Contents

Title Page
Preface 4

Chapter 1
Handling equal positions without a clear plan. Rules that govern the play 6
Carlsen – Kramnik, Wijk aan Zee 2019 6
Carlsen – Mamedyarov, Wijk aan Zee 2019 13
Carlsen – Grischuk, Shamkir 2019 20
Chapter 2
Equal positions with a choice of bailing out or playing on. Calculated risk 27
Vallejo Pons – Carlsen, Karlsruhe 2019 27
Fridman – Burg, Belgium, team championship 2019 37
Rapport – Giri, Wijk aan Zee 2019 42
Harikrishna – So, Olympiad, Batumi 2018 46
Chapter 3
Common wise sayings. Do they apply to positions where not much is going on 52
Dealing with the slogan “It is better to play with a wrong plan than no plan whatsoever” 52
Hjartarson – Urkedal, Olympiad, Batumi 2018 53
Guijarro – Karjakin, FIDE Chess.com, Douglas 2019 57
Balint – Kotronias, Budapest 2018 68
Plain-plan vs no-plan situations 79
Ding Liren – Ma Qun, CHN-chT China, 2018 79
Lalith – Adams, Gibraltar 2020 87
“Attack is the best defence” syndrome 94
Caruana – Nakamura, Sinquefield Cup, Saint Louis 2018 97
Ding Liren – Harikrishna, Shenzhen 2019 107
Sanal – Firouzja, Nakhchivan 2018 114
Tomczak – Dragun, Warsaw 2019 124
Topalov – Giri 134, Shamkir 2018
Chapter 4
Fighting the Fear of Exchanges 145
Carlsen – Naiditsch, Grenke Chess Classic 2019 145
So – Fedoseev, FIDE World Cup, Tbilisi 2017 154
Ioannidis – Kotronias, Patras 2017 168
Chapter 5
Long-term Assets 177
Carlsen – Matlakov, Wijk aan Zee 2018 177
Kotronias – Strikovic, Zagreb 2019 185
Chapter 6

2
Overpressing 202
Kramnik – Shankland, Wijk aan Zee 2019 202
Mamedyarov – Ding, FIDE Candidates, Berlin 2018 208
Ding – Radjabov, Wijk aan Zee 2019 213
Psakhis – Semkov, Sochi 1982 218

Game Index 227

3
How to Play Equal Positions
Vassilios Kotronias

Chess Stars Publishing

www.chess-stars.com

Copyright © 2020 by Vassilios Kotronias

Cover by Rustam Taichinov and Semko Semkov

4
Preface
“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation,
which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.”
Confucius

This book aims to spare you a part of the bitter experience and teach you the easiest way – by
imitating the example of great players. Of course, I will also provide a fair deal of my own
reflections.

The first steps in chess are easy. You quickly learn to fight for the centre, to attack and mate the
enemy king. Books and trainers teach you a lot of wise things – to develop your pieces quickly, to
take open files, to sacrifice for the initiative. You learn basic openings, improve your calculation. All
that knowledge brings quick results – most talented could become candidate-masters in two years.
And then you reach a plateau. Whatever you do, you cannot make the next step. You can see
already enough tactics, you are able to develop initiative, but you horribly “drift” without clear plan
and targets. You simply cannot play “equal” positions.
The purpose of this book is to shed some light on the underlying principles that govern “boring”
chess positions, bordering on equality. Such positions have gradually become the main dish of
nowadays’ chess menu because people have increased their level, their stamina, their desire to grind
down wins out of nothing.

Chess has definitely changed over the past few decades, becoming more and more dense, energy
demanding, technical. To win (or survive, if you so prefer) you need a full arsenal of weapons and a
well worked out home front. You have to understand, classify, combine, implement a complex set of
rules, find exceptions, and even create new rules out of them.

I propose a clear streamlined method of thinking in dry equal positions without long-term plans.
It is based mostly on correct evaluation and categorization of the position, and move by move play.
We’ll see that some widely accepted slogans as “Attack is the best defense” and Marshall’s famous
remark “a bad plan is better than none at all”, are rarely valid. We’ll also discuss calculated risk, fear
of exchanges and the danger of overpressing.
But most of all we’ll discover that dry equal positions could hide a lot of positional subtleties and
even top grandmasters fail to cope with them successfully.
The method of playing equal positions hasn’t been covered adequately in chess literature and I would
like to thank Semko Semkov for bringing this topic to my attention. It was a pleasure and highly
instructive for my chess understanding to analyse the games this book contains. I hope that it will
prove so for the readers as well.
Vassilios Kotronias Athens
24/11/2020

5
Chapter 1

Handling equal positions without a clear plan

Rules that govern the play
“If you don’t know where you are going, you’ll end up someplace else.”
Yogi Berra

Defining the terms

We should start by making clear what I mean under the term “equal position”. It is obviously based
on evaluation. However, any evaluation is subjective, and depends on the player’s strength. For
novices, even pieces could be enough, and for computer engines a lot of crazy positions get “0.00” at
a big depth of calculation. So I expect from you fair understanding of chess and a human approach.
We are not machines and will never be able to assess the game by “brute force”. A position full of
complications and life, with great imbalances, isn’t “an equal position”, even though computers may
assess it as “0.00”.

The simplest way to define equality is when neither side has strategic or material advantage and
lacks a clear plan to improve.

The last point is very important - games when one has typical play, for instance, the possibility to
build a minority attack in a Cambridge-Springs pawn structure, are not subject of this book. A well
educated player will seldom “drift” in such situations as he will recall good models to follow.
We are not interested in games with long forced variations either – the player’s task is clear and it is
up to his calculation abilities to choose the right continuation.
We’ll try to improve our handling of dry positions, where it is difficult to find a target.
Look at the following diagram:

Carlsen – Kramnik

Wijk aan Zee 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.c3 d5 6.Nbd2 dxe4 7.dxe4 0-0 8.0-0 Qe7 9.b4 Bd6 10.a3
a5 11.Rb1 axb4 12.axb4 Be6 13.Re1 Rfd8 14.Qc2 h6 15.Bf1 Ra2 16.Bb2 Qe8 17.Nc4 b5 18.Ne3
Ne7

6
An appropriate description for the situation on the board is “equality, without a clear-cut plan for
either side to stir up some play”. Let’s see the arguments:

• The pawn structure is symmetrical.

• Both kings are absolutely safe.
• The possibilities of pawn breaks are extremely limited. They are c3-c4 for White and ...c7-c5 for
Black, but these advances cannot be carried out without weakening the respective b-pawns for
either side.
• The piece mobility is about equal.
• Space is finely shared between the two sides.

It is extremely difficult in such a situation (for either side) to create winning chances or even some
shreds of play. The first thing that comes to my mind is to improve the position of our own pieces and
to try to exploit the opponent’s movements. What do I mean by that?

There are two kinds of advantages in chess: those of permanent nature and those which are transient
or temporary. In both cases the superior side’s method of action is standard: In the first case we
devise our short-term or long-term plans according to the source of our advantage. In the second case
the secret is alertness: the strong player keeps a hungry eye for any tactical opportunity that might
pop up, or any slight uncoordination in the enemy camp that would allow him to transform his minute
advantage into something of a more enduring nature. I would say that the approach employed in the
second case should be also the key for those who want to excel in creating a playable balance out of
an apparently sterile equality. Since the sterile equalities are often based on symmetry, one important
thing is to be alert enough to exploit any given opportunity to break it. Or even lure our opponent
(within reasonable boundaries) to do it himself. The present game is an example of this particular
theme.

7
19.Ra1

White doesn’t have any illusions about the position. He knows that it is equal and starts with some
simple chess, removing the annoying intruder. In doing that, he acknowledges the fact that this may
result in an exchange of his central pawn for a wing pawn. However, that would be already some sort
of progress from the viewpoint of creating chances, wouldn’t it?!
I would have also considered 19.Red1!? at this point, with the aim of passing the move to Black and
keeping more pieces on the board (at least for a while).
Another option is 19.c4 Bxb4 20.Rec1, but it is obvious that 20...bxc4 21.Bxc4 Bxc4 22.Nxc4 Ng6
23.Qb3 Qa4! 24.Qxa4 Rxa4 25.Ncxe5 Nxe5 26.Bxe5 Bd6= leads to a position where neither side
can hope for anything more than a draw.

19...Rda8 20.Rxa2 Rxa2 21.Ra1! Rxa1 22.Bxa1

22...Qa8!?

Black shows that he is ready to take up the gauntlet. This is a duel between a former and a reigning
world champion, so obviously both players are out there to prove something. Considering that
Vladimir Кramnik is a man who has the courage to vindicate his convictions, his choice isn’t
surprising. After all Carlsen isn’t the only player in the world capable of profiting from imbalances.
On the other hand, Black succumbs to the lure as Carlsen was hoping for, allowing him to create a
fight out of nowhere.

23.Bb2 Qxe4

The question at this point is: How would have Carlsen continued against a more conservative top

8
player who would have been satisfied to keep the symmetry? Or a 2500 player who would be solely
intent on drawing without allowing any imbalances occur? The answer is certainly not easy, but
before trying to address it, we first have to take into consideration a couple of things:
A 2500 player would have had a good chance of going wrong at an earlier stage; few chess players in
the world can match the level of Kramnik’s opening preparation.
Carlsen’s reputation as a technician is so powerful that it often works for him. People who have to
play him are most often facing this dilemma: Should I allow the position to remain symmetric at the
risk of being eventually squeezed, or should I seek counterplay at the earliest opportunity in order to
unsettle him?
Those two things considered, there is already a good chance that many people would have gone down
in flames earlier, or having reached the game position, they would have reacted in Kramnik’s manner.

Still, let’s suppose that Black chooses a method of play where the symmetry persists. What do we do
then? The answer is the most important rule of the book:

We start playing move by move.

This method should serve us well in such situations and should save us a lot of time on the clock. It
would be futile to look for a long-term plan, and even if we came up with one, it would certainly be
wrong. A plan makes sense only when we sense that the first imbalance has occurred, be it an
imbalance in space, in the pawn structure, or in the quantity/quality of the pieces. Let me now try to
become more specific.
What do I mean with this move by move motto? I’ll be discussing this term many times during the
book. Let’s start here with a short explanation. Playing move by move means that we do not build
complex long-term plans or calculate long variations. Instead we make a list of candidate-moves and
try to build a variation tree with short, but dense branches.

To give you an idea of what I mean, we should go one move back, to the position after 23.Bb2. If
Black chooses to keep the symmetry, he would have to defend his b-pawn with his queen, pawn or
bishop.

9
In the given situation Black would most probably put his queen to b7 or the bishop to d7.
After 23...Qb7 White has two moves that adhere to our motto:
24.Qd3!? is the best one. White hits the b5 pawn, again challenging Black to break the symmetry, or
become slightly more passive by retreating his bishop to d7!
The other move would most certainly be 24.Nd2, but it leads to the exchange of too much wood after
24...c5! 25.Qd3 Qd7, making the draw trivial. So I am sure Carlsen would have avoided it.
Therefore, 24.Qd3!? Bd7!?. I am not examining the captures on e4 because we assumed that Black
insists on the symmetry. Now e4 is hanging, so White has to make a decision:
It seems that White would finally have to do something, like 25.c4. But I am not sure Magnus would
have played it, especially if facing a significantly lower rated player than him. Here we have basically
one of the cases where we should pick a move depending on the strength of our opponent, his time
management, tournament situation, etc. However, the basic thing is to play a move which doesn’t
weaken strategically our position.
25.Nd2 isn’t liked by the engines as it removes the pressure from the e5-pawn. Still, it doesn’t
disrupt the equilibrium, and keeps the game going. Well, if only for a couple of moves:
25...Ng6! 26.g3 Bf8!. This is the recommendation of the machine, but also my own logical
thought. Now Black is ready for ...c7-c5. In such a situation, when the opponent has found all
the best moves, it is logical to call it a day.
Returning to 25.c4, play will most likely proceed 25...bxc4 26.Nxc4 Qxe4 27.Qxe4 Nxe4 28.Nfxe5
Bxe5 29.Nxe5 Be6=. White has gotten the bishop pair, but it is insignificant as the queenside pawns
are bound to disappear.

23...Bd7 is the other logical continuation for Black. Here again both 24.c4 and 24.Nd2 are possible,
with similar ideas and evaluations. However, on this occasion 24.c4 requires an accurate reply from
Black:

10
24...Nc6!. Definitely not a piece of cake to find.
Most likely many people would choose the simplistic 24...bxc4?! 25.Nxe5 Bxe5 26.Bxe5 Qxe4
27.Qxe4 Nxe4 28.Bxc7 when suddenly White comes out on top.
25.Qc1!?. Planning either c4xb5 or c4-c5 and the game is going on. An important point is that when
playing 24...Nc6! Black would have to evaluate that 25.c5 Nxb4 26.Qc3 Na2! is at least okay for
him. Usually seeing such small tactical ideas (or overlooking them) can change the course of the
game, so paying attention to small 2-3 move deep skirmishes is absolutely essential in our effort to
create something in apparently barren situations.

24.Qxe4 Nxe4 25.Bxb5 f5

11
Carlsen’s “luring strategy” has succeeded. While theoretically the game remains equal, it isn’t sterile
anymore. Both sides have a plan now. White’s one is the easier to carry out in practice as he has the
prospect of an outside passed pawn on the queenside. I am almost certain that Magnus would score at
least 75-80% against 2500+ opposition if he is offered the chance to play this position several times.
In the present game, the legendary Volodya manages to keep the balance in style.

26.Bd3 Nf6 27.Bf1 g5

Another characteristic moment has arisen.

28.Nc4!

White doesn’t miss the chance to create more imbalance by adding one more element to it – a
valuable pair of bishops. Okay, Black’s pawn mass outweighs it for the time being, but any mistake
from now on will seriously tip the scales in White’s favour. The bishops are dangerous pieces in
endings, trust me!

28...Bxc4 29.Bxc4+ Kg7 30.Nd2 e4 31.Bb3 c6 32.h3 h5 33.Kf1 Kg6 34.Nc4 Bc7 35.Na5 Nd7
36.Ba4

12
White is seemingly tightening the vice, but the next move illustrates Kramnik’s huge endgame
knowledge and experience:

36...Nb6!

Some casual observers of the game described this as a blunder, while others took it as a speculative
attempt to play for a win. It is surely not the former and could have hardly been the latter. I can claim
with certainty that it is an impressive for us, common mortals, equalising method.

It was also possible to play 36...Ne5!?, but after 37.c4 Nd3 38.Bc3 Black had to see the nice retort
38...Bd6!, which isn’t simple by anyone’s standards. Black draws after 39.Nxc6 (39.c5 Be5 40.Bd2
Bf4!=) 39...Nxc6 40.Bxc6 Bxb4 41.Be8+! Kh6 42.Bxb4 Nxb4= as he can safely block the passed c-
pawn on the c7-square, while his advanced pawn mass on the kingside and wrong promotion corner
at h8 guarantee him an easy draw.

37.Bxc6 Nxc6 38.Nxc6 Nc4 39.Bc1 f4

The point. The Bc1 is restricted, and White’s queenside pawns are very hard to mobilise. Add to the
general picture the much superior activity of the black king, and we get the right evaluation, which is
none other than a draw.

13
40.f3! (40.Ke2 g4=) 40...exf3 41.gxf3 g4! 42.Kg2

42.Nd4 Be5= would not have changed the outcome as White cannot do anything.

42...Kg5 43.b5 g3 44.Nb4 Ne3+ 45.Bxe3 fxe3 46.Nd3 e2 47.f4+ Bxf4 48.b6 Kf5

49.Kf3 g2!

Making sure that the white king is caged.

50.Kxg2 Ke4 51.Ne1 Ke3 52.b7 h4 53.c4 Bg3 54.c5 Kd2 55.Nf3+ Kd1 56.c6 Kc1 ½–½

14
A well played game. Summing up the events that took place in it, I drew some first conclusions,
which can serve as a guide for our overall conduct in dry positions where both sides lack a
constructive plan:

A. First of all, we have to be sure that the position belongs to the above-mentioned type, so we start
with evaluation. Common factors are kings’ safety, pawn structures, weak points, space, quantity and
quality of the pieces.

B. Once we arrive at the conclusion that the position belongs to the described category, we should
proceed according to the move by move rule. We don’t build long plans, but just play solid good
chess, emphasizing on improving piece activity while watching out for one-move-threats or short
tactical skirmishes.

We should await any slight disharmony in the enemy camp, caused by a careless piece move of our
opponent. It could hand us a small, but lasting plus (e.g. the bishop pair).

The move by move rule should be followed with devotion. It is bad to search for a plan which doesn’t
exist. To paraphrase a well known old saying, our slogan should be:

“No plan is better than a bad plan”.

A “bad plan” draws its origins from a false perception of the situation. Every too often we observe
unfounded activity, pawn advances or stupid attempts of attacks, influenced by misinterpreted advices
in some books, preaching “attacking” chess.

Lure is an important tool for creating imbalances. The bigger the incentive we offer our opponent to
alter the structure, the better the chances it will succeed. We must be sure though that if the challenge
is accepted, the resulting positions are not strategically worse for us.

It is important to have a due measure in our attempts to create something out of nothing. There is
always a point where if the opponent plays well, unavoidable liquidation or even a repetition should
occur. In that case it is vital not to lose our objectivity and know when we should call it a day.

15
 Carlsen – Mamedyarov

Wijk aan Zee 2019

1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 dxc4 4.e3 e6 5.Bxc4 c5 6.0-0 a6 7.b3 b6 8.dxc5 Qxd1 9.Rxd1 Bxc5 10.Bb2
Nbd7 11.Nbd2 Bb7 12.Be2 0-0 13.Nc4 Rfd8 14.Ne1 Bd5 15.Rac1 Rac8 16.Nd3 Be7 17.Nce5 Bb7
18.Nc4 Bd5 19.Nd2 Bb7 20.Kf1 h6

Here we have another example of a heavy-weight struggle belonging to the very same category of
apparently “barren equality”.
The two armies are confined to their respective first three ranks, the pawn chains are symmetrical, the
kings are absolutely safe, the piece quantity and quality is finely balanced. The only factors that could
allow either side to have hopes of winning this are:
• A potential significant weakening of the c3, a3 or c6, a6 squares respectively in either camp.
• The fact that the queenside pawns cannot be exchanged due to the lack of direct contact.

Nobody would have blamed the players if a draw were agreed here or after a few moves, and this
would indeed be the expected result in 90% of the games. However, Carlsen’s move by move
approach eventually leads to a transformed position with some play for both sides:

21.Bf3

Probing the c6-square. This is a one-move positional threat, for which the usual reaction is automatic
and well known, and it is displayed by Black’s next:

21...Nd5?!

16
Yet this move isn’t the best here! It offers White time to build a very slight space advantage, on
which his campaign will be based.
If Shakhriyar had applied the same move by move strategy instead of reacting on general
considerations, he would have probably ended up playing 21...Bxf3! at this point. Calculation shows
that Black doesn’t surrender even an inch:
22.Nxf3 Nc5 23.Ke2
In the event of 23.Nxc5 Rxd1+ 24.Rxd1 the accurate 24...Rxc5! 25.Ba3 Rd5!= does the job.
23...Nxd3 24.Rxd3 Rxc1 25.Rxd8+ Bxd8 26.Bxc1 Ne4. Material is limited and the weakness of c6 is
hardly exploitable, so further winning attempts are futile.

22.Nc4

Eyeing the sensitive spot in the black construction, namely b6.

22...b5 23.Na5 Ba8

Objectively the position still remains in perfect balance even after Black’s inexactitude. However,
there is a ray of hope now for White as exchanging all major pieces along the c-file has been rendered
difficult to carry out as a result of the bishop retreat on a8.

24.a3!

Controlling b4 and preparing to support/provide a retreat for the knight on a5, if needed. This is a
perfect example of the move by move approach – White doesn’t have any clear plan and passes the
move to the opponent.

17
24...g5!!

And Black makes excellent use of it, rising fully to the occasion. This is a very strong move by
Mamedyarov, showing that the game will definitely not be a one-sided affair. From here onwards till
almost the very end of the game he continues making strong positional decisions that improve his
position overall, while staying tactically alert on every turn. You may ask: “Why is 24...g5!! so
strong?” The point here is that Black has decided to seal entrances to his position by making the Nd5
a tower of strength. This means he isn’t going to move the knight in the near future and allow White’s
invasion on c6 or b7. Therefore, he has to find an alternative method of making moves that would not
allow his position to deteriorate. What is the solution? Intuitively speaking, take space on the
kingside! I guess that Shakhriyar didn’t have to elaborate much on the consequences of this advance,
because he simply felt that with the Na5 far from the kingside White cannot exploit the weakening.
Indeed, a simple count shows that Black has four minor pieces that can support the space gaining
effort on the kingside as they are in direct contact with it, while White has only three.
You can better appreciate the Azeri super GM’s decision by comparing it with the following
alternative: 24...N5b6

18
This opens the gate to the black camp in the hope that the consequences will not be too serious. The
idea is of course to trade some pieces and suffer in a slightly inferior position, believing that Black’s
queenside weaknesses will eventually be defendable. Although the computers don’t disapprove of
this idea, in over-the-board play it would be a waste of chances and energy. It also requires more
calculation as it would put Black in a passive position. But what I dislike most about this retreat is
that it would give White a clear plan to put pressure. For example:
25.Bxa8! This move is best, removing the defence of the c6-square.
a) Instead, 25.Nb7 Rxc1 26.Rxc1 Rc8 27.Rxc8+ Nxc8 28.Nb4 Bxb4 29.axb4 Kf8²/= doesn’t
offer White much as his pawns have been crippled. He is still the nominally better side, but the
static queenside should make this hardly convertible.
b) 25.Nc6 doesn’t achieve objectively an advantage in view of the tactical resource 25...Bxc6
26.Bxc6 Nc5! and Black should escape unscathed: 27.Nxc5 Rxd1+ 28.Rxd1 Rxc6 29.Nxa6
Nd5 30.e4 Nf6 31.Bxf6 Bxf6 32.Nb4 Rc8 33.Ke2 (33.Rd2 Rc1+ 34.Ke2 Rb1=) 33...Ra8
34.Nc6 (34.Nc2 Rc8=) 34...Rxa3! 35.e5 Bg5 36.h4 Bxh4 37.g3 Bxg3 38.fxg3 Rxb3=. However,
even in this line White does keep the initiative for a while and Black has to discover further
resources, something not simple by anyone’s standards.
Returning to 25.Bxa8!, after 25...Rxc1 26.Rxc1 Rxa8 White does have a key move:

19
27.g4!. In anticipation of the last rook’s exchange, White makes sure to prevent the formation §g6/
§h5, depriving him of kingside targets. After 27...Rc8 28.Rxc8+ Nxc8 29.Nc6 Bd6 30.h3 g6 31.Ke2
Kf8 32.f4² the position remains equal according to the computers, but in human chess the symbol “²”
is undoubtedly more appropriate: White controls more space and has the easier practical task
compared to Black, who has to find accurate moves to keep him in the drawing zone. And you may
ask: “What if 24...g5!! didn’t exist?” Well, this question is of course highly hypothetical, as with the
knight on a5, I am ready to support the opinion that it was bound to exist. Still, assuming this is an
extraordinary move, I will offer a more ordinary alternative:
24...f6!?. Besides 24...g5!!, this would have been the best choice for Black, preparing to improve the
position of his king. Before making it though, he would have to seriously consider the capture on d5,
followed by Nd3-f4. In that case:
25.Bxd5
The more accurate 25.Ke2! Kf7 26.g3 g6 27.b4 N5b6 28.Bxa8 Rxc1 29.Rxc1 Rxa8 30.f4²
preserves a tiny edge for White.
25...Bxd5 26.Nf4 Rxc1 27.Rxc1 Nc5! Black’s minor pieces are sort of hanging, but White cannot
exploit that. For example, 28.Nxd5 Rxd5 29.Ke2 Ne4 30.Rc2 Bd6=, and Black has everything in
order.

25.h3 f5! 26.b4!

Carlsen is undoubtedly the most sensitive player in the world to any modification a pawn structure
may undergo during a game, and he knows how to react accordingly. Here he understood the need to
bring the knight back, hoping that it could somehow be used to attack a6 or e6. As a result, Black is
kept on his toes. We may notice here that in striking resemblance to the Carlsen-Kramnik game, the
first dynamic twist introduced by Black allows White to make his first concrete micro-plan in the
game, which is Na5-b3-d4, attacking the soft spot on e6.

20
26...Kf7 27.Nb3

27...Bf6!?

I particularly like in players like Mamedyarov their refusal to believe the opponent. You can afford it
only if you are willing and capable to scrutinize the concrete lines in depth, but it also requires a
healthy blend of sense of dynamics and positional understanding. Apparently the Azeri GM possesses
the latter quality to a very high degree, and I believe that it is the greatest weapon in his arsenal,
together will a very well built opening repertoire.

Most players would have gone here for 27...Bd6 which is actually a good defensive move, covering
both c5 and e5 and providing the black king with a useful square on e7. However, that is probably
what Carlsen would have liked to see. After 28.Nbc5 Nxc5 29.bxc5 Bc7 30.Ne5+² White gets a
slight initiative by conquering the e5 square.

With the game move Black refuses to believe in ghosts. He contests the e5-square by exchanging
bishops, correctly realising that White doesn’t get anything significant by conquering the c5-square.
Most noticeably, with the trade of bishops his king becomes more powerful and safe than it was
before, backing up actively the advance of the kingside pawns.

28.Bxf6 Kxf6

21
29.Nbc5

A practical choice. White denies the Nd7 the pleasure of arriving at e5.
After 29.Ndc5 Ne5! 30.Nxa6 Nxf3 31.gxf3 Rxc1 32.Rxc1 e5! 33.Na5 h5! the position would be
dynamically balanced in spite of White’s extra pawn. For example 34.Nc5 Ke7!
Even 34...Nxe3+!? 35.fxe3 Bxf3 36.Nab3 g4° is possible, as Black’s pawn mass, aided by the
powerful bishop, is extremely menacing.
35.Ncb3 Kf6 36.Ke2 h4! 37.Nd2 Ne7 38.Nab3 Bd5°, and it is very hard for White to undertake
anything constructive as he is impeded by his inferior pawn structure and the activity of the strong
enemy bishop.

29...N5b6!

We have clearly entered a stage where both sides do have plans. Black aims to exchange light-
squared bishops and counterattack by planting his knight on c4. White tries to avoid this bishop trade
and make the most out of his knight on c5.

30.Be2!

Correctly avoiding the exchange. After 30.Bxa8 Rxa8 31.Nb7 Rdc8 32.Ndc5 Nxc5 33.Nxc5 Ke7=
White has nothing.
30.Nxa6 Bxf3 31.gxf3 Nc4 32.Ra1 gives Black a pleasant choice between 32...Ndb6° or 32...Rc6
33.Nac5 Nxc5 34.Nxc5 Rxd1+ 35.Rxd1 Nxa3 36.Rd7 e5 37.Rb7 Rd6=.

30...Nc4

22
31.a4!

A well known lever for increasing the pressure in such situations. I am sure Magnus felt around here
he was close to achieving something tangible, but Mamedyarov’s enterprising spirit simply doesn’t
let the dust to settle down.

31...Ndb6!?

An imaginative idea. That said, 31...Ke7 32.a5 Nxc5 33.Nxc5 Rxd1+ 34.Rxd1 (34.Bxd1 Nd2+
35.Kg1 Ne4=) 34...Nxa5 35.Ra1 Nc6 36.Nxa6 Ne5 37.Bxb5 Rc2 38.Nc5 Bd5° was a way to
sacrifice a pawn for maximum activity, and engines say that Black has full compensation. I guess the
point is that White cannot place his rook behind his passed pawn because 39.Rb1 is met by
39...Ba2!=.

32.a5 Nd5

23
An engrossing sight. Apart from taking on e3 Black also threatens to take on b4 with complete
equality, so White has no choice.

33.Nxa6! Ndxe3+ 34.fxe3 Nxe3+ 35.Kg1 Nxd1 36.Rxd1 Rc2 37.Bf3 Be4! 38.Nac5 Bxd3 39.Rxd3
Rxd3 40.Nxd3 e5

After brilliant and imaginative play by Black we have reached an ending where attack and defence
are balancing each other. The correct result should have been a draw here, but Shakhriyar soon gets а
bout of blindness (by tiredness or over-ambition, I am in no position to know), and commits a bad
mistake, throwing away a well deserved half point.

41.Bb7! e4 42.Nc5 Ke5 43.a6 Ra2 44.Bc6

24
44...h5??

