. Qh8t
43. d8=Qt Kh7
� ��%"
W# �'� 44. Qd7t Kg6
"�'£� - '� "�
'-'fY} " " .&. '-U.i

•:�:-�,�
45. Rd6t Kh5
46. Qt7t Kh4
- �'� �� �� 47. Kxg2
48. Kf1
Qg5t
� � .§ � ,, ��
49. Qe6t
Kxh3
Resigns.
30. •.. Qxf4?
Black underrates the attack and is (49)
tempted by the idea of united fts. The only Australian Championship
chance was ... exf4. Woodhams gives 30... (Brisbane 1967)
exf4 31. d7 Rcd8 32. Q!c7f3 "and ...Rg8with C. Purdy-D. Hamilton
winning chances." The analysis is right, but Game ofa Lifetime
for "winning" read "drawing." Thus, 33.
Q!b7 fxg2 34. Bxg2 RgB 35. Kh7 and now This was the most astonishing finish in
there are about three lines to consider: Purdy Senior's long career, and probably
(a) 35... Oj3 36. Qj5 with the double that of Hamilton's then short one, even
threat of Q.xj5t or c5 (for c6); though the astonishment was for Hamilton
(b) 35... Rg7 36. b4! Kh8 (if ... Oj3, again mixed with grievous disappointment. Still,
Qj5) 3Z b5 axb5 38. cxb5 Oj3 39. Qf3! and he saw the funny side, and congratulated
wins; his opponent with genuine enthusiasm.
(c) 35... a5 36. b4 axb4 3Z a5 and if The first diagram shows the position in
... Oj3, again Qj5. C. Purdy-Hamilton after the second ad­
It may be possible to find a draw for journment.
Black, but certainly not a win if White is
wary.

- 302 -
 His Games

tion; (b) the ending � -and-4) versus 'lf is at

best very tedious; and (c) most important,
Black saw an obvious way he could get a
whole ¥11, and White not. The game looked
a push-over. It might have needed an Aver­
bakh to see the fallacy in (c).
74. h5 a3
75. Rf1 a2
76. h6 Bd4
77. h7 Na3
After 68. Rgd4 Too late now for . . . a 1=(6 but the text
move seems to force White to resign, so
At first sight, it seems that Black should what the hell.
win on sheer material. This was why I spent 78. Rdl
the whole of my first Thursday morning
(free day) analyzing 68... Kc7 69. Rd7f Kc8
70. Rd4. I came to the conclusion that be­
cause of Black's bad 'l), White had a draw
in all variations, and covered several sheets
of paper with them.
Hamilton came to the same conclu­
sion, and correctly gave up his it +. He had
sealed his 68th.
68. Bg5
69. Rg4 Bd8 78. ••. Bh8
70. Rd4 Bb6! Some other square would be better,
This worried me, as I simply had not but it wouldn't matter! We return to this
had time to analyze it. � will draw against point later.
� and 4) with level its all on one wing, but 79. Kf7 Nbl
this is different. Easy draw if Black's passed Looks a killer. "Very slow resigner, this
it were a rank further back. As it is, it's a Purdy," some onlookers thought.
runner. 80. Kg8
71. Rxh4 Kb5 First shock. If 80... a 1=(6 81. Rxb1t
72. Rf4 forces a book draw.
The only hope. 80. ... Bb2
72. • • • a4 81. Rd8!
73. h4 Nc2 Just the same if White's 'll were only at
There was a simpler procedure, 73... f7.
a3 74. h5 a2 75. Rf1 Bd4 76. h6 a1=Q 7Z 81. . . . al=Q
Rxa1 Bxa 1 78. h7, and now, provided Black Nothing else to be done now.
makes the right tour with his 4), he can 82. Rb8t Kc6
retain both pieces and stop White queen- 83. Rxb2! Qa8t
ing. Taking the .§. would be useless even
Three considerations, luckily for Purdy, with the white 'll still on f7, Kg8 would
deterred Hamilton: (a) it took some calcula- follow, with book draw.

- 303 -
 The Searchfor Chess Perfection

are earned the hard way.