This simply drops the precious b5 pawn without getting anything for it.
44...e3! 45.Bxb5 Kd4! was the right way to advance the pawns as the white pieces cannot cope
simultaneously with the two tasks of halting Black’s pawn armada and effectively helping their own
pawns advance. After 46.Bd3 (46.Kf1 Ra1+ 47.Ke2 Ra2+ 48.Kd1 f4=) 46...f4 47.Kf1 Black has
several ways to draw. The simplest is 47...Ra1+ 48.Ke2 Ra2+ 49.Kd1 (49.Kf3 h5) 49...Rxg2 50.Be2
Kc3 51.Na4+ Kb3=.

45.Bxb5+–

An inglorious end to a fantastic game. It is fair to say that both players deserved at least half a point,
but in the end only one gets on the score board.

45...g4 46.hxg4 hxg4 47.Bc4! Ra1+ 48.Kh2 f4 49.b5 f3 50.b6 Kf4 51.Nxe4 1-0

“Shaq” resigned. This was obviously a game where perfection in attack and defence almost balanced
each other, and with its high quality was enlightening in many respects. It led me clarify some things
in my mind and draw some new conclusions which I am glad to present below:

A. In a symmetrical position that is apparently barren, there are two or three factors that could
animate it in the long run:
1. Pawns on both sides that cannot be easily liquidated;
2. An attempt to conquer more space;
3. Creation of a weak square, or (this is a rather important remark) exploiting the illusion of a weak
square.

25
B. In the stage of the move by move fight where no plans yet exist, it is important to think concretely,
scrutinising the position and exposing any bluff of the opponent. If you don’t do that, it is very likely
that at some point you will be plagued by ghost threats, which could cause you drift slowly into
passivity. Another impressive feature of the game we have just seen was Mamedyarov’s dispute of
every inch of the board. He did so by refusing to trust his opponent’s reputation and technical
expertise, and he succeeded in creating his own play out of nothing at the opposite side of the board
from where White was active.

C. It is important to understand at which point of the game happens the transformation from “barren
equality” to a “playable equality”. If you fail to realise that, you are running the risk of losing the
general picture and the game. In the current game both players did cope with the task brilliantly. They
immediately spotted the change in the character of play and switched from one-movers to well
thought out micro plans.

D. The amount of energy you need to withstand the transformation from “barren” to “playable”, is
considerable. In the game, we’ve seen Carlsen winning because he adjusted more easily to the new
situation, by keeping a low profile and being merely “technical” at both stages. Mamedyarov, on the
other hand, discarded “technical solutions” on 2-3 occasions, opting for dynamic approaches, and
once he ran out of energy he had to pay for it. I want to be clear at this point, I am not condemning his
strategy, on the contrary. I am just saying that it requires a full tank of energy. Bear also in mind that
playing energetically isn’t always possible.

26
 Carlsen – Grischuk

Shamkir 2019

The next game we are going to examine displays in a typical fashion the problem of choosing among
natural moves in an almost barren position. In all my life I was sceptical when I was seeing
distinguished grandmasters being too optimistic about the number of good continuations in a certain
situation, generously pouring out to their audience various “equality lines” or “interesting
possibilities” which wouldn’t stand the test of a closer scrutiny. Well, in a “barren” position we do
have actually a wider choice of good moves than usual, but my conviction is that this choice of moves
is much narrower than what most people naively thought in the past. This is crushingly demonstrated
when you decide to test yourselves by playing such a position against a computer – you make what
you think to be “natural” moves, you are relaxed by the thought “oh, this is good, but that one is good
as well, so whatever I play keeps things under control”, only to realise eventually that it wasn’t so.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.c3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Ba4 Ne7 8.Bc2 Ng6 9.d4 Bb6 10.a4 c6
11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 dxe5 13.Qxd8 Rxd8 14.a5 Bc5

We start the analysis of the game at a point where the queens have gone off the board and once again
symmetry doesn’t promise anything more than a dull draw. The fact that a pair of knights have been
exchanged as well, adds up to the drawing tendency. To be fair though, in comparison to the previous
two examples we have checked, this position is a bit more vivid as there is only one open file, making
further exchanges not so easy, and White does have a small trump in the shape of the a5-pawn that
slightly cramps the enemy queenside. Still, it isn’t clear what White aspires to or how he can make
use of that little wedge in the enemy camp. If I had this position and you asked me during play what
my plan was, I would have told you “I don’t know”. I’m almost certain that the much higher rated
contestants of this game would give you the same answer.

27
15.Nd2

White starts bringing out his yet undeveloped pieces by correctly following the old wisdom “knights
before bishops”.
15.Bg5? Be6µ would be bad of course, as taking on f6 is never a threat.

15...Be6

Black is the first to complete development, and he is actually quite ahead in it, but this doesn’t make
him the favourite in the struggle in view of the semi-closed character of the position. By putting the
bishop on e6 he prevents Nd2-c4, which would gain a few inches for White. After 15...Be6 we are at
the first major decision point for White in this game. What would you play?

16.Re1!?

I have understood from my long chess playing experience that creating play in a symmetrical position
is very hard to achieve if there are not a couple of mutual weaknesses or an imbalance in the quality
of the pieces. The above position apparently doesn’t fulfil any of these two conditions, so White
logically makes a waiting useful move, following the move by move motto. I referred to it in the
previous two illustrative games. With his solid rook shift Carlsen protects e4 and prepares to deploy
his knight to b3, hitting the Bc5 and starting a quest for more space. Did I say space? Yes, gaining it
is another important method we can use to create play in bleached positions. As we saw in the
previous two encounters, all three top players involved, namely Carlsen, Kramnik and Mamedyarov,
were fully aware of its importance. Actually, the motivation to gain more space is the only plan
available in the present position, even if it is more of a “vague” plan than anything else. To be sure,
Black will not just sit there, watching his opponent.

28
Besides the game choice, there are two more ways to fight for more space, and Carlsen might have
briefly considered them before making his decision. The first one, namely 16.b4, looks committal as
White isn’t well developed to support the space it grabs. After 16...Bf8 17.Nf3 Black uses the b4
pawn as a lever to create counterplay: 17...c5! 18.b5 Nd7 19.Be3 f6 20.a6 b6 21.Bd3 c4 22.Be2 Bc5.
He is at least not worse.
The other way, 16.g3!?, was interesting to some extent.

The idea is to place the king on g2 – closer to the centre and freeing the f2-pawn from the pin. Then
White could pursue the plan of gaining space on the queenside or even generate play on the kingside
with the advance of the f-pawn. Whereas it is always risky in such position to play f2-f4, it might
become a viable possibility at a later stage. Perhaps Magnus was afraid of a bishop invasion on h3,
but I think it would not have worked for Black. Let us see a couple of lines:
16...b5! This should be the right reaction. White isn’t the only one fighting for space!
If Black is lured into 16...Bh3, then he ends up slightly worse: 17.Re1 Ng4 18.Re2 Be7
19.Nb3². White will push his opponent back with f2-f3 and then post his bishop on e3, eyeing
c5 and a7. It is still not that much, but at least, it is something.
17.Kg2

29
17...a6! Consolidating Black’s own space gains. Here we see that the least committal move, played on
general grounds, proves to be best.
After 17...Nd7 the risky 18.f4!? isn’t out of the question. If Black reacts automatically with
18...f6 (Instead, 18...exf4 19.gxf4 f5!÷ is probably best, however even in that case after 20.Re1!
b4 21.Nf3 fxe4 22.Bxe4 Bd5 23.Bxd5+ cxd5 24.Bd2 Rab8 25.Rac1 Nf6 26.c4! the game is
on.), then 19.Bb3! Bf7 20.Bxf7+ Kxf7 21.Nf3 exf4 22.Bxf4² yields a tiny edge to White.
Returning to 17...a6!, the position apparently borders on complete equality. A couple of sample lines
follow: 18.Nf3 Nd7 19.Rd1
19.Ng5 Bc4! 20.Re1 f6 21.b3 fxg5 22.bxc4 h6= is also a position where the bishop pair doesn’t
offer White anything substantial.
19...f6 20.Ne1!? Rac8 21.Nd3 Be7 22.Nb4 Bxb4 23.cxb4 c5 24.bxc5 Rxc5 25.Bb1 Rcc8! 26.Be3
Nb8! 27.Bd3 Kf7 28.Be2 Rxd1 29.Rxd1 Rc2 30.Rd2 Rxd2 31.Bxd2 Nc6 32.f4 Nd4=.

16...b5!?

Alexander Grischuk felt the need to counter White’s plan of h2-h3, followed by Nd2-b3 and Bc1-e3,
by taking space on the queenside himself. I find his choice natural and strong enough, and such a
move can in my view be played without even consulting the alternatives.

To get a glimpse of what Carlsen’s intended follow up was, I gave the position to the engines and
allowed White the liberty of moving again in the position after 16.Re1!?. The line given by them was
17.h3 Nd7 18.Bb3! Nf8 19.Bxe6 Nxe6 20.Nc4 f6 21.b4 Be7 22.Be3 Nc7 23.Nb2 Kf7 24.f3 Nb5
25.Na4²/=, with a tiny edge for White. This is the type of endgame Carlsen excels at, so Grischuk’s
decision is brave and positionally sound.

17.Nb3

30
Magnus continues with his plan. This is really a crucial juncture in the game as Black has more than
one natural-looking move, and the choice isn’t easy. What should Black play?

17...Bxb3

This move may be okay according to the engines, and it obviously keeps the Bc5 on its strong
position in a natural way, but that comes at a price – Black surrenders to his opponent the precious
bishop pair without getting a clear equivalent for it apart from a temporary pressure on f2. In my
view, such a strategy against the best technician in the world should not work, and it is hard for me to
understand why Alexander chose such a simplistic course. Agent 000 (my suggested nickname for
Magnus since he has carried out the Mission Impossible of winning so many of these 0.00 positions
that only an upgraded James Bond of chess could win!) should have been extremely pleased to see
this exchange take place as after it White can never lose. Black has no way to match the enemy light-
squared bishop if the position opens up, so he would have to discover very accurate moves to prevent
this from happening. That already doesn’t sound too promising.

I have to inform readers that when I first looked at this game as a part of the selection process for the
present book, I looked at it fleetingly, without an engine. I didn’t like so much Alexander’s move, but
I spotted rather quickly two other natural reactions for Black which are analysed briefly below. My
personal choice would have been the second one, especially if I needed to keep the balance against
strong opposition, but the engines like by a small margin the first one:
17...Be7. This is the way to play if one wishes to continue in uncompromising style, fighting for a
win on even terms – Black preserves the balance in the quality of the pieces, passing the move to
White, fully in the spirit of our move by move motto.
18.a6!?. Only like this can White hope for something, preparing to invade with his knight the enemy
camp. Still, after 18...c5 19.Na5 Rd6 20.Nb7 Rc6 21.Be3 Ne8 22.f4 Nc7 23.fxe5 Nxa6 24.Nd6 Nc7

31
White is definitely not better.

If Black wanted to surrender the bishop pair, then my preferred move 17...Nd7!? was the better way
of doing it, as in that case he preserves good control of the light squares d3 and b3. After 18.Nxc5
Nxc5 19.Be3 Bb3! White has nothing better than to transpose to an opposite coloured bishop ending:
20.Bxc5 Bxc2

21.a6!?. Maybe Alexander was worried about this? If yes, wrongly so as control of the d-file nullifies
White’s pressure against a7. For example, 21...Bb3 22.Be3 h5 23.Re2 Bc4 24.Rd2 Rxd2 25.Bxd2 Rd8
26.Be1 (26.Be3 b4!=) 26...f6 27.f3 c5 28.Bf2 Rc8 29.Be3 Kf7, and it is clear that the game is heading
towards a draw.

18.Bxb3

White has been given that little “something” he was aiming for. After the disappearance of the chief
protector of his light squares Black is somewhat weak on c6, but mostly on f7. Thus plans for White
to press have suddenly appeared out of nowhere.

18...Ng4?!

Again, a natural move, but the threats to f2 will be easily parried, so strictly speaking it amounts to
nothing more than a loss of time and energy.
18...h6! was the way to proceed, taking away the g5-square from the Bc1 and adding strength to the
...Nf6-g4 idea. Please observe how this suggestion, which is also fairly natural, is more functional and
less committal than what Alexander played.

32
After 19.Kf1!
Instead 19.Re2 Rab8 20.g3 b4 21.Ba4 bxc3 22.bxc3 Rd3 23.Kg2 Rxc3 24.Bb2 Rc4 25.Bxe5
Rbb4 26.Bxc6 Bxf2 27.Bd5 Nxd5 28.exd5 Bd4= is drawish, while
19.g3 Rab8 20.Kg2 b4 21.Bc4?! (21.Ba4! bxc3 22.bxc3 Rd3 23.Re2 Rxc3= transposes to the
above line) 21...Ne8!÷ leaves the white bishops without good squares.
19...Rab8!
19...Ng4!? 20.Ke2! Nxf2 21.Rf1 Nxe4 22.Bxf7+ Kh7! 23.Bb3 Nf6 24.Bc2+ e4 25.Rf5 Bd6
26.Be3 b4 27.cxb4 Bxb4 28.a6!° gives White good compensation for his pawn as the bishops
are powerful in this open position.
20.f3! Ne8! (20...b4 21.Rd1!²) 21.Ke2 Nd6 22.Rd1 Kf8„. Black keeps a fair share of the chances as
he is well centralised and the lever ...b5-b4 promises him counterplay. So objectively, even
surrendering the bishop pair the way Alexander did, would not have distorted the equilibrium.
However, the subtleties Black would have to find to keep the balance would have required a lot of
energy from him, much more than what the original position deserved. After the decentralisation
Black embarked upon in the game, White is already in the driver’s seat.

19.Re2 Rd6 20.Bg5!

Refuting Black’s idea of ...Rd6-f6 as the threat Bg5-e7 gains time, so Black cannot expel the bishop
with an immediate ...h7-h6. White is now able to build a fine attacking formation by orchestrating all
his pieces in the best possible way for carrying out f2-f4.

33
20...Kf8 21.Rf1² Nf6?!

This makes a bad impression. Why to retreat if not attacked?

21...Rb8!² was the way to proceed, intending to use the lever ...b5-b4 for counterplay. After 22.h3
Nf6 23.Kh2! Rd7! it isn’t easy for White to achieve f2-f4, and his advantage is contained within
reasonable limits.

22.g3±

Now White has obtained what he wanted, a solid advantage without counterplay. He has a clear plan
to progress, while Black can only sit back and defend, in my opinion without any practical chances of
surviving.
Thus, I will not comment on the rest of the game as its instructional value was exhausted by the
choices the players made up to this point. From here onwards we enter the stage of conversion.

22...a6 23.Kg2 Nd7 24.Bc1 Ba7 25.f4 f6

34
26.h4! Re8 27.h5 h6 28.Ba2 c5 29.Be3! exf4 30.gxf4 Rxe4 31.Bb1 Re7 32.Rfe1 f5? (32...Nb8±)
33.Bxf5+– Nf6 34.Kf3 Nd5 35.Rd2 Rd8 36.Be4 Red7 37.Red1 Nf6 38.Rxd7 Nxd7 39.Rd6 1-0

The World Champion obviously made a stunning display of the bishop’s pair’ power. It is rare to see
a player of Grischuk’s class going down like this. At the same time he provided us with a classical
example from which we can draw valuable conclusions. In my view the most important ones are the
following:

A. When we are in a “planless” stage of the game, not all natural moves have the same weight. It is
actually important to distinguish long-term natural moves from automatic reactions. The latter
often make concessions to the opponent for which a tactical or, if you prefer, tangible compensation
might not exist.

B. There can be a distinction as well between the long-term natural moves – there are
uncompromising, and more conservative moves. In other words, moves that keep more possibilities
of potential play, or moves that steer the game in more drawish channels. Here the choice depends on
our personal style and the opponent’s strength.

C. Decentralisation may often appear natural, but if it fails to produce concrete results, it often
causes irreversible damages. Such was the case with Alexander’s ...Nf6-g4 sally in the above game.

D. Moves that suppress the activity of the opponent’s pieces are very strong candidates for being
the best moves in the position. This is a rule of thumb that applies in both planless situations and
situations where “vague” plans are looming without taking shape yet. The same applies to moves that
consolidate space advantage.

35
Chapter 2

Equal positions with a choice of bailing out or playing on

Calculated risk and its components, safety calls

“Take calculated risks. That is quite different from being rash.”

George S. Patton

The next Carlsen’s game we are going to look at introduces us to related, yet slightly different topics
than the ones we have addressed in the previous three games. These are:

• Taking calculated risk to prevent the equal position from becoming completely drawish.

• Creating “ghost threats” to the opponent by displaying activity. Conversely, the importance of
avoiding “ghost visions” by eliminating any possible reason that could cause them.

• Showing endurance in playing equal positions out to the very end. Chess is becoming a kind of a
muscle sport in these situations, and one has to be mentally prepared for a tough, ruthless fight
when he finds himself involved in them.

Vallejo Pons – Carlsen

Karlsruhe 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Bc5 6.c3 0-0 7.d4 Ba7 8.dxe5 Nxe4 9.Bc2 d5
10.exd6 Nxd6 11.Bg5 f6 12.Bf4 g5 13.Bxd6 Qxd6 14.Qxd6 cxd6 15.Nbd2

36
We join the game after White’s 15th move in a topical line of the Spanish, which Carlsen has made
his trademark in the past few years. The queens have just left the board (as is customary for many
Carlsen encounters), leaving the chances approximately equal. Yet this is a different type of equality
than the ones seen in the previous examples. Accordingly, the approach should be different as well,
but before proceeding to explore it I deem it right to explain in a few words the steps before arriving
at this approach.
We have already mentioned in our first example that evaluating a position properly is important for
the type of strategy we should follow. In order to proceed correctly, it is necessary to realise:

• whether the position is equal or not;

• are there sound plans based on concrete features of the position, which would allow us to find our
way through the various continuations.

So let me first of all explain why the above position is approximately equal. From a static point of
view White enjoys an advantage. His pawn formation is compact, while Black has a pawn island at
d6, which is weak and isolated. White also seems to have some vague prospects of exploiting the
slight weakness of the e6- and f5-squares.

However, as almost everyone is aware nowadays, static evaluation alone doesn’t tell the whole truth
about a position. Indeed, when we start to examine the dynamic elements, we immediately realise that
two important factors work in Black’s favour – he has two long-range bishops and a space advantage
on the kingside. Besides, his pawn structure may be compromised, but he might get rid of the d-pawn
with ...d5-d4, as he has a good control of d4.
Taking these factors into consideration, we can only reach one conclusion – that indeed an
approximate equality reigns on the board.

37
Coming now to the respective strategies for each side, it is obvious to me that concrete plans do exist,
because there are concrete weaknesses and assets for each side, as was already outlined above.
Looking at it from White’s point of view, it should be obvious even to the average club player that
taking advantage of the isolani should be one of the priorities.
“First restrain, then blockade, finally destroy!” is Nimzowitsch’s rule, and not much has changed
from his era till now. Failing to do that, White could instead pursue an exchange of the light-squared
bishops or a trade of one of his knights for the Bc8 with the aim of exploiting the light square
weaknesses in the enemy camp.
Coming to Black, I think that his primary goal is to get rid of the d-pawn by advancing it to d4, but if
he fails in that, another logical idea is to exchange major pieces as then the d6-weakness would be
hardly exploitable by White. Well, at least that is what I learned from chess books and the few
mentors I had in my chess career. Practice has not taught me otherwise.

15...g4!?

Carlsen chooses the more principled plan, namely that of depriving White of control over d4, with the
aim of pushing his pawn up all the way to that square. However, on this occasion the idea has a side-
effect – he further weakens his kingside, allowing White’s knights to start treading all around,
creating tactical micro-threats and harassing Black in general. The question that naturally arises is,
why did he do it? Was it worth the risk involved?
I think that the explanation involves both subjective and objective reasons, so the answer will be
divided in two parts.

Before all, Magnus is a fighter by nature, so he hates draws. He will not go to extreme lengths to
avoid them, as often happens with yours truly, but he will surely exhaust all sound tries before
signing a draw. Here he obviously saw that after 15...d5! 16.Nb3 Re8 17.Rfe1 Bd7 18.Rad1 Rxe1+
19.Rxe1 Re8= he could secure comfortable equality, but of the type that leads to an unavoidable
draw. And naturally he didn’t want one. This much about the subjective part. Now we move on to the
really difficult part of the answer, which is based on the real situation on the board. We should answer
two sub-questions:

1. Is there any objective background in trying to play for a win?

2. If yes, on what components of the position did Carlsen base his decision?

Calculated risk

In order to answer question #1 I decided to look at the position after 15...g4!? for a few minutes
without engine help. I must admit that I soon started to like it because it resembled a good Paulsen. I
felt that even if White had some path to a slight advantage, Black’s activity should be enough to
offset it at a later stage because on a wide open board the power of the bishops often proves sufficient

38
to neutralise other factors. It was then that I recalled the famous expression “calculated risk” which
is in fact an expression containing a healthy dose of objectivity:
Indeed, if you enter a position overflowing with possibilities that offer you good chances in 70-80%
of the lines and a slight edge to your opponent in 20-30% percent of the lines on the condition he
finds all the right moves, then objectively you have good chances of winning if you are the higher
rated player. Then your choice would be fully acceptable.
So the answer to question #1 is yes, and I think that was the key reasoning behind Magnus’ decision.
My answer to question #2 has of course a direct affinity to #1 and is threefold:
a) Black will have two bishops on an open board after he pushes his d-pawn to d4. This is a powerful
factor for the upcoming queenless middlegame.
b) His kingside pawns are mobile, so they can be pushed further to attack the opponent.
c) if something goes wrong in the process, for which there is a serious possibility as there are
weaknesses on the light squares which Black might fail to control, there is always the prospect of
escaping to opposite coloured bishop endings which, as we know, offer excellent chances of
salvation. With these important questions answered, I think it is time for us to relax, sit back and
watch the game unfold:

16.Nh4 d5

Black is one step away from getting rid of his weakness, so in some sense his play is a bit predictable
at this point. What should White do?

17.Nf5!

Francisco Vallejo Pons, or “Paco”, as most of his colleagues call him, is a Spanish GM that was
raised chessicaly in the company of such legends as Kasparov, Karpov, Anand, Kramnik, Topalov,
Leko and Gelfand, to name but a few. He developed a fine sense of danger and an excellent

39
understanding of positional play, two qualities that are sufficient to rank him in the category of world
elite players. Consequently, it would have been hard to trick him in the diagram position, and indeed,
he finds the best move. The stray knight enters the fray preventing ...f6-f5, which would have gained
valuable room for Black on the kingside. It also eyes the critical d4- and d6-squares, improving
White’s impact on the centre. “But isn’t 17.Nf5! a natural move?”, you may ask. I would say
undoubtedly yes, but equally natural options appear to be rook centralisation with the aim of
preventing ...Rf8-e8/ ...Bc8-e6, or anticipating ...d5-d4 in the best possible way. However, White’s
main task should be to coordinate the strength of his minor pieces, something the text accomplishes in
a profitable manner as it retains control of the light squares.
To better appreciate Paco’s “call for coordination”, I advise you to consult the following lines:

17.Rad1. This prepares Nd2-b3. In the event of ...d5-d4 White would like to give a check from b3 and
deploy the Nd2 actively to e4, developing a serious initiative. However, playing in this way White
neglects the e-file, something Black should immediately exploit:

17...Re8!
17...Be6 is also possible, but then 18.Nb3 Rad8 19.Nf5 Rfe8 20.Nbd4²/= allows White to
achieve some progress.
18.Nb3 Re2!?
More incisive than 18...Re5 19.Rd2 Bd7 20.g3 Rae8 21.Bd3÷.
19.Rd2 Rxd2 20.Nxd2 d4! 21.Ne4 Kg7 22.Nd6 Be6!÷. Black has created a mess out of which the
bishops have good chances of emerging as winners.

Realising the sort of problems 17.Rad1 entails, I tested instead 17.Rfe1 against the computer.
However, that weakens the f2 square, so Black can start a march of his f-pawn: 17...f5! 18.Rad1 f4!
19.Bb3 Kh8 20.Bxd5 g3 21.Ne4 Ne7 22.Bb3 Bg4!° with full compensation.

40
Finally, “improving on the improvement” with 17.Rae1!? is a bit clumsy, and Black gets good
chances with 17...d4 18.Ne4 Be6! 19.Nd6 Bxa2 20.Nhf5 dxc3 21.bxc3 Rab8 22.Be4 Ne5 23.c4
Kh8÷. It is important to note that in all three continuations mentioned above Black has real chances
to play for a win. As we will soon witness, after Vallejo’s choice these chances become significantly
reduced.

17...d4!

Magnus continues in an enterprising manner, liberating his play by getting rid of the main weakness
in his camp. It is important to notice here that his move is once again the least committal as there is
no need to take immediately the knight on f5.
That said, after 17...Bxf5 18.Bxf5 h5 19.Rfe1 Rae8! 20.Rxe8! (20.Be6+ Kh8 21.Bxd5 Rd8 22.c4
Nb4=) 20...Rxe8 21.Kf1 Ne7 22.Re1 Kf8 23.Bc2²/= White is only a tad better and Black should
draw without many problems. After the move played we have reached another decision-making point
with White having once more a choice between several natural continuations:

18.Nc4

There are no less than five (!) logical possibilities here, and Paco simply chooses one of them. As you
can witness by checking the lines below, the motif is almost all the time similar. White gets a very
slight initiative that fades out in opposite coloured bishop endgames.

The only line where I found Black to have possibilities to play for a win occurs after the rather
careless 18.Rfe1. Then Black has 18...d3! 19.Bb3+ (19.Bxd3? Rd8µ) 19...Kh8 20.Be6 Ne5 21.Bxc8
Raxc8÷, obtaining a position where the pawn on d3 is more of a strength than a weakness. It is White
in my opinion, who has to be the more careful side.

41
After 18.Nd6 f5! 19.Rae1 dxc3 20.bxc3 Bc5! 21.Nxc8 Raxc8 22.Re2 Kg7 the weakness of the f5
pawn isn’t so important and Black should hold easily. For example:

23.Nb3 (23.Rfe1 Rc7 24.Nb3 Ba7 25.Kf1 Rff7=) 23...Ba7 24.Rd1 Rcd8 25.Red2 Rxd2 26.Rxd2 Re8
27.Kf1 Kf6 28.Rd5 Re5 29.Rd7 Re7=.

18.Nb3 leads to similarly equal positions, e.g. 18...Bxf5 19.Bxf5 dxc3 20.bxc3 h5 21.Rad1 Rad8
22.Rfe1 Kf7 23.Kf1 Rfe8 24.Rxd8 Rxd8=.

Finally, there is 18.Rfd1!?, which represents White’s best effort to obtain an edge. However, even
here the alert 18...dxc3!
Also possible is 18...Be6 19.Re1! Bxf5 (19...dxc3 20.Rxe6! cxd2 21.Kf1 Rad8 22.Rd1 Nd4
23.Nxd4²) 20.Bxf5 Rad8 21.Rad1 h5 22.Kf1 Kf7, but the resulting positions are more difficult
to handle for Black, e.g. 23.a4 (23.c4!? d3 24.b4 Bd4!„) 23...dxc3 24.bxc3 Rfe8 25.Ne4 Rxd1
26.Rxd1 Bb8 27.Rb1²/=.
19.bxc3 Be6 produces a situation where White has nothing serious.

42
For example, 20.Nf1
20.Bb3 Rae8 21.Re1 Ne5 22.Kf1 Bxb3 23.axb3 Nd3 24.Rxe8 Rxe8 25.f3 Nf4 26.g3 Re2
27.gxf4 Rxd2 28.fxg4 Rxh2 29.Ra4 h5! 30.gxh5 Rxh5 31.Nd6 Rc5!=.
20...Rfd8! (20...Kh8 21.N1g3²) 21.N1g3 Rxd1+ 22.Bxd1 Kf8 23.Bxg4 Ne5°/=.

At the end of these lines I think it becomes clear that the decision taken by Magnus on his 15th move
was indeed a calculated risk, prolonging the game with the knowledge that he wouldn’t ever be in any
real danger of ending up significantly worse. The confidence required to take such risks is a natural
gift to a few intuitive players, but for most of us is forged through hard work and experience. In the
case of the reigning Word Champion all three elements are there, making him look like an
unmatchable force at times...

18...Bxf5

Another possibility for Black was 18...Ne5!? 19.Nxe5 fxe5 20.Bb3+ Kh8 21.Nd6 Bf5! 22.Nxf5
Rxf5÷, and it was perhaps the best one.

19.Bxf5 h5 20.Rad1 Rfd8

43
21.a4!

A strong move by Paco, improving his position and passing the move to Black. This isn’t a barren
equality though, and Black has a clear plan to improve his position despite White’s excellent play.
The explanation for attaching an exclamation mark to White’s move is that 21.Rfe1 would have
allowed Black a slight initiative by 21...b5! 22.Nd2 Kf7³. The Spanyard correctly decided there was
no need to allow this.