1. d4 d5
2. c4 e6
3. Nc3 c5
4. cxd5 cxd4
One of Rogers' favorites, and an ag­
gressive way to go for a full or half point.
Cecil, however, was never upset by gam­
bits, and in his true classical style lets the
gambit run its course.
5. Qxd4 Nc6
6. Qd1 exd5
86. Rg2!! 7. Qxd5 Bd7
White cannot afford to keep his !':'! . 8. Nf3 Nf6
Nor can Black usefully avoid taking it. 9. Qd1 Bc5
86. ••• Qxg2t 10. e3 Qe7
87. Kh8 Drawn 1 1. Be2 0-0-0
Black is a ¥11 and 4J up, but his r3} is 12. Bd2
one square too far away and so is his 4J. Given a !? (deserving attention) in En­
Black must allow either stalemate or pro­ cyclopedia D-Cecil had obviously done his
motion. homework.
Now return to the second diagram. 12. g5
Instead of 78... Bh8, try 78... Bb2. Then 79. 13. 0-0 Kb8
Kj7 Nh 7 80. Rd8 and the same old joke is 14. Rcl g4
on, as Ra8 is one threat. Or if 78... Bc3, 79. 15. Nd4 Qe5
Rc7 Nh8 80. Kj7 a 7=Q_87. Rxc3 Q3c3 82. Kg8 If 75... Nxd4, 76. exd4Bxd4 7Z BJ4t Be5
and still draws. 78. Q,d4Bxf4 79. Q3J4fKa820. Rfe7 Rhe827.
So the tempo lost by 78... Bh8 did not Bf! and White retains a small plus.
matter. 16. Ncb5 Ne4
17. Qc2 Nxd2?
(SO) Instead 7Z .. Rhe8 protects the ¥11 and
Sydney International contains a veiled threat against the white
Tournament (1979) .\lle2 (Rogers). Not 7Z .. a6 78. Bc3!
C.j.S. Purdy-1. Rogers 18. Qxd2 a6
Hennig-Schara Gambit 19. Qc3! Nxd4
Notes by Michael Woodhams.

This delightful little game was Purdy's

last major tournament game. His opponent,
Ian Rogers, only needed a draw to secure
his second IM norm (and equal first place
in the tournament with English GM Ray
Keene). Cecil, at 73 years of age, declines
an offer of a draw. Always a sportsman and
a great Australian, Cecil believed that titles

- 304 -
 His Games

20. exd4! 34. Oj5! would have left Black para­

If 20. Nxd4 (threat Nc6f), ...Bd6 21. g3 lyzed. With his � exposed and two fts
h5! and Black has a big attack on the �­ down, the game would be over. By swap­
side. After the text, it is White who gets the ping ¥/!is, Black has a ray of hope-his passed
attack. c- ft .
20. ... Qxe2 34. ... Qxd6
21. Qg3t Ka8 35. cxd6 Rxelt
22. Nc7t Ka7 36. Rxel Kb6
23. dxc5 ReS 37. d7 Rd8
Probably designed to keep White's ¥11 38. Re7?
out of c7 as much as to harass the 4). 23. .. 38. Rd1! followed by h4 looks more
Q7b2 wou1d be too risky, e.g., 24. Rh1 Q7a2 logical ( l='!s belong behind passed fts) and
25. Ra 1 Q§2 (Black must guard against White wins easily, e.g., 38... c5 39. h4 c4 40.
White's Qg3) 26. Nxa6!; or 24. Rh1 Q§2 25. h5 Ka5 (40... c3 41. Rc1) 41. h6Kxa4 42. h7 c3
Nxa6! (Rfc1 Qg4) Rhe8 26. Nb4 Qg4 2Z Rh3 43. g4 c2 44. Rc1 Kb3 45.f4and White easily
wins or 26... Q7c5 2Z Qg3f Kb8 28. Na6f;or wins the race. Once fts are established on
24. Rb1 Q§2 25. Nxa6 Q§4 26. Q§7! Q7a6 2Z d7 and h7, Black's ):'! is immobilized.
Rb3! wins. However 23... Bc6 1ooks more 38. •.. c5
logical-if 24. Qg3, ... Qs5!; or 24. Rc4 Rd3! 39. Kfl?
25. Oj4 Rhd8 threatening ...Rd1; or 24. Rfe1 White is still winning, but when an
Q.d3 25. Q7d3 Rxd3 26. Re7 Rhd8and ...R3d2. ending develops into a ft race, you can't
24. Nd5 Bb5 afford to play two plans at once (� to ¥/1-
25. a4! Bc6 side and pushing the h- ft ) . 39. h4! still wins.
And Black now offered a draw. 39. ... Ka5
If 25... Bxa4?, 26. Nb6; or 25... Rxc5?, 40. h4 c4
26. Nc3! Apart from pushing the h- ft , White
26. Rfel Qxb2 could also win by getting his ):'! behind the
27. Ne7 Rce8 d- ft , e.g., 41. Re4 Kb4 42. Rd4 Kc3 43. Rd6
28. Nxc6t bxc6 Kb2 44. h5 c3 45. h6 c2 46. Rh6f Ka 1 4Z Rc6
29. Qxg4 Qb7 Rxd7 48. Rxc2 Rd6 49. Rc7 and wins. White
30. h3 Qc7 could also have sealed (and thus won eas­
31. Qf5 Rhg8 ily), but sportingly played on to allow Rogers
32. Qxh7 Qf4 to catch a plane.
33. Qd3 Qc7 41. Ke2? Kxa4
42. Kd2?
White can no longer win-the last
chance was 42. h5 Kb3 43. h6 c3 44. Re8
Rxd7 45. h7 c2 46. Rc8 Rd8 4Z Rxd8 and
wins.
42. ... Kb3
43. Kcl a5
44. h5
An easy draw was to be had by 44.
Re5! a4 45. Rh5t Kc3 46. RbZ
34. Qd6? 44. .•. a4