21...Ne7 22.Be6+

White cannot afford to lose time. After 22.Be4?! Rac8! 23.Na5 dxc3 24.Rxd8+ Rxd8 25.bxc3 Rd7!³
Black is for preference as the b7-pawn is immune and he is ready to push his opponent back.

22...Kg7 23.Rfe1

44
Another critical moment for this game. I know many, even strong, players, who would not know what
to do as Black here, but understanding deeply the elements of chess, Magnus demonstrates a fine
idea:

23...f5! 24.Na5 Rab8 25.Kf1

25.Bb3 Ng6 wouldn’t change much.

25...Kf6! 26.Bb3 Ng6 27.Re6+ Kg5!÷

Space! It was, is, and will always be a mean for winning games, and the top players know this well!
In this particular case the black king bolsters the space gained in an impressive manner, with his
knight on g6 playing the role of an adjutant that takes care of his master’s safety.
Sometimes it feels like chess pieces have life in them, don’t you think?!

28.g3!

It was clear at this point that White needed to put a halt to his opponent’s activity. The little pawn
move takes away valuable squares from the Ng6, making both the Kf1 and the Re6 safer.

28...dxc3 29.bxc3 Rxd1+ 30.Bxd1 Rd8

We have reached a moment where Black has dangerously activated all his forces and is on the brink
of taking the initiative. However, Paco had foreseen all that and had a good reply handy in order to
maintain the balance:

45
31.f4+

As simple as it is effective. Since Black cannot retreat (it would leave him with a gruelling weakness
on f5 to defend) he must make a crucial decision: to allow a breaking up of his impressive pawn
troika, or go for a knight sacrifice for two pawns, with both options clearly having their
shortcomings.

31...gxf3!

The best choice by human standards. The most accurate continuation according to the computers is
31...Nxf4 32.gxf4+ Kxf4, but I am sure Magnus rejected it immediately. Chess is a practical game
and when you are the World Champion you need to keep as many winning chances as possible in
every game. And there wouldn’t be any such chances for Magnus after 33.Bc2 (33.Be2 Rd2=)
33...Rd2 34.Re2 Rxe2 35.Kxe2 Bg1 36.h4=. On the contrary, I think Black is the only one with
chances to lose this position, especially if he fell in time pressure.

32.Bxf3

32.h4+?? would be a blunder as now Black sacrifices the knight under optimal conditions: 32...Nxh4
33.gxh4+ Kf4!–+, when White is dead lost.

32...h4!

The game is approaching a climax. White is standing fine, but probably around here he started to get
worried about rook invasions to d2 or d3, which his next move was designed to extinguish.

46
33.Nc4

Overcaution. Although there isn’t anything wrong with this move, it gives Black the signal that White
is only interested in drawing. And as such, it gives him a psychological advantage.
33.Bxb7! was strongest, and there was no reason to avoid it. White was probably afraid of 33...Rd2,
but he isn’t getting mated, is he? After 34.gxh4+ Nxh4 35.Rxa6 Bc5 36.Nc4 Rxh2= the position
remains equal, but the onus would be on Black as White is a pawn up.

33...hxg3 34.hxg3 Bb8!

Of course Magnus was not going to fall for the cheapo 34...Rd3?? 35.Rxg6++–. The text move not
only revives the ...Rd8-d3 idea, but also eyes the weak g3 pawn.

35.Kg2

An automatic reaction which isn’t in itself bad, but prepares the scenery for a nasty episode.
35.Kf2! is better, but if White was in time pressure, it must have been difficult to find it. After
35...Rd3 36.a5! Rxc3 37.Nd6! White threatens a deadly check on f7 as well as the b7 pawn, so the
draw is certain. For example, 37...Rc2+
37...Bxd6 38.Rxd6= is of course level as Black’s queenside pawns are both vulnerable.
38.Kf1 Rc7 39.Nxb7 Rc3 40.Kg2 Ne5 41.Be2 Rc2 42.Kf1=, and the position remains in perfect
balance.

35...b5! 36.axb5 axb5

47
37.Ne3?

Blunder time. Apparently Paco was pressed by the clock at this point.
It was of course an instinctive reaction to bring the knight closer to the king, but on this occasion it
was wrong as it enables some direct tactics. After 37.Na5 Be5 38.Nb3 Bxc3 39.Rb6 Ne5 40.Be2 b4
41.Nc5 Rd2 42.Kf1 Nd7 43.Nxd7 Rxd7 44.Rb5³ the result should have been an easy draw for White.

37...Rd2+?

Magnus errs too.

37...f4! 38.Rxg6+!?
38.Be4 Nf8 39.gxf4+ Bxf4 40.Re7 Bxe3 41.Kf3 Kf6 42.Rb7 Bc5 43.Rxb5 Ne6µ.
38...Kxg6 39.gxf4 Bxf4 40.Be4+ Kf6 41.Kf3 Bg5 42.Ke2 Re8 43.Kd3 Ke5 44.Bc6 Rd8+ 45.Ke2
Rb8µ would have given him excellent winning chances.

38.Kh3 Rd3 39.Be2?!

39.Bc6!= would have held without further problems.

39...Rxc3 40.Bxb5 f4! 41.Be8! Nf8 42.Rb6 Be5 43.Nf1 fxg3³

48
Black has won a pawn, but the material left on the board is so scant that one would expect the players
to sign a draw soon. Still, chess is a cruel game. After defending heroically for most part of the game
Paco eventually goes down:

44.Rc6 Ra3 45.Rb6?!

White has entered the so called “ghost mode”, apparently intimidated by Carlsen’s almost impeccable
play in this game. Had he been able to keep a cool head, he would have found 45.Rc4! Ne6 46.Rg4+
Kf6 47.Nxg3 Ke7! (47...Nf4+ 48.Kh4 Ke7 49.Rg8=) 48.Bb5 Nf4+ 49.Kh2 Nh5 50.Re4!=.

45...Ra2!

By putting his rook on a2 Black ensures himself of winning the exchange, after which he can drag
White’s torture on and on. An exhausted Paco plunges into the wrong pawnless 4-piece ending,
allowing Magnus to complete one more episode of Mission Impossible:

46.Rb4 Ne6 47.Rg4+ Kf6 48.Bc6??–+

White caves in. 48.Rxg3!! Bxg3 49.Kxg3³ is the position that holds for White as he deprives his
opponent of the really powerful bishop.

48...g2!

Now, shockingly enough, White is lost.

49.Bxg2 Nf4+ 50.Rxf4+ Bxf4 51.Bf3 Bb8 52.Ng3 Kg5 53.Ne2 Bc7 54.Kg2 Kh4 55.Kf2 Bb6+

49
56.Ke1 Be3 57.Kd1 Kg5 58.Be4 Kf6 59.Bf3 Ke5 60.Bg2 Kd6 61.Be4 Kc5 62.Bf5 Rd2+ 63.Ke1
Rd8 64.Be4 Kc4

65.Kf1?

This one destroys White’s coordination by allowing a lethal check on f2. However the position was
lost anyway.
65.Ng3 would have held out longer.

65...Rf8+! 66.Ke1

There is no salvation to be found in 66.Kg2!? Rf2+ 67.Kh1 because Black can outmanoeuvre White:
67...Kb4!!
67...Rxe2?? 68.Bd3+!= is a nice stalemate idea.
68.Bd3
68.Ng3 Bf4! 69.Nf5 Bc7 70.Ne3 Kc5–+.
68...Kc5 69.Ba6
69.Ng3 Kd4 70.Bb5 Bf4–+.
69...Kd5! 70.Bd3 Ke5–+, and the black king closes in for the kill.

66...Bf2+ 67.Kd2

After 67.Kf1 Bc5+ 68.Kg2 Rf2+ 69.Kh1 Bd6! 70.Bg2 Kd3 71.Ng1 Rb2–+ it’s all the same all over.

67...Rd8+ 68.Kc2 Be3 69.Bf3 Rd2+ 70.Kb1 Kb3 71.Nc1+ Ka3 72.Ne2 Rb2+ 73.Ka1 Rb8 0-1

This game has huge instructional value because both players performed at a very high level, making a

50
series of extremely tough decisions. As far as I’m concerned, the three most important things to learn
are the following:

A. If someone wants to avoid a forced draw in a position where this seems like the most correct
result, it is important to have some long-term asset in return. This is the essence when taking
calculated risk, as powerfully displayed by Magnus in the game we just looked at.

B. It is important not to believe in ghost threats out of great respect of the opponent or fear of
losing. I think the best example historically in this respect was Fischer, who would always snatch
material if he didn’t see a refutation.

C. When fighting in an equal position against a strong opponent, unavoidably there will be a gradual
escalation of the tension, reaching a culmination point where mistakes could occur. You need
physical endurance to withstand the pressure successfully. Energy gives composure, so you can
make sound decisions quickly, avoiding ruining an otherwise well played game.

51
 Fridman – Burg

Belgium, team championship 2019

In the game Vallejo Pons-Carlsen we witnessed calculated risk in an equal position, which was fully
vindicated by a long-term asset (a bishop pair on an open board) available to Black. However, this
immediately rings a bell to me: in such cases it is important to know when an asset is really long-
term, for otherwise the risk could by unjustified. If such an asset isn’t sustainable, it is imperative to
bail out instead of prolonging the game, accepting equality and a draw. So again everything comes
down to evaluating the situation properly. In practice misevaluations in situations of this type are
more often the rule than an exception. The following example is a glaring one:

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.c4 e6 4.g3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.Qc2 c5 7.0-0 cxd4 8.Nxd4 Na6 9.Bd2 dxc4
10.Qxc4 e5 11.Nf3 Be6 12.Qc2 Rc8 13.Nc3 Nb4 14.Qd1 Nc6 15.Bg5 h6 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.Nd2

Black has played an excellent opening and the position is equal. Once again the pawn structure is
symmetrical and the kings are absolutely safe. White has a slight preponderance over the light
squares, and the Bg2 is indeed strong, but Black has two bishops and the prospect of challenging
White’s light square control by putting his pieces in the centre and advancing his f- and e-pawns
when ready. If he manages to do that, then he will become the better side because White’s asset will
eclipse.

17...Qb6!

Preparing to bring the king’s rook to d8, and creating the semi-threat of gobbling the pawn on b2.
After 17...Rc7!? 18.Nb3! White is eyeing both c5 and d5, and could easily get on top if Black is

52
careless. Play could go on:
18...b6
18...Rd7 19.Qc1 Be7 20.Bxc6!? (20.Rd1=) 20...bxc6 21.Qe3÷.
19.Qb1!. In comparison to the game, now this is justified, as Black finds it harder to dispute the light
squares.
19...Nd4

20.e3! Nxb3 21.axb3 Bxb3

21...a5 22.Rd1 Rd7 23.Qc2 Be7! 24.Bc6 Rd6 25.Rxd6 Qxd6 26.Be4÷.
22.Ra3 Be6 23.Nb5 Rd7 24.Nxa7 Rd2 25.Qc1=.

18.Qb1?

This can hardly be called a calculated risk. It is in fact a dive into a worse position from which White
should have never escaped unscathed. GM Daniel Fridman was obviously the rating favourite, and his
game was not worse at all. He could have aspired to consolidate his grip on the light squares, with
some faint hopes of grinding something out of it. A possible explanation of his mistake is that he was
taken aback by his opponent’s enterprising opening play and started to see “ghosts”. So he decided to
“play it safe”. Whatever it was, the text is a lazy and to a great extent unnatural move that hands
Black the advantage.

White had to choose instead the obvious centralisation 18.Nd5!, not fearing the “ghost threat” on b2.
A piece centralisation with tempo always enjoys high chances of being one of the best options,
and this case is no exception.

53
There could follow 18...Bxd5
In the event of 18...Qxb2 19.e3! (19.Rb1 Qxa2 20.Ra1 Qb2 21.Rb1 Qa3 22.Nc4° is also
balanced.) 19...Rfd8 20.Nc4 Qb5™ 21.Nd6 Qa5™ 22.Nxc8 Bxd5™ 23.Bxd5 Rxd5 24.Qb3
Rd7™ 25.Rad1 Qc7 26.Rxd7 Qxd7 27.Nxa7! Nxa7 28.Rb1 b5 29.Rc1! Nc8 30.a4! Nd6 31.a5!?
= I would rate White’s practical chances higher, although the position remains balanced.
19.Bxd5 Ne7!
19...Qxb2 20.Ne4° looks at least equal.
20.Be4 Rfd8

21.Bd3! Qxb2 22.Rb1 Qxa2 23.Rxb7 Nc6 24.Ne4 Be7 25.Qa1! Qxa1 (25...Qe6 26.Qa6°) 26.Rxa1
a5. The position is in many ways balanced in spite of Black’s extra pawn. The cleanest one is

54
apparently 27.Rc1 Bb4 28.g4=.

18...Rfd8! 19.Rd1 Be7!µ

A simple move that underlines the complete failure of White’s clumsy manoeuvre. The bishop paves
the way for the f-pawn to contest the centre, and poses huge problems to the opposition.
A worse possibility was 19...Nd4?! 20.Nde4
20.e3? Rxc3 21.bxc3 Qxb1 22.Raxb1 Ne2+–+.
20...Bg4?!
Acknowledging the mistake with 20...Be7! 21.e3 Nc6³/µ is still much better for Black.
21.Rd2 Be7 22.h3 Bh5 23.g4! Bg6 24.Qd1²/=, and White is suddenly fine. Black has neglected the
control of the light squares.

20.e3

This is imperative, to keep the knight out of d4.

20...f5?!

A weak move, giving White a means to contest the light squares. Black fails to obey the rule “Do not
hurry!”, which applies to positions where one is better on both parts of the board. His mistake could
have thrown away a big part of his advantage.
Fridman of course wanted to play 21.Be4, restoring his control over the light squares and the game,
so 20...g6!µ was a much better way to stop him. Black would have then been threatening ...Nc6-b4,
and I cannot see a good way to prevent it.

21.Bh3?

55
And White reacts with a superficial, move, but most importantly, it is tactically flawed.
Daniel had to hit the nail in the head with 21.g4! f4 22.exf4 exf4 23.Qe4! Bf7 24.Nb3, activating his
pieces to the utmost. After 24...Bh4! 25.Rxd8+ Rxd8 26.Qxf4 Nb4! 27.Na4! Nd3! 28.Qxf7+ Kxf7
29.Nxb6 Bxf2+ 30.Kf1 Bxb6 31.Rd1 Kf6³ Black remains the better side, but the position is very
close to a draw.

21...e4!

After this shocker Black is practically winning.

22.g4

Too late, but 22.Ndxe4?? Ne5!–+ or 22.Ncxe4?? Ne5!–+ were of course out of the question.

22...fxg4

22...Rxd2! 23.Rxd2 Ne5 24.Bg2 Nxg4–+ would have won. White is unable to withstand the
onslaught.

23.Qxe4 Ne5 24.Bg2µ

White is still worse, but he has more chances to save the game after Black’s inaccurate moves at
various points. I will not comment on the rest of the game because it is unrelated to our topic.

56
24...Bf6 25.Qxb7 Qxb7 26.Bxb7 Rb8 27.Bg2 Rxb2 28.Nde4 Rxd1+ 29.Rxd1 Nf3+ 30.Bxf3 gxf3
31.Nxf6+ gxf6 32.h4 Rc2 33.Nd5 Rxa2 34.Nf4 Bf7 35.Rd8+ Kg7 36.Rd7 f5 37.Ne6+ Kf6 38.Nd4
a5 39.Rd6+ Ke5 40.Rxh6 Bd5 41.Nc6+ Ke4 42.Ne7 Ra1+ 43.Kh2 Rf1 44.Nxd5 Rxf2+ 45.Kh3
Kxd5 46.Kg3 Rf1 47.Ra6 Ke4 48.Rxa5 Rg1+ 49.Kf2 Rg2+ 50.Kf1 Rb2 51.Ra3 f4 52.exf4 Kxf4
53.Ra8 Kg3 54.Rg8+ Kxh4 55.Rh8+ ½-½

Unavoidably, some obvious questions are bound to arise at the end of this game:

1. How do we sense if, in a quiet position, the moment has arrived where a critical decision regarding
bailing out or not has to be made?
2. Okay, let’s suppose we did sense that. What happens if we suspect the right approach (e.g. to bail
out), but we cannot fully shape it tactically?

A. To start with question #1, it is important to notice if our opponent has a long-term asset. If we
detect one in his favour, then we should inquire if we can at least counter-balance it somehow. If the
answer is yes, we can take a calculated risk and live with it. If the answer is no, we should realise that
the position will hardly remain quite for long. Then we should search a way to end the battle
peacefully before things got worse for us. There are usually short periods of 3-4 moves where this
is possible, when the opponent has not yet attacked anything in our camp. This looks like a pseudo-
planless stage, but it should not be perceived as such.

B. To answer question #2, I have to note the following: a very neglected element in chess are the
micro-skirmishes.
Many people claim that chess is 99% tactics and there is a good reason for that. Now, focusing on the
core of the question, if we feel we should bail out, we must put more effort in calculation. A small
material investment is often a good way to anticipate negative developments. We don’t have to

57
calculate everything to the very end if we do get considerable activity in return. We should trust our
evaluations.
For example, a rook on the seventh rank or the creation of a very strong outpost in the centre or, even
better, a combination of similar factors, should be enough to outweigh a pawn. What is more
important to know is that stabs that create such activity are most often positionally sound as tactics go
hand in hand with strategy. Constantly harassing the opponent with small stabs is often the best
strategy.
If we cannot see either an immediate bailout nor a more sophisticated one, which involves dynamic
elements, such as a pawn sacrifice for activity, then probably our initial evaluation was wrong. The
position may have been quiet, but not equal. That often happens when the opponent has more than
one long-term asset working in his favour. These factors will be “awaken” at the first contact of the
armies. In such cases only passive defence will give us hopes. As you can see, almost everything
comes down to a correct evaluation, so you should work on it heavily if you want to improve your
game.

58
 Rapport – Giri

Wijk aan Zee 2019

In the next example the issue of the correct evaluation reappears in a most striking manner, showing
that even top-class players can make superficial assessments in quiet positions that border on
equality. The victim here is Hungarian super GM Richard Rapport.

1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bf4 e6 4.Nb5 Na6 5.e3 Be7 6.Nf3 0-0 7.Bd3 c6 8.Nc3 Nb4 9.h3 Nxd3+
10.cxd3 b6 11.0-0 Bb7 12.Qb3 Nd7 13.Rfe1 Rc8 14.Rac1 h6 15.Bg3 a5 16.Na4 Ba6 17.Ne5 Nxe5
18.Bxe5 Bb5

We join the game at a moment where some mild simplification has taken place. This is one of the
cases where the classical tools for evaluating a position remain quite helpful, but they are not the A
and Z for a 100% correct assessment.

Let us first of all do a count in the classical manner for strengths, weaknesses and all the elements that
remain equal. Then I will proceed to the peculiarities of the particular situation:

• Material is equal.
• Space looks evenly distributed.
• The kings are absolutely safe and there are no prospects of any attacks being conjured up in the near
future.
• All 16 pawns are on the board. In a total absence of heavy pieces Black’s pawn structure would be
better. In the presence of many of them though, as portrayed on the diagram, things are balanced.

59
Let us see why:
• The c6 pawn is slightly vulnerable. The existence of only one semi-open file that can be used by the
white rooks gives White a small target and makes him the formally more active side.
• The weaknesses at d3 and b6 are balanced. The queens are tied to defending them from the attacks
of the respective minor pieces, which are the Bb5 for Black and the Na4 for White. It is notable
that the Bb5 and the Na4 are in some way “marking” each other (to use a football term), a fact
that adds up to the feeling that attack and defence are delicately balanced on the queenside.
• Black has the possibility to organise a pawn break by playing ...Rf8-e8, ...Be7-f8, ...♔g8-h8, ...f7-f6,
...e6-e5. This looks too long, but still remains a valid possibility. And let us not forget that his
bishop pair (a long-term asset) would spring to life in that case. The problem with White’s
structure is that it is the more static, and a similar pawn break doesn’t exist.

Thus much for the classical way of evaluating things, but now let us come to the “specifics”. The
“specifics”, as I like to call them, are factors of discomfort that we do feel during the game, but due to
some reason (perhaps too much faith in superficial old rules?) we fail to define exactly or take
seriously. Looking at the position deeper, I discovered one reason of discomfort for White and none
for Black, so eventually I decided that the position hinds dangers only for the White side. The main
reason of discomfort here is the mobility of the white queen. It acts on a small part of the board
which Black’s bishops and pawns cover very well. It has to defend the d3-pawn as well. If White
decides to double rooks along the c-file, then its mobility would be further reduced, leaving it with
practically no square to flee to. This is in itself an alarming factor. At this point, I guess, it is
important to remind ourselves that Black does have a long term asset – the bishop pair (and a way to
activate it by carrying out ...e5), which our potential pressure on the c-file is supposed to
counterbalance or even supersede. It is for this reason that according to classical thinking we would
have to double rooks and try to make something out of it.

But is this pressure of ours a real long-term asset like the opponent’s bishop pair? The answer is: only
partly. A long-term asset either neutralises the activation of the opposite one or creates threats of its
own. In this case, operating on a restricted space and with limited resources, White cannot generate
real threats. So by putting his rooks on the c-file White in the best case would become a passive
spectator, hoping that when the opponent tried to carry out his central advance he would be well
armed to meet it.
Thus we come to unavoidable conclusion that White should seek a way to bail out in the diagrammed
position. A rescue exit does exist, and is relatively easy to find, but White misevaluated the position
and tried to treat it “the classical way”:

19.Re2

Not a bad move in itself, but it is the prelude to a faulty tactical operation.
White had to defend his d-pawn with 19.Red1!, preparing to bail out. On this particular occasion it
consists of a repetition. After 19...Re8 20.Nc3! Ba6
20...Qd7? simply blunders a pawn to 21.a4 Ba6 22.Qxb6±.

60
21.Na4 Bb5 22.Nc3 Ba6 23.Na4= both players could have gone to rest, satisfied by having played a
good game.

19...Re8 20.Rec2 Bf8

21.Nxb6?

A “combination” that was not bound to work. White had to wait with a move like:
21.Bg3!, even if it amounts to an admission that he has no active plan. Then 21...f6!?
21...Bxa4 22.Qxa4 b5 23.Qb3 a4 24.Qc3 b4 25.Qe1 Qd7= is simple equality if Black wants
one as c6 can never be pressed due to White’s lack of space on the queenside – a factor that
prevents him from tripling major pieces along the c-file.
22.a3 Kh7
22...Bxa4!? 23.Qxa4 b5 24.Qb3 a4 25.Qa2 Qb6= is again easy equality for Black, if he is
looking for one.
23.Kh1! makes us realise the restrictive role of the doubled rooks. To make progress Black would
have to give up his bishop with 23...Bxa4
23...e5?! 24.dxe5 fxe5 25.Nxb6! Qxb6 26.a4!²/= suddenly works for White with the open
centre.
24.Qxa4 b5 25.Qb3 a4 26.Qa2 Qd7=/³, reaching a position where he can hope to generate play with
...e6-e5, but where undoubtedly White holds firm.

21...Qxb6 22.a4

61
22...Ra8!–+

A shock for White, but good moves exist in good positions. Black uses the bad mobility of the White
queen to obtain an overwhelming advantage.
Rapport might have been counting only on 22...Rcd8? 23.axb5 Qxb5 24.Qa2, but even so, after the
simple 24...Rc8= the position is totally balanced. The weakness on d3 completely outweighs the one
on c6.

Bearing this in mind provides enough reason to condemn his avoidance of a repetition earlier on
because their is no point in discarding an immediate draw to get equality without any winning
prospects as the one on the diagram. Unfortunately for the Hungarian GM, after Giri’s brilliant retort

62
22...Ra8! no equality can be reached.

23.g4

This is what usually happens when one realises that he has been tactically tricked – an overreaction
that makes matters even worse. However, on this occasion the white position is so bad that only a
blunder by Giri could save his opponent no matter what White chose. Anish is often called the “King
of draws”, but his technical ability is quite high, and I am sure he would have easily cashed the point
after the alternative 23.Kf1. The correct follow up for Black is 23...Qa7! 24.axb5 a4! 25.Qc3 cxb5
26.Qc7 b4 27.Qxa7 Rxa7 28.Ke2 Rea8!, and the win is just a few moves away.

23...Qd8! 24.axb5 a4 25.Qc3 cxb5 26.Qc6 b4

A sad position for White: On the queenside his tripled pieces along the c-file are firing into the void,
while the black pawns are simply marching on. On the kingside his pawn advance has merely
provided Black with another target, which Giri was not going to ignore.

27.Bc7 Qg5 28.f4 Qg6 29.e4 h5

More convincing was 29...b3 30.Rf2 Rec8–+, but there isn’t anything wrong with the game move.

30.g5 h4 31.Kf2

31.Kh2 Rec8 32.Qb7 b3–+ changes nothing.

31...a3 32.b3 Rec8 33.Qb7 dxe4 34.dxe4 f6! 35.Be5 Rxc2+ 36.Rxc2 Re8 37.gxf6 gxf6 38.Kf1 Re7
39.Qc6 Rg7 40.Qxe6+ Kh7 0-1

63
At the end of the game I’d like to summarize two or three things we’ve learned:

A. In the process of evaluation, it is important to take into consideration factors which could
render a long-term asset less effective. In the above case the mobility of the white queen was
restricted, making further progress on the c-file unrealistic

B. It makes no sense to continue a game for the sake of it if our long-term asset is restricted in
some way. We should bail out and draw the game at the first opportunity.

C. If, for some reason (carelessness, rating considerations), we nevertheless entered such situation,
we should be patient. In such case drastic solutions hardly exist. We should switch to an alert move by
move game, with the aim to exploit mistakes from our opponent.

64
 Harikrishna – So

Olympiad, Batumi 2018

Chess is to a very great extent a matter of concrete knowledge. There are iconic structures that have
been tested in tens of thousands of games on the chess arenas of the world, and these games have
confirmed that the players who adopted them could happily live with the slight weaknesses these
structures come with. These resilient set-ups very often (if not always) comprise a positive feature
that balances out their inherent flaws. For example, in the Sveshnikov Variation Black accepts a
weakness on d5 for the sake of a bishop pair and a solid pawn centre, the Tarrasch Defence offers
Black outposts and free piece play in return for an isolani, etc. However, there is an issue of
importance lurking around in these systems, as the balancing features require accurate handling
from us in order to stay in the game! Somewhere here, you are of course entitled to ask: “Isn’t an
equal position comprising these features outside the scope of this book? Doesn’t it immediately
belong to the category of not-dry ones?” The answer is: not necessarily. Not all dynamic features
generate automatically sharp tangled play. To say it poetically, they could simply be lying there in the
background, as reservoirs of energy, and serving as guardian angels of our position. Besides, a lot
depends on pawn breaks and the respective dangers the kings face in a certain position. If they are
scarce, the position has a higher chance to end up in the category of the dry ones, notwithstanding the
dynamic features that can be detected in the long-term quality of the pieces or their manoeuvring
abilities. I know all this may sound a bit paradoxical, but I think that the following explanation will
give you a better idea of what I mean.

Having a powerful arsenal doesn’t necessarily means that you can forcibly reach or harm your
opponent. On the other hand, it is almost certain that it will prevent him from harming you.

Let me now return to the point I was getting at – I mentioned above that the balancing features for
inherent flaws that come with certain structures “require accurate handling from us in order to stay in
the game”. My own experience and other grandmasters’ practice shows that such an “accurate
handling” isn’t always easy and depends on your energy level – there are days where you will feel at
home setting micro-traps, avoiding the wrong exchanges and pursuing the right ones, scrutinising
every move for nuances, trying to squeeze blood out of a stone. And other days you will not be
ingenious enough. In both cases the spectator will see a fight that looks mostly dry, but in the first
case you would be feeling like a King, and in the second like an idiot, wishing you had never given
your opponent the right to be the one “making the easy moves”. This happens because your own
long-term compensation requires a higher degree of precision and patience.
Here the following situation starts to take bones and flesh – with the above considerations in mind,
chess players are often tempted (especially when playing the black pieces) to trade mutual advantages
in order to level the game completely.
This is very similar to a bail-out decision, so I deemed it right to examine it in this section. It is

65
actually not an unsound strategy. It is natural to strive to obtain a less demanding type of equality as
that saves energy and is a prophylaxis against blunders. The underlying trap in such a situation is that
you may end up so absorbed or so anxious in getting rid of the weakness, that you could fail to
recognise some kind of transformation that gives your opponent an edge. That is a common way of
losing games at any level. While in the following example Black got away with it without facing any
pressure, this is an exception rather than the rule.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.Re1 Nd6 6.Nxe5 Be7 7.Bf1 Nxe5 8.Rxe5 0-0 9.d4 Bf6
10.Re1 Re8 11.Rxe8+ Nxe8 12.d5 d6 13.Nd2 c6 14.Nc4 cxd5 15.Qxd5 Qc7 16.Qd3 Be6 17.Ne3
Rd8 18.c3 d5 19.Nc2 Nd6 20.Nd4

Having started as a Spanish Berlin, an opening both players are familiar with, it now bears close
resemblance to an IQP French, a structure that is famous for its solidity thanks to the efforts of
Kortchnoi, Vaganian and many other legendary players.
Practice and analytical work have shown that this type of position is extremely hard to break with
White. Black dances with his pieces around his own weakness and White has to keep a watchful eye
to avoid the following developments:

• Liquidation that would fill the d4 square with a pawn;

• Appropriate exchanges that would leave him unable to exploit the isolani.
• knight leaps to c4- and e4-squares that could have a weakening impact on his own pawn structure.