- 305 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

45. h6 a3 47. Kal (sealed)

46. Kbl ?? 0-1.
And now a draw is gone too. 47. Re5! Cecil's last ten moves were obviously
a2 48. Ra5 Rxd7 49. h7 RdB 50. Ra7 RhB 51. affected by tiredness, but one cannot but
Rh7t Kc3 52. Ra7 Rxh7 53. Ra3t Kd4 54. admire the clarity and logic of his play up to
Rxa2 and the game should be drawn. the first time control.
46. • • • c3

COLOPHON

Typeset in various fonts such as Berthhold Baskerville,

Doughboy, Goudy Sans, Huxley, and our C.R Horowitz,
10/12.
Copy entry and editing: Pat Scoville
Cover: Rob Long
Layout: Bob Long
Proofreading: Ralph Tykodi & Bob Long

- 306 -
 Back ofthe Book

.. 27
.45
... 12
(2ID

.......... 43, 44, 46

...................... ®
.................... 23
............................. 1
Hamilton, 47, 49
..............................

Hanks, ] . .
........... .. .
............ . . .... .............. ......... . . 3 1 , 39
......................... ...

Harris, A .
........... .
.............................. .......... ... . 14
...................................

Hastings, G . ...... ................................................. ................................. 3

Klass, H . ... .
........................... .. ....... ...... . .......... . .
.. .
..................... 24 .........

Koshnitsky, G .
............................ ................................... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Lamparter, G . . ... . .
..... ........ .... ........................ . .
. . ....................... . 15 ........

Mills, B . .
............. .. 22
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Napolitano, M �
...................................................................................

Rogers, I .
................... .
.................................... . 50 ..................................

Sarapu, 0 .
......... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .

Steiner, L . .
...... ... 10, 16, 32
....................................................................

Tartakover, S . .... .
................... 20
............................................................

Wade, R .
................... . 26
......... ............................................................ ...

Walsh, V ............................................................................................ 3 8
Watson, C 17
............. .............................................................................

Woodhams, M . .. .
.................... . . .. .
................... 48 .................... ..............

Zile, R 30
................................................................................................

- 307 -
 The Search for Chess Perfection

Index of Openings
Numbers refer to game numbers. The game section begins on
page 22 1 .

Benoni Defense 15
. . .................................................

Caro-Kann Defense 23
...........................................

Chigorin Defense 44
...............................................

Bird's Opening 4
......................................................

Dutch Defense 31
.....................................................

English Opening 6, 19, 24, 29, 4 1

...........................

Evans Gambit 25
.....................................................

French Defense 1 7, 26, 37

.......................................

Hennig-Schara Gambit 50
......................................

King's Gambit 28
.....................................................

King's Indian Defense 30, 38-39, 47-48

. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .

Nimzo-Indian Defense 7, 1 1 , 20-22, 27, 40

............

Polish Opening 2
......................................................

Queen's Gambit 3, 5, 9, 32
. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Reti's Opening 8
...................... .................................