My own practice indicates that it is very difficult for White to cope with all these tasks successfully.
Even if he plays perfectly, Black will at some point find a way to bail out provided he displays a
degree of patience. Coming to the specific position on the board, all of the above remarks apply. With
his last move Harikrishna centralised his knight, blocking firmly the d4 square, but Black is overall
well placed. His Bf6 eyes the d4-square, the d-pawn is safe, the Nd6 has prospects of leaping to c4,

66
e4, f5 to harass White.
In such a situation I know well that it is important to saddle the opponent with alternatives, and not to
give him an easy move. However, this isn’t what Wesley So did:

20...Qb6?!

Black rushes to get rid of the weakness, but in my view this is a wrong decision. For the sake of
creating a one-move threat to liquidate the Nd4, Wesley allows a transformation that shouldn’t have
worked in his favour.
20...Bd7! was the move that keeps the perfect harmony in Black’s set-up, securing the important
defender of the light squares and threatening (only now!) to put the queen on b6. This move is hardly
difficult to find, and it is quite effective, as the following variations show:
21.Bf4!?
After 21.Ne2 Be6! 22.Be3 Nc4 23.Bf4 Qd7 24.b3 Bf5 25.Qd1 Na5 26.Be3 Nc6= Black has
induced the weakening move b2-b3, and the position is completely equal.
21...Qb6!

Now this is much stronger than in the game. Black attacks b2 and wants also to take on d4, levelling
the game, so White has no choice:
22.Rd1! Bg4!. By defending the Nd6 with tempo, Black renews the threat to the b2-pawn.
23.Re1!
23.f3?! Be6 leaves White exposed on b2 and to ...Nd6-c4 ideas.
23...h6 24.Qc2!?. If the computer resorts to this, I guess we can conclude that the position is already
totally equal.
Instead, 24.h3 Bh5= allows Black to transfer his bishop to g6 and even become ambitious.
24...Bxd4. Not the only move of course, but isn’t this what Black wants? 25.cxd4 Rc8! 26.Qb3 Qxb3
27.axb3 Ne8 28.Re7 g5 29.Bd2 Nd6 30.h3 Kf8 31.Re1 Be6=. Chances are totally even.

67
21.Nxe6 fxe6²

Now the situation has changed. Black’s rush to control the d4 square has led to a transformation that
in my humble opinion favours White, if only slightly. Let us see why:
• Black’s pawn formation is split to three pawn islands.
• White has two long-range bishops in an open position. They may be on their initial squares as yet,
but they enjoy good prospects.
• Black’s central pawn duo can easily become a target, and if it is lured forwards, even more
weaknesses will arise. As for the pressure against f2 and b2, it is only temporary. He will not be
able to increase or sustain it.

22.Qe3?!

Strangely enough, “Hari” throws away his advantage at once. Maybe he thought that in the ending the
bishops will have good chances of success, but if this is really so he is soon disillusioned. He would
have actually done much better to keep the queens on the board because in that case the §e6/§d5
complex is rather weak and he would also have good long-term chances of attacking the black king.
Here is a brief analysis showing how he could have proceeded:
22.a4!? Perhaps the Indian GM missed this move? The idea is to either expel the queen from b6 or
force the weakening ...a7-a5. In both cases the resulting position is in White’s favour.

68
22...a5. The engines consider this as the lesser evil.
After 22...Qc6 23.Qh3² or 22...Ne4 23.Qe2! Be7 24.a5 Qc7 25.Be3² White develops his
initiative unhindered.
23.g3 Nc4 24.Qc2 h6 25.Bd3. I would dislike to have the black pieces here. Although it isn’t so easy
for White to progress with his attack, Black has no clear plan and must all the time be in an alert
mode.
25...e5
After 25...Kh8 26.Qe2 the position remains annoying for Black.
26.Qe2 Nd6
In case of 26...Qc6 there comes 27.Qg4! Kh8 28.Qf5 e4 29.Bxc4! dxc4 30.Be3², and White is
clearly for choice.

69
27.Bg6!?
27.Qg4 e4! 28.Qe6+ Kh8 29.Bb5 Qc5 30.Be3 d4 31.cxd4 Bxd4 32.Qe7 Rg8 33.Rc1 Qb4
34.Bxd4 Qxd4 35.Bd7 Qd2 36.Rf1 Ra8 allows Black to defend.
27.Be3 Qc6 28.h4!?.
27...Nc4 (27...Qc6 28.h4²) 28.Qh5ƒ White definitely owns the initiative. The following continuation
isn’t entirely forced, but nevertheless serves to illustrate the dangers facing Black: 28...Rf8 29.b3!
Nd6 (29...Qxb3?? 30.Bxh6+–) 30.Be3! Qxb3 31.Qg4! Kh8 32.Qh3 Nf7 (32...Kg8?? 33.Qe6+ Nf7
34.Bc5) 33.Rb1 Qxc3 34.Rc1 Qa3 35.Rc8 Qe7 36.Rxf8+ Qxf8 37.Qe6 d4 38.Bd2±.

22...Qxe3 23.Bxe3 a6=

70
In the absence of queens Black can breath freely – his king isn’t anymore in danger, nor is the central
pawn structure vulnerable as the king can support it. Last but not least, the black minor pieces are
optimally placed to support queenside play.

24.Re1 Kf7 25.g3 b5 26.Kg2 Nc4 27.Bc1 a5 28.a3 Rb8 29.Be2 b4 30.axb4 axb4 31.Bxc4 dxc4
32.cxb4 Rxb4 ½-½

As you may have noticed, at the end of every example I try to systematise my thoughts and draw
conclusions that could prove useful in a practical game. In this case my conclusions are:

A. Some structures suffer from a static weakness, but provide dynamic compensation.

B. Decades of experience have proved that the dynamic features of an isolani are of a long-term
character and balance the game.

C. We should not rush to get rid of the static weakness at all cost. Our long-term compensation will
not evaporate if we manoeuvre calmly.

The difference here from the cases of taking calculated risk is that the possibility of bailing out isn’t
unique and will not disappear if we make a couple of good moves that maintain the balance. It is
more important to preserve our patience, and we need to take care of it.

71
Chapter 3

Common wise sayings

Do they apply to positions where not much is going on

“All generalizations are false, including this one.”

Mark Twain

Dealing with the slogan “It is better to play with a wrong plan than no
plan whatsoever”

I mentioned in the very first game of this book that playing without any plan at all is better than
following a wrong plan. What I had in mind was situations where a clear plan did not exist, so we
would have instead to resort to a move by move approach, improving or simply maintaining our
position and hoping that a subsequent change of circumstances might yield a real plan. Marshall’s
famous remark, “a bad plan is better than none at all” emphasized the fact that we need to formulate
plans during play. As often happens with a piece of human wisdom, the exaggeration aimed to
enhance the impression, but also led to misinterpretations. Many people started to treat the slogan like
common sense in chess, with all the shortcomings that entails. Thus they contradicted pure logic, for,
how can something that bears negative elements be praised? It has been disappointing for me to hear
trainers at the clubs tell people they need to have a plan at all costs, even if it is a wrong one (just for
the sake of planning?!), as this underestimates not only chess, but also life’s logic. A more correct
view is that quiet balanced situations or standstills must be recognised and treated concretely. Such is
the nature of this world and we cannot change it. However, there is one exception where a bad plan
can be vindicated. As they say, desperate situations call for desperate measures, and translating this
into chess language means that in a desperate position a trap, even if its not objectively the best
continuation, could often be the only chance of survival. We will not discuss such situations here as
they are outside of the topic of this book, but I deemed it right to make this distinction just in case.
After all, we don’t play only good positions in this life.
Coming to the first example of this chapter, I think it is one that belongs to the type of no-plan-
situations for White. Or, to put it more accurately, a case where no constructive plan existed. White
had to switch to a move by move mode, trying to slowly improve his position and swiftly reacting to
his opponent’s threats. The fact that former Candidate Johan Hjartarson fails to accomplish the task
shows how difficult this particular task can be, even for the very best.

Hjartarson – Urkedal

Olympiad, Batumi 2018

72
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.b3 b6 4.Bb2 Bb7 5.e3 Be7 6.Be2 0-0 7.0-0 c5 8.d3 Nc6 9.Nbd2 Re8 10.a3 Rc8
11.Qc2 d5 12.Rfe1 Bf8 13.Rad1 a5

We join the game at a position where nothing much is going on. Both sides are fully developed and
there is some small contact between the two armies, but not one pawn or piece have been exchanged,
making this a symmetrical balance.
Still, Black does control more space, and he has a clear plan – to advance ...d5-d4.
Black’s last move, the prophylactic 13...a5, was actually designed to achieve the desired goal without
allowing counterplay with b3-b4. This would have happened after the more double-edged 13...d4!?
14.exd4 cxd4 15.b4! e5 16.Bf1÷ when the game is strategically unbalanced as the pawn structure is
asymmetrical and White controls some queenside space in return for Black’s central superiority.

Given the above remarks, what should have been White’s reaction in the diagram position? Although
every opinion is certainly debatable, I think it should have been one of restriction and gradual piece
improvement. Instead the Icelandic grandmaster embarks on a plan to confront his opponent actively
in the centre:

14.d4?!

The idea is of course to prevent Black’s intended space-gaining operation and steer the game later
into an asymmetrical course by appropriate pawn exchanges in the centre. However, White isn’t well
configured for such an active approach (to say the least) as his queen isn’t well placed on the c-file,
and the queen’s knight is more passive than its black counterpart.
I believe that White had to keep the position semi-closed with the typical centralisation 14.Ne5!,
which starts a gradual improvement of the white pieces. The natural idea of exchanging a piece in a
cramped position is accompanied with the strategically healthy design of giving the Nd2 and the Be2

73
an outlet on the f3-square. I think the following lines demonstrate the correctness of this choice:
14...d4. That should have been the critical response.
a) After 14...Nxe5 15.Bxe5 Bd6 (15...Nd7 can be answered by either 16.Bc3, preparing a
battery on the diagonal a1-h8, or 16.Bb2 Bd6 17.g3 Be5 18.Bf3=.) 16.Bxd6 Qxd6 17.Qb2!=.
White stands very well as he has enough space to manoeuvre his remaining pieces and has a
clear plan to play b3-b4.
b) Black could have also embraced the rule “the side with more space should avoid
exchanges” by playing 14...Ne7. However, in this case 15.Qb1 Nf5 16.h3 Rc7 17.cxd5 exd5
18.Nef3÷ yields a fully playable position.

15.Bf3!. This idea, known from the Queen’s Indian, would have basically been the only line White
needed to calculate:
15...Qd6
a) 15...dxe3 16.fxe3 Nxe5 17.Bxe5 Bxf3 18.Nxf3 Nd7 19.Bg3 e5 20.e4!?÷ is excellent for
White, who has plans to redeploy the Nf3 to d5.
b) 15...Nxe5 16.Bxb7 Rc7 (16...dxe3? 17.Bxe5 exf2+ 18.Kxf2 Ng4+ 19.Kf1+–) 17.exd4!² is
even better for him.
16.Nxc6 Bxc6 17.Bxc6 Rxc6 18.exd4 cxd4 19.Ne4„. Play is double-edged, but White could well be
for preference in a practical game.

14...cxd4!

Frode Urkedal, one of the many young aspirants to follow the examples set by Carlsen in Norwegian
chess, hits the nail on the head right away. Black exploits the fact that White cannot settle on d4 with
a piece due to the a3 weakness to saddle him with hanging pawns that are more of a burden than a
strength.

74
15.exd4

15...a4!

Concrete and strong!

That said, even the slower 15...g6 16.Bf1 Bg7 17.h3 Re7! 18.Ne5 Rec7 19.Qb1 Qe7 20.Qa1 Nxe5
21.dxe5 Nd7 22.cxd5 Bxd5 23.Bc4 Nc5³ would have been good for Black, underlining the
inferiority of White’s structure.

16.bxa4

After this both the Nc6 and the Bb7 will be activated, but there was no choice.
In the event of 16.c5 axb3 17.Nxb3 Nb8!! 18.a4 Nbd7 19.Bb5 Bc6 20.Ba6 Rc7 21.Ra1 bxc5
22.Nxc5 Nxc5 23.dxc5 Ne4µ White’s weaknesses on c5 and a4 make Black the clear favourite.

16...Na5 17.Ne5 Ba6

75
It is time to take stock here and evaluate the consequences of White’s “active” operation:
• His queenside pawn structure is irreversibly damaged. Being a pawn up hardly compensates that all
his queenside is vulnerable.
• All his pieces with the exception of the Ne5 are passive, performing only defensive functions.
• Exchanging any of the attacking enemy units seems very difficult. This means that a bail out
possibility most likely doesn’t exist.

Thus we can conclude that even if a magic solution existed here to help White equalise, his strategy
would still be a failure because whatever depends on miracles is failure in chess.
But what are the deeper causes that led Johan to this situation? We referred to specific issues, such as
the queen’s sensitive placement under the X-ray of the c8-rook, but was there something “bigger”
besides all that? Well, I think yes. I would summarise it as follows:

Opening up a semi-closed centre from a position with less space by means of a central thrust is
dangerous, unless it creates by force a weakness in the enemy camp or leads to a mass liquidation.

The side with the less space may easily fall victim to the higher activity of the opponent. Of course
the piece placement plays a serious role, but generally speaking, the player with more space and fluid
pawns can transform the structure to his own needs or liking since he is the active side. This isn’t a
rule of thumb, but I assure you it applies in 70-75% of the cases. Thus, White’s plan was not realistic
from the beginning, and we can discard it as a bad plan. No wonder he fell into an inferior situation.
There were two issues with it (passive configuration of pieces, slight space inferiority), and Johan’s
opponent exploited them to perfection.

18.Rc1?!µ

76
After this move White is well outside the drawing margin.
It was important to resolve the situation along the c-file immediately by 18.Qb1!! Nxc4
18...dxc4 19.Rc1 Nd5 20.g3³.
19.Ndxc4 dxc4 20.Rc1, when White has succeeded to obtain activity by returning the extra pawn in
the best possible manner. After 20...Qd5 21.h3 h6 22.Qa2 Rc7 23.Bf3! Qa5 24.Bc3! Qxa4 25.Bd1
Qb5 26.Rb1 Qd5 27.Rxb6 Qa8 28.Bf3 Bb7 29.Rxb7 Rxb7 30.Bxb7 Qxb7³/µ Black remains better,
but the position might be defendable with perfect play.

18...Nd7!

Threatening to exchange White’s only proud piece. Since he cannot avoid it, he is in deep trouble.

19.Bd3

Relatively best. 19.Nxd7?! Qxd7 would be hopeless as Black will take at the end with a piece on c4,
e.g. 20.Bc3 Bxc4 21.Nxc4 Nxc4–+, and White is beyond salvation. The computers are at first excited
about 19.Nxf7?!, but Urkedal had correctly evaluated that the sac fails: 19...Kxf7 20.Qxh7 Nf6
21.Bh5+ Ke7™ 22.Qf5 Kd7 23.Bxe8+ Qxe8 24.Qh3 Nxc4–+, and Black should gradually exploit
his serious material advantage.

19...g6 20.c5?

Whatever chances of resistance remained lied in 20.Bc3™ 20...Nxe5 21.dxe5 Bxc4 (21...Nxc4
22.Bxc4 Bxc4 23.Bb4!) 22.Bxa5 Bxd3 23.Qxc8 Qxc8 24.Rxc8 Rxc8 25.Bxb6 Bxa3 26.Nf3 Rc2
27.a5 Ra2 28.h4 Bb2 29.Nd4 Kf8 30.Re3 Bc4 31.Kh2µ, and White fights on.

77
20...Bxd3 21.Qxd3 Nxe5 22.Rxe5 Bg7–+

The game has been decided. The rest is a matter of technique at this level and Black makes no
mistake:

23.Ree1 bxc5 24.Bc3 c4 25.Qc2 Nc6 26.Nf3 Qb6 27.Rb1 Qa7 28.Rb5 Nxd4 29.Nxd4 Bxd4
30.Bb4 Bf6 31.a5 Qd7 32.Rb6 Bd4 33.Rd6 Qa7 34.h4 Bc5 35.Qd2 Bxd6 36.Bxd6 f6 0-1

Having reached the end of this game, it is time for the post mortem conclusions:
A. Playing actively with pawns in the centre from a position of a slight inferiority in space isn’t very
likely to succeed, especially when the opponent can transform the structure in different ways. It could
be a bad or superficial plan, so we need to be alarmed when considering such an idea. It is instead
better to switch to the move by move mode, improving the position of the pieces à la Nimzowitsch or
exchanging material. At a later stage, when conditions improved, we could always reconsider such an
activity.

B. Exception: Activity of such type could only be justified if it leads to something concrete. Being in
a move by move mode, we should be able to spot the right moment. However, I believe that the
characteristics of a position such as the one described above will rarely allow freeing advances in the
centre, so we should be mentally prepared for prolonged manoeuvring instead.

78
 Guijarro – Karjakin

FIDE Chess.com, Douglas 2019

In the following game we see former World Championship Challenger Sergei Karjakin deal with a
situation of equality where apparently no constructive plan exists for him. His wait and see approach
is indeed something commendable, and suits the needs of the concrete position. And yet, the way he
handles matters is not entirely satisfactory. This happens because during the process he fails to apply
the move by move rule with precision, omitting several opportunities to improve his chances when
they emerged.

1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Bg2 dxc4 5.Qa4+ Bd7 6.Qxc4 c5 7.Ne5 Qc8 8.Qd3 Nc6 9.Nxd7
Nxd7 10.b3 Be7 11.Bb2 0-0 12.Nc3 Rd8 13.0-0 Nf6 14.Qc2 Nb4 15.Qc1 Qd7 16.Rd1 Rac8 17.d3

We join the game at a moment where we can safely say that the opening stage has ended. Sergei’s
opponent, Spanish GM Anton Guijarro, has chosen a solid set-up with White, the merits of which can
be appreciated only if we try to delve deeper into the position of the diagram. I believe that the
following points describe the situation well:

• The kings are safe and material is even.

• Black controls more space, but that could easily change in the future as White has more mobile
central pawns.
• White has a bishop pair, which is a nice long-term asset, as the position is semi-open.
• An exchange of dark-squared bishops should in principle favour Black – there is a remote
possibility that he could exploit the slight weakness of the dark squares in White’s queenside.
• The respective pawn breaks are d3-d4 for White and ...c5-c4 for Black, with White’s one being by
far the easier to realise.

79
• White isn’t so well coordinated at the moment, as his a1-rook has not been developed, but this
doesn’t seem to have an impact on the position – a temporary uncoordination has value for the
opponent only if it can be exploited.

Weighing the ups and downs for each side made me conclude that the following type of equality
reigns on the board: White can try to improve his position by micro plans, aiming at opening up the
play, but Black should be able to thwart them as he has good mobility and the prospect of annoying
White with the afore-mentioned trade of dark-squared bishops. Thus, it is basically a “no plan = best
plan” situation for Black, where he normally should be waiting for White to declare his intentions,
while maintaining the balance.

17...b6

Solidifying c5 and removing the b-pawn from the firing line of the Bg2. I think this is fully in
accordance with the logic of the position, and the modus vivendi in 90% of the cases. Still, the more
dynamic 17...b5!? could have been ventured here – rather surprisingly and against conventional
wisdom. Let me explain why it is against conventional wisdom, first of all:

This is the type of move that isn’t easily accepted by human strategic feeling for several reasons:

• It gives White the a2-a4 lever, allowing him to activate the dozing a1-rook.
• It weakens the c5-pawn.
• It prepares to attack White at his strong point, namely c4. That in fact looks like bashing one’s fist
against a glass because even if Black succeeded in carrying it out, the enemy bishops would rejoice,
wouldn’t they?

And yet, as we shall see below, the move works. However, this happens because of a very delicate

80
circumstantial factor and not because the strategic elements of the position were “asking for it”.
That circumstantial factor is hidden in the last clause of my evaluation panel. Let us recall what I
wrote: ”White isn’t so well coordinated at the moment ...” Well, dear readers, in this particular
situation it appears that the inconvenience could be exploited.
It turns out that 17...b5!?, had it been played by Sergei, would have proven a good preventive
measure against White’s intended plan of allowing the a1-rook to enter the game via the c- or even d-
file by first transferring his queen to e2. Speaking more specifically about White’s plan, it would be
accomplished by means of Qc1-d2, a2-a3, e2-e3, Qd2-e2 and finally the rook is ready to enter the
play, but after 17...b5!? the move 18.Qd2 can be met with the primitive 18...c4. In addition, computer
analysis revealed that White wouldn’t have been able to exploit the structural weakening 17...b5!?
entails, even by a push of the a-pawn or other, more sophisticated methods. Let us see the proof:

a) First of all I looked at 18.Qd2, which Black neutralises with the method of liquidation. 18...c4!
19.bxc4 bxc4 20.a3 (20.d4 Rb8=) 20...Nc6 21.Qe3

21...Nd4
21...Na5 22.dxc4 Qc7 23.Rxd8+ Qxd8 24.Qxa7 Nxc4 is similar.Black will get back his pawn
and will steer the game to colourless equality – 25.Rd1 Qf8 26.Bc1 Nxa3 27.Na4 h6 28.Qa6
Nc2 29.Bb2 Nb4=.
22.dxc4 Rxc4=.

b) A noncommittal move like 18.h3 can be answered with the useful 18...a6! – Black consolidates the
gained space and also waits. Then 19.a4 undermines b5, but also b3 and potentially c3, leading to a
standstill after 19...h6!, simply waiting!
19...Nbd5 20.axb5 axb5 21.Ra5 Nxc3 22.Bxc3 Nd5 23.Be5 Bf6 24.Qa1 could be “²”.
20.axb5 axb5 21.Ra5 Rb8 22.Qb1 Rdc8=.

81
c) The immediate 18.a4 a6 19.axb5 axb5 20.Ra5 was obviously my first argument against 17...b5!?.
However the strongly placed Nb4 prevents White from making any progress along the a-file: After
20...Rb8 21.Qa1 (21.h3 h6=)

21...Nc2! 22.Qa2 Nb4 23.Qb1 Rdc8! 24.Rc1 c4 also discharges the tension. But it's not the only way:
24...Bd8 25.Ra1 Nc6!, emphasizing that b3 is a weakness, is also possible. (Instead 25...Be7?!
26.Ne4! Nxe4 27.Bxe4 Bg5 28.Rd1² achieves a favourable exchange for White and leaves him
with something to play for.)

d) 18.Qb1. This most sophisticated retort is my main line. It is based on the idea a2-a3, followed by
Qb1-a2, Ra1-c1, but still it isn’t enough to achieve anything more than equality. Black has two good
replies:

d1) 18...h6 19.a3 Nbd5,

82
when I looked at the following options:
20.Nxd5 Nxd5!= is eyeing c3;
20.Ne4 can be shockingly answered with 20...a5! 21.a4 b4, when the weakness of the c3-square
outweighs c4.

For example, 22.Qc2

22.Nd2 Nc3 23.Bxc3 bxc3 24.Nc4 Nd5 25.Qc2 Nb4 26.Qxc3 Bf6 27.Qd2 Bxa1 28.Rxa1
Qa7=.
22...Qa7 23.Nd2 Ng4 24.Nc4 Bf6 25.Bf3 Bxb2 26.Qxb2 Ngf6=.

20.e3 Nxc3! 21.Bxc3 Nd5 22.Ba5 Rf8 finds White unprepared to defend the c3-square, leading to

83
sterile equality after 23.Be1 Bf6 24.Ra2 Nc3 25.Bxc3 Bxc3=.

20.Qa2!?, trying to extricate the Ra1. At first I thought that I have managed to configure the white
pieces harmoniously, but the computer suggested: 20...Nxc3
It also came up with another brutal idea – 20...h5!? 21.Rac1 h4∞.
21.Bxc3 Nd5 22.Ba5 Re8 23.Bd2 Bf6 24.Rac1 b4! 25.axb4 cxb4 26.Rxc8!?
Or 26.Bxd5 exd5 27.Bxb4 Rxc1 28.Rxc1 Qg4=.
26...Rxc8 27.Bxd5 Qxd5 28.Bxb4 Rb8 29.Qa3

29...Bd4!! 30.e3 Bf6!°. As you can check with any decent engine, the weakening of the light squares
caused by 29...Bd4!! gives Black strong compensation and a certain draw.

d2) 18...a6. This looks most natural to me, consolidating the space gain and anticipating a2-a4.
19.a3 Nc6!
19...Nbd5 20.Qa2 Nxc3 21.Bxc3 Nd5 22.Ba5 Re8 23.Bd2 Bf6 24.Rac1².
20.e3 Na5 (20...e5!? might be more precise.) 21.Qc2 e5!? 22.Ne4 Nxe4 23.dxe4 Qg4 24.Rxd8+
Bxd8 25.Rd1 c4 26.b4 Nc6 27.Rd6 Be7 28.h3 Qh5 29.Rd5 Rd8 30.Bc3 f6= with an imminent draw.

Does all this mean that my evaluation accompanying 17...b6 had a gaping hole? Should Sergei regret
the missed chance to play more actively with 17...b5!? after all? In all honesty, I think he shouldn’t,
nor should I regret the comment that the position before Black’s 17th move was a “no play=best
play” situation for Black. The reason is simple – a strong chess player is neither a machine nor a
magician. But above all he isn’t a fortune teller, to know when a single circumstantial factor is
powerful enough to allow an active treatment instead of a waiting tactic, when all other elements of
the position suggested this tactic.
Circumstantial factors should be sought when the position is at least slightly worse, and not
when it is balanced. Looking very deeply at such ideas on the board when a safer way of playing

84
exists, could prove a loss of time and energy. Besides, there is no guarantee that the idea will prove
good eventually.

18.Qd2!

White uses the lack of contact between the two armies to transfer the queen to e2. Here starts the
manoeuvring stage, and it is very interesting in my view, despite the apparent serenity on the board.

18...Nbd5!

“Should I stay or should I go?” is the usual question that tortures chess players in such cases. Well,
although everything depends on the particular position, I have always been in favour of withstanding
the tension and not giving way till it was absolutely necessary. That may not be a Petrosian-like
approach, but I believe maximalism is a good thing if you can support it with crystal clear accurate
moves, very much the way Fischer, Kasparov or E.Geller could. However, most modern top players
(the exceptions being Caruana, Svidler, Aronian and Grischuk) belong to the Karpov school of
practical decision-makers, of which Carlsen and Karjakin are the main exponents. This school refined
Petrosian’s example and added new techniques, but the main direction has been the same all the way
– “safety first”.

Coming to the essence of Sergei’s decision, the question is whether he could have kept the Nb4 in its
place, trying to impede White’s plan of e2-e3, Qd2-e2 for as long as possible. The answer is in this
case a big NO as, remarkably, the Petrosian/Karpov approach, matches the perfect approach here.
The alternative:
18...Nfd5!? prepares to bring the bishop on f6, but proves unrealistic as it allows White to gain room
in the centre by posting his knight on e4:

85
19.Ne4!
After both 19.Rac1 Bf6= and 19.Nxd5 Nxd5 20.Rac1 h6! 21.h4 Qd6! 22.d4 Bf6! 23.dxc5
Qf8!= full equality is in sight.
Returning to the position after 19.Ne4!, the vital difference from the game (where White resorts to
the same knight centralisation) is that the Ne4 remains “marked” by a black knight whereas in the
present case it isn’t. Since Black cannot retreat to f6 without allowing doubled pawns he must sooner
or later play ...f7-f5, weakening his position. And that should lead to a slight advantage for White.
The proof:
19...Nc6!
I don’t like 19...f5 because it allows the e4-knight reach f3, which is a good square for it. After
20.Ng5 Bf6 21.Bxf6 Nxf6 22.Qb2 h6 23.Nf3 Nc6 24.Rac1² White is slightly for choice.