Ruy Lopez 1, 12-13, 18, 33, 35-36, 45

....................

Sicilian Defense 10, 14, 16, 34, 42-43, 46

..............

- 308 -
 Back ofthe Book

Index of Article§
Aids To Seeing Combinations . ....... .
...................................................... 189 ............

Amazing Lesson On The Center, An . .

....... ................................. 152 ...... ...............

Bronstein Wins With "The Isolated d-Pawn" . . . .......... ........... 203 ..........................

Combination Versus Planning . ...... . . 158

. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .................

Common Rook Endings . ................ .. .

............................................ 72 . .....................

Compensation For A Pawn .

............................................. . .
.......... 85 ................. ......

Dual Soul Of Chess, The . .. ......................................................... . 195 ......................

Every Move Is Partly Weakening! .. .... ... . . . .. . ...... . . . ..... . . . ... ... .. . .... .. 180
. . .. .... .......... ...

Exchanging ...................................................... ................................................ . . . ... 29

General Endgame Strategy . . ............ . ... .
................. ............ . 55
...................... ........ ...

Guiding Rule For Endgames, A . ...... ................................................................. 201

How To Advance In Chess . ........... . .
............................................. 205 .... ................

How To Avoid Traps .............................................................................. . 1 19 . .. .. . . . . .

How To Improve At Chess .. .

. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
. ...... ....................

How To Reduce Oversights To A Minimum . .

... .
....................... . 198 ........ ......... ...

How To Think In Chess . . .

............................ . . . . .. . . . . . . . ........... . 1 74
.... ... ......... ........ ....

Lopez Subtleties And Steamrollers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. .. . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . 1 19

.

Method Of Thinking In Chess, A ....................................................................... 75

Minor Pieces For A Rook .................................................................................. 1 08
More About Pawn Centers ................................................................................ 155
More On Those Two Bishops ...... .... .. ........................... .................................... 1 02
Notes On Planning In Chess ............................................................................. 1 83
On Castle Wails .................................................................................................. 1 15
Play For Position After The Opening, The ........................................................ 65
Play With The Pieces ........................................................................................... 6 1
Rook Against Two Minor Pieces ...................................................................... 1 05
Snare Of The Odd Pawn, The ............................................................................ 5 1
Snare Of The Swop, The ..................................................................................... 53
Stenitz-Lasker "Law" Exploded, The ............................................................... 163
That Isolated d-Pawn ............................................................................................ 8 1
Those Two Bishops ..................... ....................................................................... 1 00
To Take Or Not To Take .................................................................................. 1 18
Transition From The Opening To Middlegame ............................................... 88
True Elements Of Chess, The ........................................................................... 126
Weak Pawns And Weak Squares ...................................................................... 1 12
What Is A Combination? ................................................................................... 169
What Is Position Play? ........................................................................................ 137
When Attack Is The Best Defense/When Counterattack is Wrong .......... 91, 98
Why A Pawn Center? ......................................................................................... 130

- 309 -
 John Hammond, one of Aus­
tralia's wealthiest men, was
a close friend of CJ.S. Purdy. After
Purdy's death he and IM Robert
Jamieson put together the "best"
of Purdy's writings from his
various chess magazines and
published them as a book in a quantity of 10,000-
all of which sold (better than most chess best sellers) !
Purdy had a knack for writing about chess which
few could equal. In his quirky language he
would always get to the "core" of the issue,
no matter how complicated. After
reading a Purdy essay on Rook and pawn
·
endgames you feel an immediate sense
of reliefl Chess isn't easy to play and consistently
win, but Purdy will show you those finesses, tricks,
subtleties, and ideas which will add
significantly to your winning armory.
When Cecil Purdy shows how to find
combinations, and how to avoid blunders,
and then self-effacingly admit he hasn't
always taken his own advice, you know
you have a real honest people's advocate!
When he won the first world's correspon­
dence chess championship in 1951 against
the best in the world, it was no fluke. It was
the result of a "system," a s� • of checks �

and balances which are n (Y') t used in

ms. "The
illy explore
tt just theory,
ies of chess
kn {ou will be en­
cour....0
. _ _ _ _ __ .. rritings live on
this magnificent collection
ideas, his games 5 2200 (and othe1
championship play), ar
unabashed writings; all gem
quality.