86
20.Rac1!. The most flexible move, keeping control over g5, proves best.
After 20.e3 f5! 21.Nc3 Ndb4! 22.Qe2 Nxd3 23.Rab1! (23.Bf1 c4 24.bxc4 Nce5 25.f4? is a
blunder due to 25...Nxc4µ and the Bb2 hangs.) 23...c4! 24.bxc4 Nce5 25.Nb5! Ng4 26.Nxa7
Qxa7 27.Rxd3 Rxd3 28.Qxd3 Qxa2 29.Bf1 Rd8 30.Qc3 Bf6 31.Qc1 Bxb2 32.Rxb2 Rd1!
33.Qxd1 Qxb2 34.Be2 h5 35.h3 Nf6 36.Bf3 Kh7 37.Kg2 Qa2= the game peters out to a draw.
20...f5. There isn’t anything better, but once more, 21.Ng5! Nd4 22.Nf3 leaves White in command as
22...Bf6 is answered by 23.Ne1! Nc6 24.Bxf6 Nxf6 25.a3². The plan of opening up the position is on
the agenda, causing Black a mild headache. Indeed, his kingside weaknesses could prove a factor and
his king would start feeling unsafe.

19.Ne4!

87
Anton understands the position excellently and prepares to put some pressure upon Black applying
the move by move method.
An immediate 19.e3 would have allowed 19...Nxc3 20.Qxc3 Ne8!=, and Black is ready to oppose
dark-squared bishops without weakening his structure at all.

19...h6!

And Sergei displays the appropriate no-plan approach, improving his position by making a useful
luft.
Instead 19...Nxe4 20.dxe4 Nf6 would have been inferior because after the simple 21.Qxd7! Black
faces a tough ending: 21...Nxd7
21...Rxd7 22.e5 Rcd8! 23.Rxd7 Nxd7 24.Rd1 Nb8 25.Rxd8+ Bxd8 26.f4 Kf8 27.Be4² might be
defendable, but the lack of space causes problems.
22.e5 f6 23.exf6 Bxf6 24.Bxf6 Nxf6 25.Bb7! Rb8 26.Ba6!², and White keeps a small but stable
slight edge.

20.e3!

After 20.Nxf6+ Nxf6 White has nothing, e.g. 21.Rac1 Ne8! 22.Bf3 Bf6 23.Bxf6 Nxf6 24.b4 c4=
(24...cxb4÷).

88
20...Qb5

This is where Sergei starts losing the thread. He makes a “preventive” move when the position was
finally ripe for an active one. This happens because White’s last move changed the structure by
weakening a bit d3, so Black could have tried to exploit it.
The human way was 20...a5!?, intending ...a5-a4. This is a valid idea in such positions in the absence
of a knight on c3.
21.a4
21.Qc2 Qa7 22.a3 b5 23.Bf1 b4! 24.Nd2 Nd7 25.Nc4 N5b6 26.axb4 cxb4 27.Bd4 Qc7 28.Bg2
Nxc4 29.dxc4 Bf6„ isn’t at all worse for Black.
21...Nb4 22.Qe2 Qe8!
22...Nxe4 23.dxe4 Qc7 24.Qg4!².
After the text it is quite difficult for White to make progress as taking on f6 offers him nothing. The
knight on b4 proves to be an equalising factor for Black, as can be seen from the following lines:

89
a) 23.Nxf6+ Bxf6 24.Bxf6 gxf6 25.Rac1 Rd7= is safe enough for Black.

b) I also looked at 23.Bf1 Rc7 24.Qf3!?

Equality arises after either 24.Rd2 Rcd7= or 24.Rac1 Rcd7 25.Nxf6+ Bxf6 26.Bxf6 gxf6 27.d4
Qf8!=.
Black is okay after 24...Nh7! 25.d4 f5 26.Nd2 Bf6 27.Nc4 Ng5 28.Qe2 cxd4 29.exd4 Rcd7 30.Nxb6
Rxd4!=.

c) 23.Rac1 Nxe4 24.dxe4 Rxd1+ isn’t better for White when his bishop isn’t already on f1, the reason
being tactical: 25.Qxd1™ (25.Rxd1 c4!µ) 25...Rd8 26.Qe2 Nd3 27.Rd1 c4, and Black even has
slightly the better of it.

d) 23.Nc3. Trying to install this knight on b5, from where it could support d3-d4.
23...Nfd5! 24.Nb5 Bf6=. Black is in time to exchange dark-squared bishops as White cannot play d3-
d4 due to the temporary weakness of the c2-square. The game is balanced.

Another promising move for Black was 20...Qc7!?

90
with the following possibilities: 21.Qe2
21.Bf1!? a6! 22.Qe2 b5! is now good for Black as he is ready to take on e4, followed by ...Nd5-
b6, so a logical continuation is 23.Nd2 (23.a4 Nxe4 24.dxe4 Nf6 25.axb5 axb5 26.Rxd8+ Rxd8
27.e5 Nd7 28.Qxb5 Nxe5=; 23.Rac1 Nxe4 24.dxe4 Nb6=) 23...Nd7! 24.Rac1 Qa5! (24...Bf6?
25.d4±) 25.a3 Bf6 26.Ne4 Bxb2 27.Qxb2 Qb6=.
21...Nxe4 22.dxe4 Nb4 23.Bf1 Rxd1 24.Rxd1 Bf6!
Forcing a vital exchange. 24...Nxa2!? 25.Bxg7 Kxg7 26.Qxa2 Rd8 27.Rxd8² is weaker.
25.Bxf6 gxf6=. Black isn’t at all worse in this type of position, and may even get the advantage if
White plays carelessly.

21.Bf1!

Showing Black that his last move was rather “cooperative”. However, even so Sergei should have
been able to keep the balance.

21...Qe8

Understandably, Black didn’t like the opposition Bf1:Qb5, so the queen retreats to the back rank of
her camp. However, this is again a pedestrian treatment.
Best was 21...a5! 22.Rab1!?
Or 22.Qc2 Nb4 23.Qb1 (23.Qc3 a4) 23...Nbd5= and Black has not surrendered any ground.
22...a4! 23.Nxf6+ Bxf6 24.Bxf6 Nxf6 25.bxa4 Qxa4 26.Rxb6 Ne4 27.Qe1 c4 28.Rb4 Qa5 29.Rxc4
Nd2!=, maintaining complete equality in a nice forcing way.

22.Qe2!

91
White has finally achieved the desired formation and is ready to bring the Ra1 into play. Having the
bishop on f1 helps him actually, as it guards the d3-square and eyes the weak light squares b5, a6 in
case the position opens up. So we may conclude that Black has not played optimally the last few
moves. There is quite a difference between just waiting, and waiting with an alert eye to exploit
imperceptible changes.

The latter requires concrete thinking and dense (rather than deep) calculation.

I think this is the main factor that distinguishes Carlsen from the other top grandmasters today.
Less good was 22.a3 Nxe4 23.dxe4 Nf6 24.Qc3 Qc6! 25.f3 Ne8 26.Ba6 Rb8 27.a4 Bf6 28.e5 Be7
29.e4 Bf8 30.Kg2 Nc7 31.Rxd8 Rxd8 32.Be2 Qb7=, and White is too static to progress.

22...Rd7

Black has failed to grasp the opportunities which arose after White played e2-e3, and now his choice
is down to some kind of gloom passivity, which is aimed at preventing d3-d4 or reducing its
consequences.
22...a5 would not have brought any concrete fruit because with the bishop placed on f1 White is
better placed to meet this activity. For example, 23.a4!
23.Bg2 a4 24.Rac1 a3! 25.Bxa3 Ra8=.
23...Nb4 24.Rac1!
This tips the balance in White’s favour.
24.Nxf6+?! is hasty – 24...Bxf6 25.Bxf6 gxf6 26.Rac1 Rd5 27.Rc4 Rcd8³, and Black gets the
upper hand.

92
24...Nxe4. This looks like an admission of failure, as the Bf1 will now be proven useful on the
diagonal f1-a6. However, there isn’t anything better:
24...Rd7 fails to 25.Nxf6+ Bxf6 26.Bxf6 gxf6 27.d4!±, the fine point being 27...cxd4?
28.Qg4++–;
24...Rc7 25.Nxf6+ Bxf6 26.Bxf6 gxf6 27.d4± is similarly bad as Black all the same cannot play
...Rc7-d7;
Finally, 24...Qf8 is answered strongly with 25.Qf3! Nfd5 26.h4², gaining space and tempting
Black to play ...f7-f5.
25.dxe4 Rxd1 (25...Qc6 26.Qg4± is even worse.) 26.Qxd1². White is slightly better here as he has
prospects mostly in endings. Indeed, the sensitive weaknesses of b5 and b6 could be in the reach of
the white king in the remote future. But he is better even in a rookless middlegame as he can put his
bishop on c4 and try to advance the kingside pawns. In that event the presence of queens is a
dangerous factor which creates real attacking chances.

23.a3²

White is slowly building up the pressure. Other possibilities were 23.a4!? or 23.f4!? Nb4 24.Nf2!².

23...Rdd8

Resigning himself to passive waiting. Sergei probably realised at this point that 23...Rcd8?! 24.Nd2!
strikes at thin air. The knight is ready to leap on c4 and harass the opponent.

93
24.Nd2

24.f4 b5! would have given Black counterplay. I see a strong case for:
24.Rac1! Nxe4
24...b5 25.Nxf6+ Bxf6 26.Bxf6 Nxf6 27.Qe1².
25.dxe4 Nc7! (25...Nf6 26.e5 Nd5 27.h4±) 26.Rxd8 Rxd8 27.Qc2².

24...Nd7!

Black has the luxury of a real constructive move, intending ...Be7-f6. The game is approaching a
climax with White called upon to stop this positional threat.

25.e4

An important decision. It was also possible to return to 25.Ne4 N7f6 26.Rac1!, transposing to the
previous note.

25...Bf6! 26.e5 Be7 27.Nf3 (27.Ne4!?)

94
27...b5!

Now Black is back on the right track. He spots that the structural change favours the ...c4 break.

28.a4! b4!?

Fixing b3 as a weakness, and refusing to give space to the Ra1. Now ...Nd7-b8-c6-a5 emerges as a
threat. 28...a6 was less committal.

29.Qe4

Designed to add force to d3-d4. 29.Rac1 with the same idea was also possible.

29...Nc3!? 30.Bxc3 bxc3 31.Rac1

95
31...Rb8?

Black has made a series of good moves, but now the “Minister of Defence”, as Sergei is widely
called, disappoints his fans. Listing the candidate-moves in move by move mode would have surely
revealed the excellent evacuation sacrifice 31...c4!. After 32.dxc4 Nc5 33.Qc2 Rb8 34.Rxd8 Bxd8
Black gets powerful counterplay, and the game should end in a draw as follows: 35.Nd4 Ba5! 36.Rd1
Qc8! 37.Nb5 a6 38.Nxc3 Rxb3 39.Ne4 Rb8 40.Nd6 Qc6 41.Bg2 Qb6 42.Kf1 Qb4 43.Bc6 Bc7
44.Kg2 Qb2 45.Qxb2 Rxb2 46.Be8 f5 47.exf6 gxf6=.

32.Rxc3 Rb4 33.d4 Nb6 34.Bb5 Qf8 35.Bc4?

Returning the favour. I don’t know if Anton was in time pressure at this point, probably both players
were.
35.Rcd3 (even stronger was to insert 35.h4! g6) 35...c4
35...cxd4? 36.Nxd4 Bc5 37.Nc6!.
36.bxc4 Nxc4 37.Rc3 Nb6 38.Qc2± would have put Black on the ropes.

35...Nxc4 36.Rxc4 Rxb3 37.Rdc1 Rd5 38.Kg2= ½-½

White has lost his advantage. Although we have already made several conclusions inside the
comments, I’d like to remind the most important lessons of this game:

A. In waiting mode we should watch out for opportunities that could arise as a result of changes in the
structure. Do not forget to look for more candidate-moves!

B. Refusing to give up ground is an acceptable tactic as long as it doesn’t entail weakenings in our

96
set-up.

For me, 18...Nbd5! was Sergei’s best move in the game because he acquiesced to the fact that some
space had to be surrendered to the opponent for the sake of keeping an eye on the Ne4. In that way,
he could avoid weakening moves like ...f7-f5 in the future.

97
 Balint – Kotronias

Budapest 2018

The following example is taken from my own practice. It illustrates a clear case of no plan=best plan
situation for both me and my opponent, where the order of the day is to play move by move,
improving the harmony between pieces and waiting to grasp a chance, if it occurs. Being the higher
rated player in this game, I had to balance between objectivity and restrained ambition, something
that isn’t always easy. In spite of the fact that I did not win the game, I consider that I carried out the
task reasonably well save a couple of hesitant steps.

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.0-0 0-0 5.d4 d6 6.Re1 Nbd7 7.e4 e5 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.b3 Re8

9...Nxe4!? is another move at this point, mentioned in the 1st volume of my series Kotronias on the
King’s Indian. My opponent told me after the game that he was well prepared for it, something that I
understood during the game from his body language. So I decided to stray clear from the
complications that arise after 10.Rxe4 Nc5 11.Nfd2 Nxe4 12.Bxe4 f5÷ and continue instead my
development.

10.Bb2 Qe7!

To play such a move one has to be familiar with typical motifs that would enable him to deal
successfully with the pressure on the a3-f8 diagonal. I felt confident, so I moved my queen to e7
rather quickly.

11.Nbd2

98
White could try 11.Ba3!? Nc5 12.Nc3, intending Nc3-a4, but then 12...Nfd7! 13.Na4 (13.Bh3 Qf6!
14.Nd5 Qd8=; 13.Nd5 Qd8=) 13...Bf8!= illustrates the way to get oneself out of trouble as 14.Bh3
Qf6! 15.Nxc5 Nxc5 16.Bxc8 Raxc8 17.Bxc5 Bxc5 18.Kg2 Rcd8 19.Qe2 Kg7 hardly promises
anything to the first player. That said, playing in such a manner White could have secured an easy
draw for himself as the resulting position is almost barren.

After White’s calm developing move 11.Nbd2 I reached the first juncture in the game where I slowed
down a bit and tried to evaluate the situation.

Before proceeding with my thought process, I would like to answer one common question that is
often on the lips of chess players, both amateurs and professionals: Do we have to evaluate the
situation on the board on every move? If not, how do we know that a critical moment for
evaluating things has arrived? I would say that while there isn’t an accurate and fully trustworthy
guide regarding this problem, one should, as a minimum, pause and evaluate the position in the
following cases:

• We’re suddenly out of book, in unknown territory. This means that our knowledge on the ensuing
position is limited or non-existent, so we should try to compensate that by using the evaluation
tool.
• The pawn structure has been just fixed and apparently isn’t going to change for several moves to
come – a fixed structure is often a good basis for making concrete evaluations as it’s a stable
element that has concrete requirements.
• Specific exchanges took place, or the pawn structure changed without necessarily becoming static –
this should certainly urge us to reassess the situation, as its main new components might be
different than the old ones.

99
• Both sides have just completed development – this is surely a moment where an evaluation is
needed as both sides’ units are working at maximum capacity.
• A sacrifice or a material imbalance occurred – I guess it goes without saying that here an evaluation
is needed because the balance of power might have swung towards one side or the other.
• An attacking or defensive effort came to an end – evaluation is required as king safety carries a
special weight and all other aspects of the struggle are directly affected from it.
• Massive simplification has led to an ending. When the dust settles down, letting things crystallise, a
concrete evaluation can and should be made as the nature of the struggle has changed, requiring a
new approach.

Returning to the example we are examining, I deemed it necessary to evaluate the situation for the
following reasons:

1. I couldn’t see any pawn breaks in the structure, which meant that it was bound to remain static for
the moves to come. So I had something to lean upon.
2. White has completed his opening configuration, whereas I was very close to completing mine too.
This meant that it was about time to see if this was a position where plans existed, or it was a case of
no plan=best plan. Then I would forge my reaction accordingly.

11...Rd8!?

This reaction was a direct result of my evaluation, which was based on the following findings:

• Kings are absolutely safe.

• Space is evenly distributed.
• The pawn structures are symmetrical without weaknesses or obvious breaks available for either side,
and there is only one open file for the rooks to contest.
• White has a very slight lead in development, but in view of the static nature of the position it should
not count.
• The e-pawns can provide each side with a temporary target, but are not essentially weak. Perhaps
the c3-square is a mild weakness in the white camp, but exploiting it requires “cooperation” from
the opponent.
• All pieces are still on the board, and their quality/mobility is similar. The only difference is that
Black has yet to commit his queen’s bishop and can choose a slightly different deployment than
the one White chose for his own.

From all the above facts I concluded that the position belonged to the category of “Equality without
clear plans” and decided that the way to proceed was a no plan=best plan approach. I didn’t see any
long term assets for either side, but well, I could detect two things:
1. White can profit from an exchange of light-squared bishops, Black from an exchange of the dark-
squared ones. That said, I could not see how that could be pursued or accomplished anytime soon.
2. The only way for Black to create potentially lively play is to set up his pieces somewhat differently

100
than White’s, hoping that at some point they will supersede in quality their counterparts. It isn’t very
likely that this can be achieved, but Black can at least try by playing flexibly at the beginning, which
in chess terms is translated into “avoiding moving the Bc8 till the best square for it is known”. My
move in the game was based on the very last remark. I didn’t want to copy the opponent by
developing my bishop on b7 since that would give White a microscopic edge in a boring symmetry.
By putting the rook on d8, I was ensuring the e5 pawn against attacks by securing it with the retreat
...Nf6-e8. The rook move also helped controlling better the squares in the centre.

My decision to use 11...Rd8!? as a method to maintain some imbalance in piece play is vindicated
when we see what the computer gives after the alternative 11...b6 – 12.Nc4 Rd8 13.a4!? Bb7

13...Ba6 14.Nfd2! doesn’t have so much point when the queen isn’t already on e2 because
14...Ne8 15.Ne3! c6 16.Ba3! Qe6 17.Ndc4! Bf8 18.Qd2! Bxa3 19.Rxa3² is better for
White.Black has exchanged the dark-squared bishops, but on the minus side, he lost too much
time, has a weak d6-square, and the Ba6 is awkwardly placed.
13...Ne8 14.Ba3 c5!? 15.Ne3² is also a bit better for White.
14.Nfd2!?
14.Qe2 allows 14...Nxe4 15.Nfxe5 Nxe5 16.Bxe4 Nxc4 17.Qxc4 Bxb2 18.Bxb7 Qf6 19.Rad1
Rxd1 20.Rxd1 Rd8 21.Bd5 Rd7 22.Rd3 c6 23.Qxc6 Qxc6 24.Bxc6 Rxd3 25.cxd3 f5= with a
completely drawish opposite coloured bishop ending, in spite of White’s extra pawn.
14...a5 15.Qe2 Ba6. The bishop has reached a6, but it has moved twice to achieve it. 16.Qe3 (16.Qf3
h5!?) 16...Qe6
Or 16...h5 17.Bf1 Nh7 18.Rad1 Nhf8 19.Qc3 Ne6 20.Ne3².
17.h3 Bf8 18.Bf1²/=.
The position remains drawish in nature, but White has deployed his knights more actively, and seems
to be always a step closer to trading light-squared bishops than his opponent the dark-squared ones. I
would rather take the White side here.

101
12.Qc1

After this Black has no problems at all. White’s move isn’t bad, but at the same time is noncritical
because it fails to connect the rooks and to put more pressure on the centre.
The point of my play would have been visible after 12.Qe2!? b6!, when Black wants to exploit the
fact that the White queen has been lured to e2 by developing his bishop aggressively on a6 instead of
b7.

For example:
a) After 13.a4 a5 14.Ba3 one nice idea behind re-deploying the rook to d8 is revealed:
14...Qe8!. Now everything is neat and tidy inside Black’s camp! The queen isn’t standing bad on e8,
and ...Bc8-a6 or ...Bg7-f8 are on the cards. Funnily enough, after 15.Red1
15.Qe3 Bf8 16.Bxf8 Qxf8=; 15.Qc4 Ba6 16.Qc3 Bf8 17.Bxf8 Qxf8 18.Nxe5 Nxe5 19.Qxe5
Rxd2 20.Qxf6 Rxc2 21.e5 Re8 22.Bd5 Bc8=.
15...Ba6 16.Qe1 we get an absolute symmetry with Black to move which isn’t in itself a great gain,
but is at least a moral victory.

b) 13.Nc4 allows the bishop to go immediately to a6, creating some sort of “potentially” unclear
position. For example, 13...Ba6! 14.a4 (14.Rad1 Ne8 15.Bf1 Nd6 16.Nfd2 Nc5„)

102
14...Ne8! – using the e8-square again, this time to manoeuvre with the knight! 15.Bf1 Nd6 16.Nfd2
h5!? 17.h4 Nxc4 18.Nxc4 Nc5 19.Qe3
Or 19.Ba3 Bf8 20.Qe3 Qe8 21.Qc3 Rd4=.
19...Qe8 20.a5 Rab8 21.f3 (21.Kh2 Bb5) 21...Bb5 22.Kh2 Nb7 23.axb6 axb6 24.Qf2 Kh7 25.Ra7
Bxc4!? 26.Bxc4 b5 27.Bf1 Qc6 28.Rea1 Bf8÷.

c) 13.Rad1!?. Black should be patient with the development of the c8-bishop, seeking the maximum
for it, which is placing it on a6. Having shifted the rook to d8 proves again instrumental, making
possible the following preparatory move:
13...Ne8. Heading towards d6.
13...Bb7!? 14.Nc4 Nxe4 15.Rxd7! (Or 15.Nfxe5 Nxe5 16.Rxd8+ Rxd8 17.Bxe5 f5 18.Bxg7
Qxg7=.) 15...Rxd7 16.Nfxe5 f5 17.Nxd7 Bxb2 18.Nxb2 Qxd7 19.Rd1 Qg7 is close to equality,
but White still enjoys a slight initiative.

103
 A computer would not have problems holding it, so from an analytical point of view this line
may be Black’s best option. However, OTB we can take some calculated risk in order to keep
things more complex.
14.Nf1!. The right way to direct the knight to d5, avoiding getting pinned. Has the black strategy
failed?

14...a5! This accurate move leads to unclear positions. Black insists on ...Bc8-a6 as the white queen
lacks good squares.
The immediate 14...Nd6 is strongly answered with 15.Ne3 c6 16.Qd2!? (16.Ba3 Nc5 17.Bxc5
bxc5 18.Qd2 Be6 19.Qa5 Nb5 20.Nd2 Rac8 21.Ndc4 f5÷) 16...Nxe4 17.Qc1 Bb7 18.Nc4
(18.Ng4!? f5 19.Nh6+ may be more enterprising) 18...f5 19.Qa1!².

104
15.Ne3 c6!

16.h4!?. This looks like the culmination of White’s play, but Black has a remedy, as we’ll see.
Weaker are instead 16.Qc4 Bb7÷ and 16.Nc4 b5!? 17.Nfxe5 Nxe5 18.Rxd8 bxc4 19.Red1
h5÷.
16...Ba6!.
Provoking c2-c4, after which both the d4-square and White’s queenside pawn formation would
be potentially vulnerable.
Instead Black should avoid 16...h5? 17.g4! Ba6 18.c4±, when White obtains a dangerous
kingside initiative.
17.c4 Bb7!. In my view, this is the position that should have been reached if White had played in the
most principled way on move 12. Both set-ups have their pros and cons but overall equality reigns as
the following brief analysis indicates:

105
18.h5
18.Qc2 h5! 19.g4 Nef6!? (19...hxg4 20.Nxg4 Nef6 21.Ngxe5 Nxe5 22.Bxe5 c5°) 20.g5 Ne8
21.Nf5! gxf5 22.exf5 f6! 23.Nd4 Nc5 24.Nxc6 Bxc6 25.Bxc6 Rxd1 26.Rxd1 Rd8÷.
18...Nef6 19.hxg6 hxg6 20.Qc2 Nh7

Of course White’s pieces are more active after 21.Bh3 (21.Ng4 Ng5; 21.c5 b5), but 21...Nc5 or
21...Nhf8 defend everything.

I am sure that many of the readers of this book would like to ask me: “How much of all this did you
calculate during the game?” The answer is of course nothing. I just stopped my analysis after
13...Ne8!, confident that I has not been doing anything wrong till that point, and that the move ...Bc8-

106
a6, when achieved, would create a playable set-up for me, with not a complete symmetry in the piece
arrangements. You may call my idea a micro-plan, but for a real plan to exist we need imbalances to
occur first. Time to get back to the game continuation 12.Qc1:

12...Bh6!?

A three-move micro-plan to improve the black pieces – the f6-knight will typically go to d6 to control
c4, but I deemed it right to pin the Nd2 first in order to impede White’s movements.

13.Bc3?!

I mentioned elsewhere that not all automatic moves are natural or good. Here we do have such a case.
13.Qb1! was preferable, preparing to answer 13...Ne8 with 14.Nc4 f6 15.a4 Nc5 16.Ba3 b6 17.Qb2
Rb8 18.Qc3 Bf8 19.Nfd2 Bb7 20.Rad1 Qf7 21.Ne3= with an equal game where both sides keep
moving around the pieces till some exchange of wood happens and a draw ensues. The text should
have led to a worse position for White.

13...Ne8?!

A direct result of following blindly my micro-plan and ignoring the move by move rule. Sometimes,
with the clock ticking, we feel tempted to play sets of two or three moves planned in advance without
pausing to reconsider them. Such was the case here. In doing so, I missed a much stronger
opportunity.
13...b5! would have placed White in serious difficulties as the unpinning move Qc1-b2 is prevented. I
should have considered this move because gaining space is one of the main ways of creating chances
in a symmetrical position. Unfortunately I didn’t.
14.b4

107
 14.a3 a5 15.Qb2 Ne8! 16.Nf1 f6 17.Ne3 Bb7³ would have left White getting slowly suffocated
in the centre and on the queenside, while 14.Ba5!? is met with the excellent retort 14...Nb8!³,
retreating in order to attack!
14...Bb7 15.Qb2 Nb6 16.Rab1 Na4 17.Qa1

17...Ne8! (17...Nxc3 18.Qxc3=) 18.Nb3 f6 19.Na5 Rab8 20.Nxb7 Rxb7 21.Rbd1 Rxd1 22.Rxd1
Rb6! 23.Be1 Nd6³. Control over c4 and better pieces overall nullify White’s bishop pair advantage
and give Black the better game.

14.Qb2 Nd6 15.a4 f6 16.Rad1

Once more an automatic move, but this time it was very difficult to perceive than it was hardly
needed in the current situation. White had to leave his rook on a1 for the time being as nothing of
interest is happening on the d-file. It was correct to rearrange his knights as follows: 16.Nf1! Nc5
17.N3d2! Be6 18.Ne3 c6 19.Bb4! Na6 20.Ba3 Qc7 21.Ndf1!=.

108
This is a great micro-plan, as we can find out by glancing at the diagram. White has established a
knight on e3 defended by the other one on f1, so the Re1 can switch to the d-file without worries. The
kingside is wonderfully defended in Petrosian-like style, and White may even contemplate advancing
with h2-h4-h5 later on. I believe that this particular moment of the game demonstrates in an
exemplary fashion the kind of thinking you must employ in situations without a clear plan.

Improving the piece mobility in conjunction with prophylaxis is the perfect combination.
I did not use the name of Petrosian accidentally as he was one of the all time greats in doing that.

16...a5! 17.Nf1 Nc5 18.N3d2 Bg4! 19.f3 Be6 20.f4

109
I have played an almost perfect game so far, but here I acted too hastily, somehow feeling “offended”
by my opponent’s last move. I calculated something and played it fast, without thinking what were
the other candidate moves. If I had applied with strict discipline the move by move rule, I would have
easily found the best possibility as it was not beyond my abilities. My reaction is even more
reproachable for two reasons: The best move belonged to a group of typical motifs I had classified in
my arsenal as a player. More importantly, playing fast at a critical juncture where the pawns come
finally in contact should have been discarded as bad attitude. At this moment the structure was about
to change. Therefore, I should have slowed down to make first of all a proper evaluation, and then
forge my reply accordingly.

20...Nd7

This move can be described in two ways:

• Weak, but not weak enough.
• Good, but not good enough.
No matter which way you look at it, it throws away whatever advantage I had created with my micro-
plans in the first part of the game.
The typical KID or Bronstein reaction 20...Nf7! would have secured for me the slightly better game. I
didn’t have to sacrifice a pawn in this position and give my opponent concrete play. Simply
defending it would have exposed the inadequacy of his strategy and forced him to a defensive stance.
Let us look at the position after 20...Nf7! and try to make an evaluation by using the standard tools at
our disposal:

110
• The kings are safe for the time being, but White’s might feel the draught later on the diagonal a7-g1.
• Black’s pieces are overall more active. Especially the Bh6 is very well placed and has a clear target.
• White’s pawn structure is more loose. If his pressure on the complex §f6/§e5 fails to bring any fruit,
then §f4 might become a serious weakness.
• Likewise, the Qb2 and the Bc3 will prove ineffectively placed if Black manages to bolster e5.
• For the first time in the game, real plans have appeared. White’s one involves the moves Nf1-e3,
♔g1-h1, f4-f5, gaining space on the kingside, while Black has a plan to attack the awkwardly
placed Bc3 by ...c7-c6, ...b7-b5-b4. Black’s play looks clear-cut and dangerous, as it has a direct
target.

All the above factors should have weighed in my decision process in favour of 20...Nf7!, giving me a
slight advantage and the much easier practical task as the following lines reveal:
21.Ne3! This would have been best.
Instead White is worse after 21.fxe5 fxe5 22.Kh1! (22.Bxe5? Nxa4µ) 22...Bg4 23.Ra1 Qe6
24.Nf3 Bh3 25.Re2 Rd7 26.Rae1 Bg7³ as the e4-pawn has suddenly become a soft point in his
camp.
21...c6 22.Kh1
Actually, 22.Qa1!! (anticipating ...b5) 22...Qc7 23.f5! Bxe3+ 24.Rxe3 gxf5 25.exf5 is the best
defence, but it is difficult to assess that the position after 25...Bxf5 26.Rf1 is dynamically
balanced. Besides, 25...Bd5! 26.Rde1 b5 maintains some pull.
22...Qc7

111
By improving the queen to protect e5 Black begins to exert pressure on f4, practically forcing White
to go ahead with his own plan without any delay:
23.f5 gxf5 24.Nxf5 (24.exf5? Bd5µ) 24...Bxf5!
24...b5!? 25.Nxh6+ Nxh6 26.Nf1 Ng4÷.
25.exf5 b5! 26.axb5 cxb5 27.Nf1! Kg7
27...b4!? 28.Bd2 Bxd2 29.Nxd2 Ra6³.
28.Qa1 a4! 29.Qb1 Rxd1 30.Rxd1 Ra7 31.bxa4 bxa4³. The final position is defendable for White, but
it is clear that Black is targeting him and that the first player has to respond with promptitude and
accuracy in order to hold. Almost every black piece is more active than its white counterpart, and he
also has a safer king, due to the robust structure §f6/§e5.

21.fxe5

The most challenging retort, although 21.Nf3 might be more prudent.

21...Nxe5 22.Bxe5 fxe5 23.Qxe5 Nf7! 24.Qc3!

112
24...Bg4

24...Bf8! kept the initiative, the key point being 25.Kh1 Qb4!. White cannot trade queens due to the
nasty pin of the Nd2. So:
26.Qf6 Ra6! 27.e5 Bg4 28.e6 Rxe6 29.Rxe6 Bxd1. Black has the bishop pair, but White’s pieces are
sufficiently active to balance it.

25.Bf3 Bxf3 26.Nxf3 Rxd1 27.Rxd1 Qxe4

At this point a feeling of mild disappointment overcame me as I knew I have done something wrong.
In the rest I did pull myself together and applied the move by move rule, but of course in the
relatively simple position that has arisen it was only enough to hold the balance:

28.Rd7 Bg7!? 29.N1d2

113
29...Qe1+!

I had seen this when playing my 28th. The “dumb” 28...Rc8= is also good enough for equality.

30.Nxe1 Bxc3 31.Nef3 Rd8 32.Rxd8+ Nxd8 33.Ne4 Bg7 34.Kf2 Kf8 35.Ke3 Ke7 36.Kd3 c6
37.Nfd2 b5=

38.c4!?

The only try, but with weaknesses on c4 and a4 White cannot of course hope for any advantage. His
slightly better king is outweighed by the fact that the Bg7 is a very strong defensive piece.

114
38...bxa4! 39.bxa4 Nf7! 40.Nb3 Ne5+ 41.Kd4 Nd7+ 42.Kd3 Ne5+ 43.Kd4 Nd7+ 44.Ke3!? Nb6
45.Nxa5 Kd7 46.Nc5+ Kd6 47.Nab7+ Kc7 48.Kd3 Nxa4 49.Ne6+ Kxb7 50.Nxg7 Kb6 51.Kd4
c5+ 52.Ke5 Nb2 53.Kd5 Nd1 ½-½

This apparently good, blunder-free game was concluded at this point. Needless to say though, I
wasn’t entirely satisfied from the outcome as I felt I had not used the most of my chances in spite of
trying. What we can learn from this game:

A. We need to develop a feeling when to evaluate or re-evaluate a situation during the game. That
will undoubtedly help us make better decisions. It isn’t easy to sense the right moment in positions
where not much is going on, but we still have to watch out for imperceptible game changers.

B. We should not execute even micro-plans automatically. There is a danger we will miss an
opportunity our opponent generously offered us. So the move by move mode should be even then
switched on.

C. In positions featuring symmetrical pawn structures, choosing a different piece set-up from our
opponent could provide chances to make the game more spicy.

D. A real plan is never based on “ifs”. That is rather a micro-plan. Micro-plans more often involve
rearrangements in our camp, rather than creating threats.
Speaking simply, a micro-plan is when we think: I play here and there and there, and if my opponent
plays this, then I have that.
A plan is: I play here and there and there, and regardless of what my opponent does, I have that.
From the above description it becomes clear that micro-plans have mostly a preparatory or
prophylactic nature, and real plans pursue a direct target which is often accessible. In the hope I have
not become too philosophical, I will close here my analysis of this game and proceed to the next
example.

115
Plain-plan vs no-plan situations

Ding Liren – Ma Qun

CHN-chT China, 2018

The following high level example definitely provides us with a case of pseudo-activity at a moment
of the game where concrete plans did not exist. Upon summarising the way things evolved, I drew the
really surprising conclusion that a 2800 player:
a) rejected entering a position with a clear and probably advantageous plan for him, only to:
b) allow this position drift into a type of planless state, then:
c) started treating it as if a real plan existed. No one is perfect, it seems!

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.Bxc6 dxc6 6.Nbd2 Be6 7.Nb3 Bd6 8.Na5 Rb8 9.0-0 0-0
10.b3 Qe7 11.a4 Bb4 12.Nc4 Bxc4 13.bxc4 Nd7 14.Bg5! f6 15.Be3 Bc5

We may state with certainty that the opening stage has been concluded at this point, as both sides are
safely castled and fully developed. Thus the situation is ripe for a first evaluation, which can be
summarised as follows according to my own criteria:

• The kings are safe for the moment, but the pawn structure suggests that the side with chances to
launch an attack against the enemy king is White.
• Both pawn formations consist of two parts. a4 is weak, but White has more pawns in the centre.
That makes the f2-f4 possibility realistic at a later stage.

116
• White’s bishop is better than Black’s.
• White controls slightly more space.
• That said, an exchange of minor pieces has already taken place, so we cannot say that Black is in
any way suffering from lack of space.

Weighing all the above factors I decided that White is better, if only slightly. He should normally be
striving to keep his bishop on the board, then go for Nf3-h4, f2-f4, g2-g3, ♔g1-h1 if needed. Black
would merely have to wait as creating play of his own on the queenside with ...b7-b5 doesn’t look
very realistic.
Instead Ding went for:

16.Nh4?!

This cannot be approved for many reasons. The most important ones are:
a) A better bishop is exchanged for nothing.
b) The side with more space shouldn’t allow exchanges;
c) White splits his pawns, obtaining three pawn islands.
16.Bd2! was the right move. Then Nf3-h4 would be on the cards, and Black would have to find a way
to anticipate a potential onslaught featuring the f2-f4 move, as pointed out above.
Here are some lines:

a) Obviously 16...f5? is a positional slip, leading after 17.exf5 Rxf5 18.Qe2 Rbf8 19.Rae1± to a clear
advantage for White.

b) 16...g6 is a usual way the Berlin wall protagonists anticipate Nf3-h4 in similar positions, yet my
computer remains unimpressed:

117
After 17.Qe2 (17.c3!?²; 17.g3!?²) 17...Rfe8 18.g3! Nf8 19.Kg2 Ne6 20.h4! h5 21.Ng1! b6 22.Nh3²
White is almost ready for f2-f4 and has the better game.

c) 16...Rfe8 17.Nh4 Nf8 (17...g6 18.g3²) 18.Nf5 Qd7 19.h4!² is also better for the first player. If the
pawn reaches h5, then the Nf5 would become a powerful resource as it cannot be repelled so easily.

d) Maybe Ding didn’t see what to do after 16...Bb4!?, chasing his dark squared bishop?

I would not rule out such a possibility, but it doesn’t change White’s plan, for instance:
17.c3 Bd6 18.Nh4 g6 19.g3 b6 20.Qc2 Qe6 21.f4.
Besides, White’s game also remains easier after 17.Bxb4 Qxb4. Black has succeeded in trading
bishops, but at least his queen has been lured to an unnatural position and White didn’t worsen his
pawn structure while allowing the bishop exchange. Play could proceed in the following manner:
18.Nh4!?
18.a5 Nc5 19.h4!? also fixes some space.
18...g6
18...Qe7 19.Nf5 Qf7 20.f4 exf4 21.Qg4 Kh8 22.Qxf4²;
18...Qc3 19.Nf5 g6 20.Ng3².
19.g3 a5 20.Kh1 Qe7 21.Qg4 Rbe8 22.f4².

e) 16...Qe6 17.Nh4 g6 18.Kh1 b6 19.Qf3².

118
The point becomes obvious after 19...a5 20.Qg3 Kh8 21.f4 exf4 22.Bxf4, when 22...g5? fails to
23.Nf5.

16...Bxe3 17.fxe3 g6!

Of course Black can afford ...g7-g6 more comfortably now, without the fear of f2-f4. In fact White’s
static structure prevents him from creating anything of substance on the kingside, so my human
evaluation is that Black is at least equal already. I would even be feeling slightly uncomfortable here
as White, in spite of a slight preference of the engines for the white pieces.

18.Qg4 Rbe8 19.Rf3?!

For me this is a sign that White had chosen a wrong plan of displaying activity on the kingside. The
rook has no space to manoeuvre on the third rank after Black’s next, so it was senseless.
The right approach was to switch to a move by move mode 19.a5! Nc5 20.Nf5 Qe6 21.h3! Kh8
22.Nh6, improving White’s stand on both sides of the board and maintaining playable equality.

19...Qe6! 20.Qg3

Menacing Nh4xg6, a threat that can easily be parried. But which is the best way? I am sure Black’s
next move shocked Ding a little here:

119
20...Kf7!!

A brilliant move, showing the futility of White’s hopes on the kingside.

20...Kh8 was also possible, as 21.Nxg6+?? hxg6 22.Qxg6 fails miserably due to 22...Re7 23.Rh3+
Qxh3–+. However, Black rightly perceived that his king would be fine in the centre as White’s
clumsy pieces and static central pawn cluster cannot generate any threat.

21.a5

This gives Black a lever to generate queenside play, but there was nothing substantially better at this
point.

21...b5!

By hitting immediately White’s construction, Black leaves his opponent no choice but to open the a-
file. This happens at a moment when White’s major pieces are not well coordinated and his knight on
h4 presents us with a rather inglorious picture.

22.axb6 axb6

120
23.Ra7?

I think that Ding was here under the impression that he had the initiative, or else he would have never
played this move. By re-evaluating the position, he would have realised that he could not attack with
a lone rook and that he should restore his coordination.
23.Rff1! was imperative, switching before it became too late to a no plan=best plan approach. Then
White would have succeeded in connecting the rooks and giving the Nh4 a retreat. After 23...Ra8
24.Nf3 Kg7 25.Rfb1 b5 26.cxb5 cxb5 27.Qe1! Qb6= Black has the more pleasant position, but the
equality basically remains intact.

23...Qd6?

Ma Qun misses a golden opportunity. If he did not believe his opponent (and that could be done best
by going deeply into move by move mode), he would have surely found:
23...Ra8! and White’s choice isn’t pleasant. The practical decision seems to be 24.Rxa8, duly
accepting that something has gone wrong, and switching to passive defence.
Instead, 24.Rxc7?! Ke7! would have led to a precarious situation for White as the rook’s life is
endangered. Sample lines follow:

121
 25.c5! (25.Rf1 Kd8 26.Rb7 Kc8µ is clearly bad.) 25...bxc5 (25...b5 26.Qh3 Ra1+! 27.Kf2 Ra6!
28.Qxe6+ Kxe6 29.Rg3! Nxc5 30.Rxh7 Rf7 can be calculated down to a draw.) 26.Rb7 Ra2
27.Rf2 Ra1+ 28.Rf1 Rfa8 29.Qf2 c4 with a slight initiative.
24...Rxa8 25.Rf1! (25.Qe1 b5!) 25...Ra2 26.Nf3 (threatening Ng5+!) 26...Kg7 27.Qf2 b5 with some
pressure.

24.Qh3!

Ding starts to untangle his pieces, having understood that they were useless for an attack.

24...Ke7 25.Rf1 Ra8 26.Rxa8 Rxa8 27.Nf3 h5 28.Qg3

Equality has been restored and the position is back to being one where nothing much is going on. But
Ma’s next move is going to change that:

122
28...g5!?

This looks like a horrible positional mistake since it weakens f5, but in fact could be an example of
fresh concrete thinking. Black gains space, restricting the white knight. At the same time he solves
the problem with the weak g6-pawn. However, all this would have been true only if Black connected
...g5 with the rearrangement ...Kd8!!, ...Qe7, when the black king could hide on c8 and even b7.

After the trivial 28...Kf7= play is also equal, but more dull. There are only micro-plans, but neither
side is really able to threaten the other as the following computer lines show:
29.h3
Or 29.Qh4 Qc5 30.Kh1 Ke7 31.Qe1 Qd6 32.h3 Qe6 33.Kg1 Ra2 34.Qb1 Ra8 35.Qb2 Ra5
36.Kf2 Nc5 37.Ra1 Rxa1 38.Qxa1=.
29...Qe7 30.Nh4!

123
30...Nf8 (30...Rg8=) 31.d4
31.Kh2 Qe6 32.d4 Kg7 33.Nf5+ Kh7=.
31...Re8 32.Nf3 Nd7=. I cannot see any decent try for White to make headway.

29.Qf2!

Suddenly White finds the strong idea of planting a knight on f5 via d2-f1-g3.

29...Qe6?

The correct set-up was 29...Kd8!!, ensuring the king’s safety.

124
30.h4
30.d4 is met the same way – 30...Qe7, or with 30...Ra2.
30...Qe7! 31.hxg5
Or 31.Qg3 g4 32.Nh2 Ra2=.
31...fxg5 32.Qg3 g4 33.Nh4 Kc8 34.Nf5 Qf6 with a comfortable position. The target on h5 is
balanced by the weakness on c2.

30.d4?!

Definitely not the usual accurate Ding we’ve seen over the past few years. On the other hand, I have
to acknowledge that the move does put some pressure on the opponent as it threatens to open up the
position, and its practical merits may have been considerable if Black was in time pressure.

If we ignore the psychological factors and stick to pure chess, it was important to secure g3 for the
knight immediately, so 30.h4! was called for. The positional explanation is simple – if Black plays
...h5-h4 himself the knight can never reach f5 and there is no advantage.
After 30...g4?! 31.Nd2 Ra2 32.Rc1! b5! 33.Qe1!? (33.cxb5 cxb5 34.Nf1 b4! 35.Qe1 Qb6
36.Ng3 Nc5„) 33...Qd6 34.Nf1 bxc4 35.dxc4 Qa3 36.Rd1 Nb6 37.Qd2 Qd6 38.Qe2 Qc5
39.Qd3 Ra8 40.Ng3 Qxc4 41.Qd2ƒ White’s attack would be very hard to cope with, especially
in a practical game.
Black should better preserve the tension with:
30...Rg8! 31.Nh2 (31.Ra1!?) 31...Kd6 32.Ra1 gxh4 33.Qxh4 f5 34.exf5 Qxf5 35.Rf1 Qg5, but still
the black king looks strange on d6.

30...c5?

125
Allowing Black to block the position, but at the same time ...sealing his doom!
30...Qxc4 31.dxe5 Rf8!÷ or 30...exd4 31.exd4 Qxc4 32.e5 fxe5 would have turned the game into a
complete mess, but obviously it is more difficult to play with Black as his king is now exposed. Still,
White would objectively have no advantage after this as the engines show 0.00 at quite a great depth.
Perhaps the most practical solution is 30...Kd8! 31.dxe5 Kc8!! 32.exf6 Qxf6. The king has finally
found a safe haven, and White’s split pawns don’t count for much.

31.d5! Qg8

32.h4!±

This time White doesn’t fail to find h2-h4. Once the Nf3 obtains a better stand, Black will be unable
to seal the entrances to his camp as there are too many weak squares to protect.

32...gxh4?+–

The final mistake.

After 32...g4 33.Nd2 I looked at two moves, but Black is close to losing in either case:
33...Qg6 Apparently the most resistant.
In the event of 33...Ra2 the following ingenious idea is very strong:

126
 34.Qf5! Rxc2 (34...g3 35.Qxh5 Rxc2 36.Nf3 Rxc4 37.Qf5+–) 35.Rd1! g3 36.Nf1± and Qf5-h3
followed by Nf1xg3 should decide the game.
34.Qe1!. This threatens Rf1-f5 followed by Nd2-f1-g3. Black has huge problems here too, one
example being 34...b5 35.cxb5 Ra4 36.b6! Nxb6 37.Qb1 Rb4 38.Qa1 Qe8 39.Qa7 Qd7 40.Rf5 Kf7
41.Rxh5 Kg6 42.Rf5±.

Needless to say that after the move in the game the knight enters f5 immediately, quickly destroying
Black’s uncoordinated defence.

33.Nxh4 Ra2 34.Nf5+ Kd8 35.Qd2 Ra3 36.Rf3 h4 37.Rh3 Ra4 38.Rxh4 Rxc4 39.d6 cxd6 40.Nxd6
Ra4 41.Rh8 1-0

I think this game stressed quite a few things we need to be aware of in the type of equalities this book
examines. I will try to wrap it up by listing 3 important conclusions:

A. Attacking with only one piece (23.Ra7?) will almost never be a good plan if that piece has no
contact with the rest of our pieces. In the majority of the cases it isn’t even a micro-plan that improves
our position.

B. It is important to sense when we are at a stage with real plans and when not. That could allow us to
avoid wrong decisions. In the game we have just seen Ding firstly played “move by move” (16.Nh4)
when he should have realised that he needed long-term planning – he should have preserved the
bishop for the future attack.
Then he could have gotten into trouble because he failed to switch to move by move and made instead
an automatic “active” move (23.Ra7). I’m sure he didn’t stop to evaluate the situation properly. If he
had, he would have sensed he was not any better and had to restore the coordination between his

127
pieces immediately.

C. Once more, this game confirms that unfounded activity could best be refuted if we entered the
move by move mode. In my game against Balint I failed to do so after his pseudo-active move f2-f4,
giving him the chance to equalise. The same thing happened here when Ma failed to punish the move
Ra1-a7. Perhaps one may say that my case was easier, as f2-f4 changed the structure, so if I had
stopped to evaluate the situation, I would have understood I was better and reacted accordingly. In
Ma’s case the evaluation should have been done a couple of moves ago. He probably knew he was at
least not worse and perhaps even slightly better, but maybe in the heat of the battle he trusted his
opponent too much and that limited the list of his candidate moves after Ra7. On several occasions he
missed good concrete solutions, and had to pay the penalty.

128
 Lalith – Adams

Gibraltar 2020

The majority of the examples included in this book belong to the category of equal or slightly better
positions where none of the players has an easy or apparent plan and actually in most cases has no
plan at all. The next example belongs to a special type of equality which for practical reasons I will
refer to from now on as a “plain-plan situation”. This is a situation where clear plans do exist, but
they are so trivial and anticipated by the other side that any position featuring them is best classified
under the category “dry equality”. In spite of the existence of clear plans, relative simplicity of the
play suggests that most rules we have forged for no-plan situations should also apply to the examples
of our new category. The fight taking place in them is quiet and contains only micro-plans or even
one-movers designed to improve one’s position.

Having pointed out the similarities, it is important to underline the differences as well:
a) Micro-plans here are part of a larger picture, as they are born from the needs of an already existent
long-term plan. In the no-plan situations the opposite happens – we use micro-plans or one-movers,
awaiting a change of the status quo.

b) The above detail suggests that micro-plans in plain-plan situations are more easy to create, but also
more predictable. They are derived from concrete characteristics of the position, which experienced
players spot in advance and base their long-term strategy upon.

c) Consequently, I am going to support the opinion (with some reservation of course) that the most
important thing in such situations is to focus on tactical accuracy and avoid one- or two-move
positional blunders – typical for the move by move mode. There isn’t a great need to evaluate the
position too often here, although it certainly does no harm. It is more important to focus on details.
The game presented below features the ultra solid super GM Michael Adams as Black. His opponent,
Indian GM Lalith Babu, displays carelessness in the move by move fight, and also fails to conceive
the right micro-plans. I think it is a very instructive example, because it shows that the slightest error
can be punished in chess, and no position is dead equal till bare kings are left.

1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.g3 dxc4 5.Bg2 a6 6.0-0 Nc6 7.Bg5 Be7 8.e3 0-0 9.Nbd2 e5 10.Nxe5
Nxe5 11.dxe5 Ng4 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 13.Nxc4 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Qxe5 15.Qd4

We join the fight at the moment when the Indian player offered a queen trade. Black has a choice
between accepting it or retreating his queen.

129
In either case the result seems to be dry equality. Indeed, until this game, there had been no decisive
results from this position in the database, a fact indicating its strong drawish tendencies. Mickey
decided to keep the queens and some small imbalance. That is natural, after all as the higher rated
player he must have been out for a win.

15...Qe7

After this move the pawn structure remains unchanged. It is a structure which has been well known to
the chess public for over a hundred years since the game Marshall-Capablanca, New York 1909,
albeit here we have on the board a much better version for White. In the historic encounter mentioned
above, the great Cuban had beaten his esteemed opponent by mobilising the queenside pawns and
eventually forcing the win of a piece, but here Adams is too far away from achieving anything
remotely resembling that – White is ahead in development, he has good control over the dark squares
and his bishop exerts annoying pressure on the long diagonal. For those who want to ascertain the
truth of my statement by simply comparing the position of the two games around move 15, the
encounter between the two legends of world chess is provided right below: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5
4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.g3 Be6 7.Bg2 Be7 8.0-0 Nf6 9.Bg5 Ne4 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.Ne5 Nxd4
12.Nxe4 dxe4 13.e3 Nf3+ 14.Nxf3 exf3 15.Qxf3

130
15...0-0 16.Rfc1 Rab8 17.Qe4 Qc7 18.Rc3 b5 19.a3 c4 20.Bf3 Rfd8 21.Rd1 Rxd1+ 22.Bxd1 Rd8
23.Bf3 g6 24.Qc6 Qe5 25.Qe4 Qxe4 26.Bxe4 Rd1+ 27.Kg2 a5 28.Rc2 b4 29.axb4 axb4 30.Bf3 Rb1
31.Be2 b3 32.Rd2 Rc1 33.Bd1 c3 34.bxc3 b2 35.Rxb2 Rxd1 36.Rc2 Bf5 37.Rb2 Rc1 38.Rb3 Be4+
39.Kh3 Rc2 40.f4 h5 41.g4 hxg4+ 42.Kxg4 Rxh2 43.Rb4 f5+ 44.Kg3 Re2 45.Rc4 Rxe3+ 46.Kh4
Kg7 47.Rc7+ Kf6 48.Rd7 Bg2 49.Rd6+ Kg7 and 0-1.

Undoubtedly Adams was aware that it would be very difficult for him to mobilise his queenside pawn
like in the above game and that retreating his queen to e7 gave his opponent space and a tempo.
However, he decided to do so nevertheless, taking a calculated risk. The queenside pawn majority is
a long-term asset, and he assessed that in the worst case he could only be slightly worse if White
played perfectly. For those interested to know, I would like to point out before continuing with our
game that 15...Qxd4 isn’t a bad move: After 16.exd4 c6 17.d5 cxd5 18.Bxd5 Ra7 19.Rfd1 b5 20.a4
bxa4 21.Rxa4 Rd7 22.Rad4 a5 23.Bc4 Rxd4 24.Rxd4 Be6= White had nothing in Leroy-Hauser, corr.
2015, and a draw was soon signed.

16.Rfd1 c6

Necessary, to block the scope of the g2-bishop.

131
Looking at the board only makes me think that to win this position Black needs a small miracle, but
believe me, Mickey has pulled off many miracles like that. After all, chess is a game, and mistakes
are part of it.

17.Qc3

An imperceptible error, throwing away whatever shreds of advantage White might have had. In
general, it isn’t good to retreat before one is attacked, unless there is a very special reason, as
happened in the Guijarro-Karjakin game. An assessment of the position after Black’s 16th tells us the
following things:

• Both kings are safe, although White has the wider pawn cover on the kingside.
• Both sides have a pawn majority on one side of the board. A queenless ending should in general be
okay for Black, especially if he keep his bishop, as it can aid his queenside pawns’ advance.
• White would love to carry out restrictive strategy on the queenside and then slowly progress on the
other wing. But that has to be done carefully enough not to provide Black with levers for
counterplay.

Overall, the evaluation should be that White has a tiny edge, but nothing more than that. To maintain
this edge he should strive for maximum accuracy, as this is definitely a situation where every inch of
space is valuable and every bit of time could be crucial.

Evaluation is an important part, but the application of the strategy makes the real master. And that is
most often dependent on subtleties. Let us come to the specific position before 17.Qc3 and try to
switch into move by move mode while trying to devise micro-plans to improve White’s position.
Actually I did this myself without a computer and I present the results of my experiment below:

132
My first thought was to clamp on the queenside by placing my queen on b6. Can it be done?
The answer is yes, but there are side effects. After 17.Qb6 Be6 18.a3 Rfd8 19.h4

19...Bg4! 20.Rxd8+ Rxd8 Black gains control of the d-file, and this more than compensates his
immobilised pawn majority. After following up with ...h7-h6 he should at least be no worse, as his
rook would be free to invade the white camp. Having thought about it for 5 minutes, I dismissed this
possibility.

Then I tried to apply a clamp by putting my pawn on a5. After 17.a4 Be6 18.a5!² the position made
me happy, but what can White do after the natural reply 17...a5, fixing the a-pawn on a light square?
Apparently not much. I felt this was not the right way after thinking about it for about 7-8 minutes,
then retracted the moves and started to think again.

Baffled, but still optimistic, I thought I’d better use some prophylaxis, spending 10 minutes on 17.a3
Be6 18.Bf3 Rfd8 19.Qc3
After 19.Qe5 I didn’t like the fact I wouldn’t be able to improve my king by putting it on g2.
This transposes to what White could have had in the game after 19...h6
19...Qf6?! 20.Qxf6 gxf6 21.Kf1 Kf8 22.Ke1².
20.h4. It is actually not a bad possibility, but when I put it later to the computer it came up with
20...Qc7! 21.b4 a5! 22.Qc5 (22.b5 c5=) 22...axb4 23.axb4 Rxa1 24.Rxa1

133
24...Bd5!! 25.Bxd5 Rxd5 26.Ra8+ Kh7=.

My last effort was the most successful: 17.h4!?. That was finally something I really liked. I made a
flexible move, gaining space and getting rid of first rank problems. White is supposed to be better
here. After 17...Be6 (17...Bf5 18.Qf4!?) I could already use the fact I did not commit my queen to c3:
18.Qe5!? Rfd8 19.Bh3! Qf6! The best retort.
19...Rd7 20.Bxe6 fxe6² is the type of position I usually stop analysing, thinking, oh, I have
finally got something tangible! That little something here is Black’s weakened pawn structure.
20.Qxf6 gxf6 21.Bxe6 fxe6². Here I stopped. Having thought about this last line around 10 minutes I
transferred the results of my analysis to the computer, considering that White held a slight edge in the
final position by virtue of having two pawn islands compared to Black’s three. The silicon monster
approved of my idea, giving a tiny edge to White after 22.g4!?.

Thus, armed with a correct evaluation, it took me approximately 35 minutes to reach a position that
would satisfy my criteria of what a slight advantage is, and I believe this is the best White could have
gotten in the game. When we are at the board though, we rarely display such a disciplined attitude,
you may remark. What causes that? I think that chess laziness can be one reason, lack of faith in our
ability could be the other. Ivan Sokolov is a typical case of a player who can scrutinise a position for
as much as it’s needed to get the most out of it, and even the time factor won’t stop him. This
devotion to the cause is something quite typical of Mickey too, and while sometimes it proves a
double edged knife in practical play, I wholeheartedly recommend it as the best method for chess
improvement.

17...Be6

A logical bishop deployment, reminding White that he has to take care of the pawn on a2. This is yet

134
another critical juncture where White is called upon to detect the best micro-plan. What would you
play?

18.a3

A good choice, but Lalith didn’t follow it up correctly.

18.a4!? was not a bad idea either, but Black equalises by making use of the d-file:
18...Rfd8!
An important move, intending ...Be6-g4. After 18...a5?! 19.Rd4! Rfd8 20.Rad1 Rxd4 21.Rxd4
h6 22.h4 the weakness of the pawn on a5 makes it difficult for Black to equalise completely. If
22...Qc7, then White has 23.Bd5! Bxd5 24.Rxd5! b6 25.Rd3², preparing to grab control of the
d-file with a small but lasting edge.
19.a5
19.Bf3 a5 20.Rxd8+ Qxd8 21.Rd1 Qb6 22.h4 Qb4= would be balanced.

135
19...Bg4! The key move, forcing White to weaken his kingside or surrender the d-file. 20.f3
Or 20.Rxd8+ Rxd8 21.h3 Be6 22.Ra4 Qg5! 23.Rb4 Qxa5 24.Rxb7 Qxc3 25.bxc3 g6=; 20.Rd4
Rxd4 21.Qxd4 h5!=.
20...Be6 21.Bf1 c5 22.Kf2
22.Qe5 h6 23.Bc4 Re8 24.Bxe6 Qxe6 25.Qxe6 Rxe6 26.Kf2 b6=.
22...h6 23.Be2 Qc7 24.f4! Rxd1 25.Rxd1 b5! 26.axb6 Qxb6 27.Qe5 Re8 28.Rd6 Qb7 29.f5 f6

30.Qxe6+!? Rxe6 31.fxe6 c4 32.b3! Qe4 33.Bxc4 Kf8=. White’s king is too open and sooner or later
the game will end with perpetual check.

18...Rfd8!

136
The right rook, making room for the king to approach the centre if an ending arises. It can also
provide protection to the queen as the game immediately revealed:

19.Qe5

The start of a faulty micro-plan. Perhaps White wanted to prevent ...Be6-g4 or threaten himself Bg2-
h3, but the basis for a successful move by move approach isn’t only to devise our own attacks, but
even more importantly, to prevent the opponent’s threats.
19.Bf3= was the right move (or 19.Rac1), transposing to the note to White’s 17th. The game
continuation only plays into Black’s hand:

19...Kf8!

20.Qe4?!

Following up the wrong idea. 20.Qc3 or 20.Bf3 was equal.

20...h6! 21.Qh7?!

A move which reminded me of Ding’s 23.Ra7? in the game against Ma Qun. This is a pointless
invasion for the sake of creating a one-move threat of mate, which Black will be able to parry
profitably. It is indeed better to have no plan at all than to follow a wrong one!

137
White should have acquiesced to the fact he had no chances for an opening advantage and played
something like 21.Qa4=, keeping the position in balance. The problem with the game continuation is
that he surrenders with tempo the dark squares to the enemy queen.

21...Qf6³ 22.Qc2 Kg8 23.h3 a5!

Gaining space and putting a pawn on a square of the “right” colour. The English GM is in his element
in such positions, knowing well how to create effective micro-plans and exploit one-move
inaccuracies by his opponents.

24.Rd2 Rxd2 25.Qxd2 Bb3!

138
The crucial moment of the game. Perhaps White thought that with his next move he prevented ...a5-
a4 and fixed a5 as a target, but in fact he only weakened his position.

26.a4?

Going rapidly downhill.

26.Rf1 a4 27.Qd7 Rb8 28.Qc7 Qd8 29.Qe5³ would have given White chances to hold, although it is
obvious that he is solely relying on guerilla tactics in his attempt not to let the Black rook into the
game.

Perhaps the most forcing defence was 26.Rb1!! – freeing the queen from the defence of b2. 26...Rd8
is impossible as the a5-pawn is hanging, and 26...a4 27.Qd7! Rb8 28.Qc7 Qd8 29.Qxd8+ Rxd8
30.Kf1 prevents the penetration of the rook on the second rank in view of the line 30...Rd2 31.Ke1.
Once again we see how resilient a chess position could be. White did not have to see any
miraculously long variations. He just needed to pay attention to more candidate moves instead of
“thinking strategically” in this mostly tactical position. Once you see 26.Rb1, 27.Qd7 is simple – a
classical harassing tactic in inferior positions.

26...Qd8!!µ

An excellent one-mover, essentially deciding the game. Who said that one cannot attack by
retreating?

27.Qc3

27.Qxd8+? Rxd8 28.Ra3 Rd1+ 29.Kh2 Be6–+ would be hopeless. 27.Qe1 shouldn’t have saved
White either in view of 27...Qb6 28.Qc3 Qb4µ.

27...Bxa4!

139
Black’s excellent play has netted him a pawn. It was the result of a sound evaluation, correctly
devised and executed micro-plans, powerful one-movers. I will not comment on the rest, but what has
to be said is that Mickey’s conversion is up to the task, never allowing his opponent any chances:

28.Bf1 Bb5 29.Bxb5 cxb5 30.Qc5 b4 31.Qb5 Qc7 32.b3 b6 33.Rd1 Rd8 34.Rd4 g6 35.h4 h5
36.Qc4 Rc8 37.Qd5 Qc6 38.Qg5 Qe6 39.g4 hxg4 40.h5 Qf5 41.Rd8+ Rxd8 42.Qxd8+ Kh7
43.hxg6+ Qxg6 44.Qd5 Kg7 45.Kg2 Qf6 46.Kg1 Kg6 47.Qd3+ Qf5 48.Qd8 Qe6 49.Qg8+ Kf5
50.Qh7+ Ke5 51.Qh8+ Kd6 52.Qd8+ Kc6 53.Qa8+ Kb5 54.Qd8 Kc6 55.Qa8+ Kb5 56.Qd8 a4
57.Qd3+ Ka5 58.bxa4 Kxa4 59.Qa6+ Kb3 60.Qd3+ Ka2 61.Qa6+ Kb2 62.Qe2+ Kc3 63.Qe1+
Kc4 64.Qe2+ Kc5 65.Qc2+ Kb5 66.Qd3+ Ka5 67.Qd2 Qc4 68.Kg2 Ka4 0-1

Studying this example led me to the following conclusions:

A. Plain-plan situations are easier to handle than no plan=best plan situations. They don’t need to
constantly evaluate the position.

B. Micro-plans and a move by move conduct are the order of the day also here, in spite of the quiet
character of play. Micro-plans are in a way servants of the bigger plans that stem from the stable
features of the position, such as pawn structures.

C. Plain-plan situations entail an element of pseudo-safety. Players are often inclined to believe that
they are not in danger since they are aware of the typical plans and the character of play is calm,
without sharp tactics. That can often lead to lazy thinking and reckless moves, which the experienced
opponent will take advantage of.

140
“Attack is the best defence” syndrome

In the last couple of examples we touched the issue of pseudo-activity in an equal position, examining
first a planless state of affairs and then a plain-plan situation. Of course I could show you many more
examples of this, but we have a lot of other situations to explore in this book and a book has its
limitations. So now I will move on to debunk yet another slogan, which is widely used to inspire
chess players, namely, “attack is the best defence”.

I guess that first of all the most natural question posed by readers would be the following: “In what
way does this subject differ from the previous one? After all, if one misevaluates a situation and tries
to attack when he should be defending instead, isn’t that a kind of pseudo-activity?” I would say that
there is only a superficial similarity, in fact the situations are not comparable. The difference is that in
the positions we are going to examine one of the two sides is aware that it is on the defensive, and the
only problem is choosing between active or passive defence. In contrast, in the cases of Ding-Ma and
Lalith-Adams White players were actually not on the defensive, but at the same time they were also
under the wrong impression they had the initiative. There arise a couple of more questions here:

1. If someone is on the defensive, doesn’t this automatically make him worse? Assuming that it does,
why have these examples found their way into this book?

2. Isn’t a position featuring attack and defence beyond the topics this book is supposed to cover?
Aren’t attack/defence synonyms of complexity and, as such, well outside our scope?

Answering the first question is easy: In principle it is easier to attack, or to put it into a broader form,
have the initiative, but neither of these is a synonym for positional superiority. In fact, chess can often
be a double-edged game, where attack and defence balance each other and the existence of targets
doesn’t necessarily mean these targets are really weak or indefensible.
Answering the second question, I have to say: No, attack and defence are not synonyms for
complexity either. They have the right to exist also in two types of positions we have defined earlier
in this book, but in rather milder forms: Primarily in the “plain-plan situations” and, more seldom, in
planless states of affairs, under the form of micro plans and one-movers. In the latter case they are
often the by-product of a very slight space superiority of one side, or temporary factors.
Coming now to the essence of my research, I will state with certainty that the slogan “attack is the
best defence” will rarely fit in positions of the type we are examining.

In fact, the slogan was forged with the idea of emphasizing the need to harass the opponent in
positions he feels in control (most often seriously advantageous for him), aiming thus to avoid a slow
choking death. Of course, it is also applicable in double-edged positions where imbalance reigns, as a
counterattack can distract the attacker from his own assault, slow down his momentum, put him in a
state of doubt, and even throw him completely off balance sometimes. According to my own

141
perception of the situation, the generalisation “attack is the best defence” rarely works as a practical
receipt in plain-plan positions for the following reasons:

1. These positions are essentially balanced in nature, play being most often slow and static. Of course
we pointed out the need for tactical accuracy in micro-skirmishes, and the importance of avoiding
positional blunders, but there is no attack or defence in the classical sense. In the majority of cases
one side exerts a slight pressure, and the other side “monitors” this pressure, keeping it under control
with accurate reactions. These reactions are most often solid moves instead of sharp counterattacking
actions. This is logical, considering the nature of the struggle. It is very rare that a bolt comes out
of the blue. Commonly in nature and chess, mild pressure is met with light tolerance. Actually
everything (please pay attention to that!) relies on the evaluation here:
It is important first of all to know that we are in a plain-plan situation.
Knowing that, the next step is to assess the progress of each player’s plans, by checking the present
situation on the board. If our evaluation tells us that the position is equal by considering strengths,
weaknesses, mobility and space, then we need to ask ourselves whether this is a status quo, or a
position that could be resolved by liquidation. If the answer is that this is a status quo, this should
immediately ring a bell. Sometimes a status quo holds more pleasant play for one of the two sides. If
we sense we are not that side, that relegates us immediately to the role of the defender. And then we
have to immediately intensify our move by move approach, in order to maintain the status quo.

2. I presume you are a bit taken aback by the fact that in plain-plan situations an “attack” (pressure)
should be rarely met by a “counterattack” (pressure on another part of the board), but rather by
“defence” (which I described here as tolerance). Isn’t that strange? Why what created this pressure
cannot trigger a counter-pressure as well? The answer to this question brings us to the second reason
why the slogan “attack is the best defence” is rarely applicable in plain-plan situations: The plans here
are very much anticipated because they are plain. Therefore, it’s very likely that the opponent will
succeed in eradicating our first active attempts. Then what remains would be just defence. Most
probably not a difficult one, but still a defence. Having remarked the above, I will now move on to
examine my next example, featuring two esteemed American grandmasters:

Caruana – Nakamura

Sinquefield Cup, Saint Louis 2018

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Be7 5.g3 dxc4 6.Bg2 0-0 7.Ne5 Nc6 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.Nxc6 Qe8
10.Nxe7+ Qxe7 11.Qa4 c5 12.dxc5 Qxc5 13.Be3 Qc7 14.0-0-0 Ng4 15.Rd2 Nxe3 16.fxe3 Rb8
17.Rhd1 a5 18.Kb1 h6 19.Ka1

142
We join the game after White’s 19th move in a variation of the Catalan, at a stage where the pawn
structure has crystallised and development is almost completed. I think this is an appropriate moment
to evaluate the situation and try to find out what the players are aiming at:

• Kings are safe for the time being and in my view are expected to remain so in the moves to come.
White has no realistic chances of attacking Black’s kingside and Black is unable to put serious
pressure on b2 in absence of a dark-squared bishop.
• The pawn structures are weak as they both consist of three pawn islands. White’s is actually slightly
weaker because it comprises a pair of doubled pawns as well, but that is outweighed by the fact
Black seems unable to exploit these weaknesses as he has the less agile minor piece.
• Black is slightly weaker on the dark squares (d6, c5, a5) and at the same time it is more difficult for
him to exploit White’s own weaknesses on them (e3, e5) because his bishop is light-squared. One
extra feature is that this bishop lacks a decent square. On the other hand, as we well know, the
bishop is a powerful weapon in the long-term sense, and the position is rather open here. So its
potential should not be underestimated if it manages to coordinate well with the rest of the black
pieces.
• The only domain where White seems to have a slight preponderance is rooks mobility – they are
well placed, controlling the important central d-file. The black queen, on the other hand, is a
piece White would like to exchange as it is for the time being the only one having access to
White’s weaknesses.

Overall, we may conclude that chances are even. In view of the imbalances in the structure we may
already take for granted that this isn’t a no-plan situation, so what remains for us to decide is whether
it belongs to the category of complex-plan positions or to the plain-plan ones. Looking at the board
for a few minutes, I easily formed my own opinion – this is definitely a plain-plan situation. There
are not too many pieces on the board, the pawn structures are rather static, the plans easily

143
conceivable. White will seek to exchange queens, trying to enhance his dark square control and to
attack more easily the enemy weaknesses. Black will try to avoid that, while seeking a purpose for his
bishop. If any side succeeds in carrying out parts or most of their plans, then perhaps a new
assessment could be required, but for the time being this is an evaluation the players can safely build
upon, adopting their move by move approach and micro-plans to the specific character of the game.

19...Rb4

Not the best, although the desire to push the queen back is understandable, considering that it attacks
two weaknesses from a4. But what is the rook doing on b4?
When I looked at the position without an engine, my immediate concern was solving the problem
with the Bc8, as I had defined this should be the main priority, or plan, if you prefer this term. I felt
this should involve the move ...e6-e5 as I wanted to deploy my bishop actively on the diagonals g8-a2
or h7-b1. I only didn’t see the exact way of implementing that. I didn’t feel that my bishop would be
well placed either on a8 or c6 because on a8 it lacks access to both sides of the board and on c6 it
hinders the defence of the c4-pawn and would be sensitive to attacks from White’s major pieces.
The most logical move seems to be:
19...f6. Preparing ...e5.
20.Rd4
After 20.Rd6 Qb7 21.Rb1 e5 Black is fine. The c4-pawn was weak anyway, and only blocks the
c-file and the black bishop, e.g. 22.Qxc4+ Kh8 23.Qd5 Qa7 24.Qe4 Re8 25.Rbd1 Be6 with
compensation.
20...Rb4 21.Qc2 e5 22.Nd5 Qc5 23.R4d2

23...Be6!? (23...Rb7 24.b3) 24.Nxb4 axb4 25.Rd6 b3 26.Qc3 Ra8 27.Rd8+ Rxd8 28.Rxd8+ Kf7
29.axb3 Qb6 30.Rd1 cxb3=. White’s rook doesn’t have any targets, his king is weak.

144
Then I saw that the AI engine Leela offers to play ...e5 without ...f6, but its line is really super-
human:
19...Kh8!? 20.Rd6 Qb7 21.R6d2 Qc7 22.e4 Rb4 23.Qc2 Rb8 24.Rd6 e5 25.Qa4 Qb7 26.Rb1 Qa7
27.Qxc4
On 27.Rd5 Black destructs the white kingside – 27...Qf2 28.Qxa5 Bg4 29.Qc7 Qxh2 30.Qxe5
Bxe2 31.Rd2 Qh5=.
27...Be6 28.Qa6 Qf2 29.Qxa5 Rfe8 30.Nd5 Qd4 31.Qa6 Qxe4 32.Nc7

32...Bxa2!! 33.Qxa2 Rec8 34.Na6 Ra8 35.Rd3 Rxa6 36.Qxa6 Ra8 37.Qxa8+ Qxa8+ 38.Ra3 Qe4
39.b4 Qxe2 40.b5 Qc4= with a perpetual.

The above analysis shows that if Black puts his bishop on e6, he can stop worrying about his weak
pawns as he gets enough counterplay against the enemy king or the unprotected kingside pawns.
Nakamura’s waiting move doesn’t seem to solve adequately the problem with the c8-bishop’s fate.

20.Qc2 Rb8

Back we go! Obviously Naka realised the rook was doing nothing on b4 and probably hoped for a
return of the queen to a4 with a repetition. But Fabiano was not going to consent to an early draw...

21.Qe4!

This can be considered a small progress for White as he has centralised his queen with gain of time.
Yet the position basically remains intact as neither side has managed to effectively promote any of its
plans.

21...Bb7

145
21...f6? doesn’t work anymore. After 22.Rd6 e5 23.Rc6 Qb7 24.Qxc4+ Kh8 25.b3± White has won
the pawn under much better circumstances than those in the note to Black’s 19th, and he controls the
board.

22.Qd4 Ba8

Not much to my liking. Black chooses a second-best method of deploying his bishop. It has to be said
though that his position remains good even after that.
I would have preferred 22...Bc6!, having the following line in mind: 23.Qxc4 Rfc8 24.Qf4 Qb7 25.g4
a4 26.a3 f6„ 27.h4 Be8 with good counterplay for Black.

For instance, 28.g5 Rxc3! leads to a repetition after 29.bxc3 Qb3 30.Qd4 Bg6! 31.gxf6 Qxa3+
32.Ra2 Qb3 33.Rad2=.

23.e4

Although this move doesn’t change the pawn structure, it definitely weakens the front e-pawn.
I like the computer recommendation 23.Qd6!? Qa7 24.Qe5!, centralising the queen and preparing to
push the kingside pawns. After 24...Qb6 25.g4! Rfd8! (25...f6 26.Qd4²) 26.Rxd8+ Rxd8 27.Rxd8+
Qxd8 28.a3 Qb6 29.Qf4=/², to be followed by h2-h4, White has a small positional edge, but in a
practical game it would amount to nothing more than a nominal advantage. Indeed, it is hard to think
of White winning this position considering the weaknesses of his pawn structure and the fact his king
would be vulnerable to perpetuals at some point later on, deeper into the endgame.

23...Rfc8!

146
Initiating a micro-plan to improve the bishop. In the next few moves Hikaru handles the situation
well, but still, when looking at the diagram, I cannot escape the feeling that the black bishop isn’t any
better on a8 than on c8.

24.Qf2

Compare the last diagram with the one after White’s 19th move. Obviously White has made
significant progress. He has centralised his queen and gained some space.
This quick reevaluation suggests that White should have stopped playing move by move. Instead
he should think how to increase and convert his small advantage.
He already has a clear plan to advance the kingside pawns:
24.e5! (grabbing more space!) 24...Bc6 25.h4! Be8 26.g4.
Caruana’s aimless manoeuvring misses this moment.

24...Bc6! 25.Qc5!?

Tempting Black to exchange the queens, but as we will see Black isn’t averse to it, because the e4-
pawn is a weakness. Undoubtedly though, this is definitely a point where Hikaru had to reassess the
situation because a queen trade was not in his original plans.

25...Be8

25...Qb7! was somewhat better, sticking to the initial concept that with queens on the board Black has
counterplay against the white pawns. Another advantage of keeping the queens is that it maintains
some pressure on the b-file.

147
26.Qe3!?
Instead 26.Qxc4 a4 27.a3 Bd5 28.Qd4 Bb3° is excellent for Black, while:
26.Qe5 a4 (26...Be8!?) 27.a3 Qe7 28.h4 Rb3 29.Qd6 Qb7 30.g4 Bxe4 31.g5 h5! 32.Qd7 Qxd7
33.Rxd7 Bc6 34.Rd8+ Rxd8 35.Rxd8+ Kh7 36.Rd4 Bb5= is quite balanced, too.
26...Be8
A fair alternative is 26...e5 27.g4 Qe7 28.Nd5 Bxd5=.
26...a4 27.a3 e5! (27...Qe7 28.e5 Rb3 29.Rc2 Be8 30.Rdd2 Qb7 31.h4± is a success story for
White as the pawn has advanced to e5, while Black’s b-file pressure is illusory.) is also possible.
27.g4!?
27.e5 Rc6! 28.g4 Rb6 29.Rb1 Qe7=;
27.h4 Rc6 28.g4 Rb6 29.Rb1 a4 30.a3 f6! 31.g5 fxg5 32.hxg5 h5= leaves White tied up
defending b2, so practically without a chance of launching an attack.
27...Qe7 28.e5 Qh4!
28...Qg5!? 29.Qg3 h5 30.gxh5 Qxg3 31.hxg3 Rc5 32.g4 Rxe5 33.Kb1 f5 34.gxf5 Rxf5 35.Rd8
Rxd8 36.Rxd8 Kf7 37.Rc8 Rxh5 38.Kc2 Re5 39.Rxc4 g5= is another acceptable way of
proceeding.
29.Qf4
29.h3 Qg5! 30.Qxg5 (30.Qg3? Rc5µ) 30...hxg5 31.Ne4 Kf8= is also totally balanced as the
queen exchange here finds Black well prepared to pressurise the e5-pawn.
29...Rc5!. We have reached a position where apparently a status quo reigns on the board:

148
The key point here is that whenever the Nc3 jumps to e4, Black has the ...c4-c3 possibility, getting rid
of the clogging pawn on c4 and giving his pieces chances to attack the enemy weaknesses or
according to circumstance, even the white king.

26.Qxc7 Rxc7 27.Rd6 Kf8 28.Ra6 Rc5

We have reached the situation Nakamura had to evaluate before making his 25th move – the crucial
moment he decided to allow the queen exchange. Of course for a player of his calibre it was not
difficult to visualise the picture we now see on the board, but assessing the consequences of the trade
is another thing. Let us try to figure out the pros and cons of the exchange and see if the balance of
power has swung towards one side or the other by weighing the new data:

149
Comparing the present situation on the board with the one ten moves ago we notice that in the
absence of queens the kings are even safer than before. Still the white one profited the most as it is
now free to participate in the game’s affairs. There has been no change in the pawn structures apart
from the e3-pawn moving to e4, but obviously once again White is the side who has the right to feel a
little more comfortable after the queen trade as his kingside weaknesses are not easily accessible.

Looking at the situation from Black’s point of view, we realise two things:

• With the pawn on e4 his bishop has obtained a potential target. However, as long as the knight stays
firmly on c3, there can be no real danger for it.
• The absence of queens allows his rook to vacillate along his 4th rank, safely protecting the a5-pawn
and at the same time attacking White’s kingside pawns. However, the rook isn’t such a
charismatic attacker like a queen or a knight if there is no open spaces available for it, so the
benefits will not be as high as one would expect.

Overall, I would say that the trade has slightly helped Fabiano, as he is enjoying a greater freedom of
movements for his king and rooks, but that the balance of power has not essentially been distorted.
Let us now see what are the plans in the new situation:

I would say that actually there are not many concrete ideas here. The experienced player realises that
this is (or is soon going to be) a balanced situation where each side has to increase its mobility and
then wait for a mistake by the opponent. The plans can be summarised as follows:

• White should somehow take care of the pressure on b2 in order to let his king approach the centre.
Without that he would not have even a trace of an edge.
• Black should be aiming to create a further weakness on the kingside by luring the h2 pawn
forwards, then using it as a lever to open up play on that sector with ...g7-g5. That should prove
useful as a counterbalancing measure that distracts White from pressurizing his own weakness.

29.Ra7!!

An apparently pedestrian move, keeping the king confined on f8, but in fact a very deep positional
one, designed to eliminate the pressure against b2. In what way is this achieved? Well, Caruana didn’t
become a 2800 player and World title challenger by accident. Of course he understood the need to
bring his king to the centre and at the same time he undoubtedly realised the problem with the
defence of the b2 pawn, so he devised an ingenious micro-plan to carry the major strategic idea out –
by creating the threat Rd1-d6-a6, winning the a5 pawn, he forces the Rb8 move to the c-file, paving
thus the way for the White king’s coming towards d2 and e3. Absolutely brilliant stuff.

29...Rbc8

A rather strange stand for the black rooks. The logical alternatives are 29...Rh5 30.h4 Rc5 31.Rd6

150
g532.a4 gxh4 33.gxh4 Rh5 34.Ka2 Rxh4 35.Rxa5 Rc8 36.Rd1 Rg4= and 29...g5 30.Kb1 g4. The
bishop commonly copes well with play on both flanks.

30.Kb1!

With the pressure on b2 eliminated, the king starts its journey towards the centre.
30.Rd6 would have been answered by 30...Rh5 31.h4 Bc6, stopping the d6-rook from reaching a6.
After 32.a4 Re5 33.Rd4 Be8 play remains balanced.

30...Rh5!

Going on with the realisation of the idea of inducing weaknesses. Such a manoeuvre would hardly be
possible in the presence of queens, so what we can remark for now is that Black exploits all the
advantages the position could offer him as a result of the exchange.

31.h4 Re5 32.Kc2 g5!

Black completes his plan. Now White will have to anticipate ...g5xh4 followed by pressure on the
resulting weak h4 pawn.

33.Rf1

But we cannot say the same about White! The consistent continuation was 33.Kd2!, and if 33...Rb8,
then 34.Ke3!. The point is that 34...gxh4 35.gxh4 Rxb2?? loses to 36.Rd8. Of course Black should
play 35...Rh5 36.Rd2 Kg7 37.Kf3 Rxh4 38.Rxa5, where the white pawn looks a bit more dangerous,
but Black should be able to stop it.

151
33...Kg7 34.Rb7!

Powerful play by Caruana who is also close to achieving his aim. By defending against threats along
the b-file, he is ready to bring his king finally to the centre.

34...Kg6 35.Kd2

We have reached a position that surely deserves a reassessment as both sides have completed their
micro-plans. What is the evaluation here? Is there a way for any player to make headway?
Looking at the position for no more than five minutes made me realise that we have reached a
standstill. Fabiano would love to play ♔d2-e3-d4, but if Black anticipated this by trading the active
rook on b7, then he would still be tied to defending b2 and perhaps a new weakness on h4, a fact
making progress impossible. Instead, rather surprisingly, Naka loses the thread and commits a small
inaccuracy:

35...f5?!

A reminiscence of “attack is the best defence” syndrome, or simply a wrong evaluation? Whatever it
was, it places Black in an unenviable position.
35...Rec5! would have been simple and good. After 36.Ke3 R8c7 37.Rb6 (37.Rxc7 Rxc7=) 37...R7c6
the result couldn’t have been anything else than a draw. For example, 38.Rxc6 Rxc6 39.Rd1 Rc8
40.hxg5 (40.Rd6 gxh4 41.gxh4 Rb8 42.Ra6 a4=) 40...hxg5 41.Rd4 Rb8 42.Rxc4 Rxb2 43.Rc5 a4=,
and there is no fight left. Obviously it is hard for me to know the exact reason that led to Hikaru’s
error in this game, but he may have been under the impression that by playing 35...f5 he was opening
up the game for his bishop and e5-rook. If this worked, it would have indeed been good strategy on
his part. But chess is most often not what we want, but what the truth of the position conceals.

152
I have to stress here that when we use a pawn thrust as a lever to open up the game for one of our
pieces, we have to be sure the move will achieve its object, as pawns are not moving backwards. As it
soon becomes evident, 35...f5 merely weakened the black position, giving thus something for White
to work on, practically out of nowhere. And now we come perhaps to the most important question of
all: How could Black’s error have been avoided? Why the position belonged to a status quo position
instead of a position where active liquidation was called for?

To answer this question we have to compare the positions before 35...f5?! (see last diagram) and after
it (see the diagram below):

By looking at those two positions, we easily establish the truth: The move 35...f5?! is weak because it
allows White’s unconnected rooks to unite their power in a common effort against the black king. An
additional factor is that it revives a dead point in the enemy camp (e4), making it a potential
stronghold of the c3-knight. The combination of these factors should have warned Black that he was
walking in the wrong direction and that he should have instead chosen to maintain equilibrium by
pedestrian means. I understand that many leading grandmasters or even common mortals will claim
that 35...f5?! doesn’t work only because of circumstantial reasons and that in general such moves are
good. Here I’ll rather trust myself in saying the opposite: Such moves would work only due to
circumstantial reasons. That is why I urge readers besides using evaluation, to double-check it in
move by move mode. In my view the possibility of a move like 35...f5?! to eventually work should be
no more than just 10% because this is the type of move the white pieces were waiting for.

36.hxg5!

Of course it would be naive to think that Fabiano would go for the inaccurate 36.exf5+?! exf5!
37.hxg5 hxg5 38.Rh1 Bc6! 39.Rb6 Rd8+ 40.Kc1 Re6=.

153
36...fxe4?

As they say, when it rains, it pours. Naka may have been in time pressure or already demoralised by
the error on the previous move.
36...hxg5? would have been also bad due to 37.Rh1!± Bf7?! (37...Rec5™±) 38.Ke3 Rec5 39.a4 R8c7
40.Rb6 R7c6 41.Rb5+– and Black is simply paralysed.
36...Kxg5 37.exf5 exf5
Alas, 37...Rxf5 faces the nasty 38.Ne4+.
38.Rf4! Rec5! 39.Rg7+ Kf6 40.Ra7 Kg5 41.Nd1 (41.e4 Bg6=) 41...h5!? (41...Rd8+ 42.Ke1²) 42.Rb7
(42.Ne3 Rb8 43.Nxc4 Bb5„) 42...Bg6² would have given Black chances to hold the position
although it is obvious that he is suffering.

The best defence was the intermezzo 36...Bc6!, taking e4 under control – 37.Re7 Kxg5
Or 37...Bxe4 38.gxh6 Kxh6 39.Rf4 Rd8+ 40.Kc1 Kg5 41.Rg7+ Kf6 42.Rc7 Bd5 43.g4².
38.exf5 Rxf5 39.Rg1 Kf6 with sufficient play.

37.Ke3!±

Suddenly White dominates the board completely. He has enhanced his control over the dark squares
and has activated his pieces. It would be no exaggeration to say that at least in a practical sense the
game has already been decided.

37...Bc6?!

A second error in a row aggravates Black’s difficulties.

37...Rxg5! 38.Nxe4 Rf5 was forced, when either 39.Rf4± or 39.Rxf5 exf5 40.Nc3 Bc6 41.Ra7± give
White excellent chances.

154
38.Re7!+– Rxg5?

The decisive mistake.

38...hxg5?! 39.Kd4 Rf5 40.Rxe6+ Kf7 41.Rxf5+ Kxe6 42.Rxa5+– would lose even faster.
Only 38...h5! 39.Rf4 Bd5 40.Ref7 Bc6 kept Black in the game.

39.Rxe6+ Kg7 40.Re7+ Kg6 41.Rd1

The result of the wrong activity, started with 35...f5?! is a tragic sight. With all his pawns weak and
an exposed king Black is bound to succumb. After:

41...Kf6 42.Ra7 Ke6 43.Rh1 h5 44.g4! Be8 45.gxh5 Bxh5 46.Nxe4 Rf5 47.Ra6+ Ke7 48.Nd6 Re5+
49.Kd4 Hikaru resigned. 1-0

This example undoubtedly teaches one or two things:

A. Evaluating a position as a plain-plan situation is almost certainly an equivalent to a recognition of

the following pattern: a quiet fight with predictable plans, where an organised attack cannot occur
often as the opponent will have the chance to spot and neutralise it before it gets off the ground. It
may, however, lead to some sort of pressure after judicious manoeuvring, especially if the opponent
doesn’t always choose the most principled reactions. This type of pressure, characteristic of most
plain-plan positions, will rarely be neutralised successfully by a sharp counterattack. It should be met
by either a very accurately calculated liquidation or by assuming a patient defensive stance.

B. In a plain-plan equal position, it is very important to sense the time when one has reached his
maximum, but also the kind of components of the enemy plan. If they are dynamic, most often a

155
liquidation will exist. If they are static, the status quo will have to be maintained by patient calm play.
So, once again, the evaluation is of huge importance.

156
 Ding Liren – Harikrishna

Shenzhen 2019

One day, during my conversation with a friend, he brought up the topic of what is talent in chess. I
answered him that there are two main ingredients that form it and combining them in the right dose
gives us what we call “a talented chess player”. First of all comes the ability to create plans – long-
term or short-term. The ability to evaluate properly a situation and use the findings to improve the
position. Secondly, it’s the ability to play the position according to the move by move approach. If
planning ensures your position’s well being after 10, 15, 20 moves, the above approach ensures that
no major accidents will happen along the way. “And what exactly is that move by move approach,”
he was interested. I thought for a few seconds and replied: “It’s a kind of antivirus and positional
amplifier at the same time: It keeps the position clean of tactical and positional mistakes, and at the
same time improves the quality of the pieces and pawns, with small steps. Ideally, it works best if we
could forget what happened before in the game and treat the position as an original one.” “So, is it
something like a living-for-the-day” attitude?,” he asked me. “No, actually much more than that,” I
replied. “It makes sure you wake up tomorrow in no worse shape than the one you are today.” I could
see in my friend’s eyes that he was rather impressed from the way I was putting things, but that is
where our conversation stopped as he had to leave. I, too, entered the underground and soon arrived
home. Normally I cannot get rid of a topic that easily, especially if it is related to chess, so I started to
expand my thoughts regarding the move by move approach. I suddenly was eager to classify the
volume of its components according to the situations we encounter in practice. I made a small
informal table on a paper which I present below:

Situations without a clear plan or no plan at all:

Positional element: Intensified. The quality of our position has to be measured almost on every move.
Tactical element: Average, as it is unlikely that long complex lines will occur. Trap/blunder
awareness mode must be switched on though. Deserts are not free of cacti and snakes.

Plain-Plan situations:
Positional element: Average/dimmed. We know what is our plan and the way to anticipate that of our
opponent. The quality of position depends on typical patterns. Most energy goes to micro-plans, but
even so most of them are pre-defined.
Tactical element: Average/Intensified for one-movers and traps.

Complex-Plan situations:
Positional element: Intensified. Abundance of plans and micro-plans definitely requires to elevate our
awareness levels.
Tactical element: Intensified. Longer sequences might require accurate calculation.

My classification concerns human beings with limitations, who need to manage their time and energy

157
during a game. And of course I don’t pretend to know everything, this table is derived from my own
experience and it is quite possible that modifications/amendments to it might be required.

The next example is one of the strangest I’ve ever seen at high level chess. It features a plain-plan
situation of approximate equality where Black’s task is to extinguish his opponent’s slight initiative
on the queenside to draw the game. To do that, he only needs to adhere to the natural plan by
applying an undemanding move by move attitude.
Incredibly enough, he chooses instead a misguided “attack is the best defence” reaction, which could
hardly be justified by the nature of the position. The whole incident is doubly surprising for me
considering Black could have avoided his faulty decision by using either of the filters available: the
evaluation/plan filter, or even a moderate move by move calculation. The fact he failed merely means
that Black’s indubitable chess prowess let him down on that day.

1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Bg2 Nb6 7.0-0 Be7 8.d3 0-0 9.Be3 Re8
10.Rc1 Bf8 11.Bg5 f6 12.Be3 Be6 13.Nd2 Qd7 14.Nb3 Bh3 15.Bxh3 Qxh3 16.Bc5 Bd6 17.e3
Rad8 18.Qf3 Nd7 19.Bxd6 cxd6 20.Nd5 Nb6 21.Nd2 Nxd5 22.Qxd5+ Qe6 23.Qxe6+ Rxe6 24.a3
Ree8 25.Rc2 d5 26.Nb3 Rd6 27.Rfc1 Kf7 28.Nc5 Nd8 29.b4 Re7 30.Kf1 Ne6 31.a4

We join the fight after White’s 31st move in a relatively quiet game, for the largest part of which
White has held a slight initiative. The absence of queens in conjunction with symmetry in the pawn
structure makes the position a likely draw, but to achieve that Black has to neutralise White’s mild
queenside pressure, arising from his doubled rooks on the c-file and space advantage on the
queenside.

31...Ng5?

A completely wrong idea. Black tries to change the course of the game by using the f3 square as a

158
hook, aspiring to plant his knight there and start a kingside attack. However, this can only rebound on
him. It is simply a time consuming plan which is on top of all impossible to achieve if White wishes
so. Even if Black failed to reach the above conclusion by using the tool of evaluation, the move by
move tool should have enabled him to do so. We’ll first see what he had to play, and then move on to
see why his game choice was faulty.

To start with, 31...Nxc5!?, albeit not the best solution, was perfectly viable. After 32.Rxc5 f5 Black
threatens to equalise by ...d5-d4 and I cannot see how White could prevent his opponent from doing
that. For example, 33.d4!?
33.f3 f4=;
33.Ke2 d4 34.b5 dxe3 35.fxe3 Ke6=.
33...exd4 34.exd4 b6! 35.Rc8 (35.Rc7 Rde6=) 35...Rdd7 36.f3 (36.a5 Re4=) 36...Re3=.

An improved version of the same idea is 31...f5, intending to take on c5 and push ...d4, e.g. 32.Ke2
Nxc5=.

31...Nd8 practically neutralises the c-file as the white knight cannot free it for his rooks.

31...Rb6 was the most principled continuation, using the b4 pawn’s weakness as a lever to force
simplifications.

32.b5 a6 33.bxa6
33.Nxe6 Kxe6 34.Rc5 Kd6 35.Ke2 axb5 36.axb5 Re8= brings about a simple balance, where
White doesn’t have any idea how to progress.
33...Nxc5 34.Rxc5 Rxa6 35.a5 b6! 36.axb6 Rxb6 37.Rxd5 Rb2 38.Kg2 Ra7 39.h4 h5=. Black gets the
job done in a dynamic manner as the impending doubling of rooks on his 7th rank will provide full
compensation for the pawn. Thus, the lines were hardly difficult, and I would say that any player with

159
a rating ranging from 2200 to 2800 could find them. But chess is a “wicked” game and sometimes we
are tempted by absurd ideas like the one “Hari” chose in the game. 31...Ng5 doesn’t lose tactically,
but it is only the 14th (!) candidate-move of the AI engine Leela. Let us see why it was wrong:

32.b5!

Ding is a brilliant player. Although he had a possibility to nip in the bud Harikrishna’s plan, he lets
him go on with it, correctly evaluating that it is wrong!
The point here is that while 32.h4!? exposes the futility of Black’s strategy, it would have allowed
him the chance to admit his mistake and retreat with 32...Ne6!², something the Chinese super GM
deemed right to avoid. But why does the knight have to retreat, you may ask. Why not 32...Nf3
33.Ke2 e4 instead? I have serious reasons to believe that Pentala’s original calculations were actually
based on this, for otherwise he wouldn’t have ventured 31...Ng5?. If that was indeed his idea, it turns
out his move by move alertness was not up to the task, for he would have spotted the following
refutation: 34.dxe4 dxe4

35.Nxe4!. A simple yet shocking capture, giving White a large plus. 35...Rxe4
35...Nd4+ is answered with the cold-blooded 36.Kd3!!+–, and White will win the rook ending,
coming out of the skirmish a clear pawn up. It is this king move what the Indian GM may well
have overlooked.
36.Rc7+ Kg6 37.Kxf3 Rxb4 38.Re7 Rd8 39.h5+ Kh6 40.Rcc7 Rg8 41.Rxb7 Rxa4 42.g4±. With his
king trapped at the edge of the board and no counter-balancing activity, Black is almost certainly lost
here, so the entire concept starting with 31...Ng5? is completely pointless. The above lines serve to
reveal that move by move mode can sometimes help us reject a strategically faulty idea, if only for
tactical reasons. The continuation chosen by Ding in the game underlines why 31...Ng5? was in its
strategic essence, deeply unsound:

160
32...e4 33.d4 Nf3 34.h3

Even 34.Ke2 Nxh2 gives White nasty pressure after 35.a5 Nf3 (35...b6 36.Na6 bxa5 37.Rc6 Rde6
38.Ra1) 36.Na4 h5 37.b6.

34...f5

The whole idea of leaving the c5-knight without a restraining opponent is entirely wrong. Black’s
knight’ sortie would have been justified only if he were the active side, with the more menacing
pieces. Perhaps Hari’s delusion was caused by the hypnotic impact of his pawn centre. But then
concrete calculation should have corrected his wrong evaluation.

35.Nb3?!

No one is perfect! As I have said elsewhere in this book, it is usually best not to retreat unless one has
been attacked. But obviously Ding “trusted” his opponent and decided to exchange the “menacing”
knight on f3. Instead the consistent:
35.a5! would have given a tangible edge – 35...b6
35...Rh6 loses to 36.Nxb7!, but the prosaic 36.h4 or 36.Kg2 also do the job.
36.Nb3 Rh6 37.Kg2 g5 38.a6 f4

161
39.Nd2! The same idea as in the game in best shaping! Black is in a predicament:
39...Rf6 40.Nxf3 exf3+ 41.Kxf3 fxe3+ 42.Kg2. Now both 42...exf2 and 42...e2 are hopeless.

Trying to understand what frightened Ding Liren, urging him to play 35.Nb3, I looked at another
natural move:
35.Ke2!. Delving deeper in the position, I understood why it did not seem so convincing. After
35...g5 36.a5 f4 37.a6 bxa6 38.Nxa6 Rh6 Black’s counterplay looks tangible.

The only move that gives White a winning advantage is 39.Rh1!!+– By calmly protecting the h3
pawn White threatens Na6-c7. Actually there is no defence against it! But it is easy to miss the idea
of returning the rook to h1.

162
35...b6?!

36...h5!² was the best way for Black to proceed, with some counterplay. Uncharacteristically for the
Indian GM, in this game his technique was below par.

36.Nd2?

36.a5!± was best. For example:

36...g5 (36...h5!? 37.a6 Rdd7 38.Rc8 h4 39.Ke2±) 37.a6 Rh6 38.Kg2 f4 39.Nd2 transposes to 35.a5.
Now Black is given a second chance:

36...Ng5?

The alternative was 36...Nxd2+! 37.Rxd2 g5 38.Rdc2 f4! with drawing chances.

For example:
39.exf4 gxf4 40.Rc6 (40.g4 Rh6„) 40...Rxc6 41.Rxc6 fxg3 42.fxg3 Re6 43.g4 Rf6+! 44.Ke2 Kg7
45.g5 Rf3 46.h4 Rh3 47.Rd6 Rxh4 48.Rxd5 Rh3²;
39.Rc7 Rf6 40.Ke2 f3+! (40...fxg3 41.fxg3 Rf3 42.Rxe7+ Kxe7 43.Rc7+±) 41.Kf1 (41.Kd2 Rh6=)
41...Rfe6=;
39.g4! fxe3 40.fxe3².

37.h4 Ne6

163
38.Nb1!+–

Finally White is back on the winning track. The knight will be re-deployed to the fantastic square b4,
from where it would be eyeing all the weaknesses in the black camp.

38...h6 39.Nc3 g5 40.hxg5 hxg5 41.Na2 f4 42.Nb4 Kf6 43.Rc8 Kf5 44.Rh8 Rf7 45.Ke2 f3+
46.Kd2 Nf8 47.Rc8 Ng6 48.Rh6 Ne7 49.Rxd6 Nxc8 50.Rxd5+ Kg4

White has snatched a vital pawn and is completely winning at this point.
However, with his next move he fails to follow one very important rule for all endings: Suppress
counterplay!

164
51.Nc6?!

A slight mistake, delaying the execution. 51.Rd8+– was an obvious killer, not giving Black a respite.
The Nc8 simply has nowhere to go. After 51...Kh3 (51...Ne7 52.Rd7 Kh3 53.d5+–) 52.Rxc8 Kg2
53.Nd5 Kxf2 54.Nc3 it’s curtains.

51...Kh3! 52.Ne5?

Yet another, this time grave error, which throws away the win.
52.Rd8! was strongest for a second consecutive turn. After:
52...Ne7
52...Rc7 loses to 53.Ke1! Kg2 54.d5 g4 55.Ne5! Rc2 56.Kd1 Rxf2 57.Rxc8 Rf1+ 58.Kc2! f2
59.Rf8 Rh1 60.Nxg4 f1=Q 61.Rxf1 Rxf1 62.d6 Rf8 63.d7 Kxg3 64.Ne5+–.
53.Rd7 Kg2 54.Ke1 Rh7 55.Rxe7 Rh1+ 56.Kd2 Kxf2 57.d5 Rh6

White wins nicely as follows: 58.Re6 Rh2 59.Rf6 Kxg3+ 60.Kc3 f2 61.Kd4 Rh1 62.d6 g4 63.Kxe4
Rh6 64.Rxf2 Kxf2 65.d7 Rd6 66.d8Q Rxd8 67.Nxd8 g3 68.Ne6 g2 69.Ng5 g1=N 70.Kd3+–.

52...Rf6„

In comparison to the above lines, here the knight comes to d6, and the counterplay against f2 is
dangerous.
52...Rg7 is also possible – 53.Rd8 Ne7 54.Ke1 Kg2 55.d5 Nf5 56.Ng4 Kh3 57.Ne5 Kg2=.

53.Rd8 Nd6 54.Kc3 Nf5 55.Rh8+ Kg2 56.Ng4 Rf7 57.Rh2+ Kg1 58.Kc4 Rd7 59.Rh5

There is no win anymore, and from now on White is playing only for tricks. Luckily for Ding, Kaissa

165
was on his side on that day:

59...Rd6

59...Nxe3+!= would have drawn immediately.

60.d5 Rg6??

60...Rd7 was a draw.

61.Rh7 Rd6 62.a5!+– bxa5 63.Rxa7 Nh6 64.Kc5 Rd8 65.Nxh6 Kxf2 66.Nf5 Kg2 67.Rxa5 f2
68.Ra2 Kf3 69.Rxf2+ Kxf2 70.b6 Rb8 71.d6 Kf3 72.d7 Rf8 1-0

If someone saw this game without analysis, he might have thought that Black got dangerous
counterplay by following the slogan “attack is the best defence”. Having analysed in some depth the
way things evolved, we do know that this impression is illusory and that in fact only White’s
inexactitudes in the end gave Black chances to save the game. Closing our examination of this
example, there are a couple of important remarks I want to make:

A. “Attack is the best defence” will rarely work in symmetrical pawn structures, especially when the
queens have left the board.

B. If in plain-plan situations we are attracted by a counter-intuitive idea and we cannot resist the
temptation to examine it further, we should intensify our move by move calculation. We may play an
intuitive idea without much thinking, but never the opposite.

166
 Sanal – Firouzja

Nakhchivan 2018

In the next game we witness again the same issue (“attack is the best defence” syndrome), this time in
a slightly more complicated form. The problem here is how to evaluate first of all the situation on the
board because as we know, almost everything depends on a correct evaluation.

1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.b3 Bg7 5.Bb2 0-0 6.Bg2 Nbd7 7.0-0 c6 8.Re1 Qc7 9.e4 e5 10.dxe5
Nxe5 11.Nbd2 Nfg4 12.Nd4 c5 13.Nb5 Qb6 14.a4 a6 15.Bxe5 Nxe5 16.Nc3 Be6 17.Nd5 Qd8
18.Ra2

We join the fight right after White’s 18th move in a game contested between two up-and-coming
players of the new generation. I presume that most of you already know the Persian genius Alireza
Firouzja. Sanal Vahap of Turkey is another talented player, whose name we should expect to hear
often in the future.
White’s last move was probably not the best one, a better alternative being in my view:
18.Qe2 Rb8 19.Ne3 h5 20.Rad1 Ng4 21.Nf3=.
However, the evaluation of the position didn’t change because of 18.Ra2. Black only has the better
side of an approximate equality after it. That said, in order to perceive well the nature of the struggle
(since this piece of knowledge will guide our future actions), we need to know exactly what type of
equality this is. When I came across this example, I classified my thoughts as follows:

The position is equal because of the following factors:

• Kings are safe.

167
• Black has the slightly worse pawn structure, but that is compensated by his bishop pair.
• The a2-rook seems a bit misplaced, but it could come into play later on after either a4-a5 (getting
access to a4) or c2-c3 (getting access to the d- and e-files).

The only factor I could think of as slightly tipping the scales in Black’s favour was his mild
preponderance on the dark squares.

Regarding the nature of the position, I was initially a bit confused by the presence of many pieces and
the slight asymmetry in the pawn formations, therefore I was not sure whether this was a complex
plan situation or a plain-plan one. When I really focused on its characteristics I sensed that the
diagram position was a plain-plan situation.
White would like to reinforce d5 by Nd2-f1-e3 if given the chance, but if he is denied that option
(e.g. by an immediate ...Be6xd5), he should at least try to activate the Ra2. Long-term strategic aims
for the first player could be exploiting the slight weaknesses of the d6 and b6 points, but for the
moment that seems rather remote.

Black, on the other hand, should strive to exploit his supremacy on the dark squares. I saw two basic
ideas:
1. Creating a symmetry by playing ...Be6xd5 when White cannot recapture on d5 with a piece, then
using the presence of opposite coloured bishops to pressurize White by trying to turn into strong
points e5 and/or d4.
2. Gaining space on the queenside by ...b7-b5. The idea would be to turn d4 into a powerful base after
a subsequent ...b5-b4. I came to this conclusion by using the observation tool, noticing that White
cannot contest d4 by more than one minor piece, so in absence of the resource c2-c3 Black could
definitely end up conquering that square.

Having defined that this is a plain-plan situation was in some way an indicator of the type of play: I
now knew that play would consist of micro-plans and micro-skirmishes rather than attacks requiring
complicated calculation, and that the side that pays most attention to these elements would enjoy the
higher chances of success.
Normally my expectation was that this game would end in a draw in a fight between players of this
level, but look at what happened:

18...Nc6

Firouzja is driven by a desire to exchange the Nd5 for a knight rather than a bishop, but in my view
this isn’t the most principled idea. In any case it is an acceptable micro-plan, and the threat ...Nc6-b4
gains time for its realisation.
Instead, I would have actually preferred 18...Bxd5!? 19.exd5 f5!, following the rule that a position
with opposite coloured bishops favours the attacker. Why is Black the attacker here was obviously
simple enough to explain to myself from my KID and Benoni experience, but I guess it will be also
easy for anyone to understand by looking at the diagram position:

168
The d5-pawn restricts the scope of the white bishop rendering it a passive observer, while d4 is an
open square for the Bg7, creating the possibility of targeting f2. Therefore, Black enjoys by a small
margin the better chances, a logical continuation being 20.a5!?
20.f4? Ng4–+;
20.Nf3?! Nxf3+ 21.Qxf3 Be5³ intending ...f5-f4.
20...Qf6 21.Ra4
21.c3!? Rae8 22.Rc2 f4.
21...Rae8 22.b4!? c4
22...cxb4 23.Rxb4 Qd8 24.Rxb7 Qxa5 25.Re3÷/³ is also a bit more promising for Black, but
White has his chances as well.
23.Ra3 Re7 or 23...h5=/³.

Another logical line is 18...Qa5 – preventing c3 and connecting the rooks.

19.Nf4 Bg4 20.Qc1 Rae8 with harmonious pieces.

19.c3

Of course the Turkish GM was not going to allow the knight at b4. At the same time c2-c3 is a move
that fits well with White’s plan of liberating the rook.

19...Ne7 20.Qf3

169
20...h5!?

Not bad, but it is prelude to rather risky play. The idea is to take on d5 and then follow up with ...Be6-
g4, Qd8-d7.
The machine prefers 20...Nxd5 21.exd5 Bf5. I think this is quite reasonable as 22.g4 Bd7 23.Qg3
Re8!? seems at least equal in view of the still displaced Ra2 and the temporary weaknesses at c3, g4.
That said, after 24.Rxe8+ Qxe8 25.Ne4! f5! 26.gxf5 Bxf5 27.Re2 White manages to activate the rook
and create counterbalancing play just in time. In the computer line 27...Qe5 28.Re3 Bxe4 29.Rxe4
Qxg3 30.hxg3 Bxc3 31.Re6= the game should gradually peter out to a draw, even if nominally Black
is the better side.

21.Nc4

I like better 21.Nf4!?, not letting my opponent saddle me with a dead point on d5. However, Black
has an impressive response:

170
21...Nc6!?. Definitely a case of inspired move by move mode! If you could start finding such moves
in your games by intensifying your focus in plain-plan positions, I would rejoice in the thought this
book has contributed something to your chess improvement. I don’t know if Alireza would have
found it, but I don’t consider it unlikely. At the moment of writing these lines he is already at 2700 +
potential. Building such a rating depends a lot on scrutinising positions in a very punctilious way,
exactly what a move like 21...Nc6 would require! The point here is that the move looks positionally
dubious as it allows White to weaken Black’s formation while depriving him of the bishop pair.
However, circumstantial factors such as winning a tempo by hitting the queen, and the weakness of
the c3-square, allow Black to carry out a fine strategic idea: 22.Nxe6 fxe6 23.Qe3

23...g5!. If the pawn reaches g4, then e5 would turn into a secure base for Black’s minor pieces. The
computer move that follows is a try to change the course of the game: 24.e5!?

171
 Perhaps best is 24.Nc4! Ne5!=, remaining with opposite coloured bishops.
24...d5!. Black gets an excellent ending. 25.Nf3 Rf5 26.Qxc5 g4 27.Nd4 Bf8! 28.Nxc6 Bxc5
29.Nxd8 Rxd8= The weaknesses at c3, e5 and f2 clearly nullify White’s extra pawn.
At the end of this sequence I would expect you to ask me: “But how can I find such moves like
21...Nc6!? and 23...g5!, and know they are good? Isn’t this too much to ask from a club player, FIDE
Master or even International Master? My answer will surprise you but it is a big, big NO!. If you have
evaluated correctly earlier on that your play lies on the dark squares, bolstering the control over such
a square in the centre (e5) could inspire you to find 23...g5. The move by move approach will take
care of the details, ensuring you don’t blunder something in the process. It could, for example, help
you spot the surprise reply 24.e5!? and try to work out its consequences. All this may sound too
hypothetical and vague to the uninitiated but, believe me, becoming really strong demands sometimes
exploiting circumstantial factors that could help you carry out your main strategic plan.
Elaborating more on this, only by intensifying your move by move focus you’ll have the chance to
execute apparently counter-intuitive ideas with success.

In Ding-Harikrishna the move 31...Ng5? was too anti-strategic to work, and it was also getting very
little help by circumstantial factors compared to the situation here. 21...Nc6! was linked to a real
strategic element such as dark square control, and was aided by all the “lucky factors” the enemy
position could offer Black.

21...Nxd5 22.exd5 Bg4

23.Qf4!

It is hard to believe that Firouzja missed this strong reply, on the other hand, in the heat of the fight
everything is possible, so I wouldn’t be surprised if this really was the case. White doesn’t defend his
pawn on c3 but focuses instead on pressurizing the d6-pawn. Apart from being objectively fine and

172
strong, Vahap’s move gives me the chance to make an interesting comment here, which I am sure
will help you clarify a lot of things regarding this “attack is the best defence” slogan.
I will not hide from you that the small kid that still lingers in each and everyone of us started shouting
at my older self at this point: “Liar! Liar! You told us that in plain-plan situations an attack isn’t met
by counterattack, but rather by tolerance and here you are adorning with an exclamation mark a
counterattacking move instead of retreating. What happened to your principles? Don’t you think this
theory of yours sucks?”

Well, obviously this young self of mine doesn’t know what good manners are, but I guess he still has
a right to voice an opinion or two. Using this question as a starting point, I think it is both important
and high time to reveal to you how distinguishing “a tree from the forest”, as public wisdom says,
works in chess. A single threat obviously differs a lot from an organised attack as it usually consists
of just one move, not necessarily linked with a plan. As such it cannot substitute the word “attack”,
even more so the word “pressure”. Organised attacks are a product of a lengthy process and follow an
escalation. So does a well built positional pressure. The fact that Sanal Vahap chooses in the present
position to attack d6 instead of keeping c3 guarded has nothing to do with the saying “attack is the
best defence”. In fact, we are still at the stage where both “boxers” are “dancing” around, landing
light punches on each other’s body in the hope of building up a momentum. This is a tit for tat phase
where no one has yet committed an inaccuracy serious enough to allow his opponent obtain an
initiative, pressure or if you so wish, attack. On the other hand, I have to stress an exception, where
the “tit for tat” fight can be perceived as “attack” and “counterattack”:

I mentioned in the intro to the Caruana-Nakamura game concerning attack and defence that they have
a right to exist “...more seldom in planless states of affairs, under the form of micro plans and one-
movers”. With the term “one-movers” I meant single moves (in contrast to culminating move
sequences), which, if they are of the aggressive type (most of the one-movers actually simply
improve piece quality) create shallow threats (usually 1-2 moves deep). Actually it is only in those
positions where a one- or two-move deep threat can be perceived as an attack. This happens
because in absence of the possibility to grow a whole forest, a tree becomes the forest itself. So
everything depends on evaluating a situation properly.

If we are in a planless state, it isn’t likely that such one-movers will often crop up, but if they do
appear and the opponent meets them with an energetic one-mover as well, this can be indeed called
“attack and counterattack”. I want to further remark that in planless situations too, correct energetic
responses will be much rarer than passive defence responses, but if they happen, we do have to
perceive them as counterattacks:

In a situation where there is no possibility of culmination or escalation of the tension because of lack
of strategic reasons, a single threat or counterthreat acquires a value that would be undeserved in
other situations.

173
Closing this lengthy comment, I would like to stress a thing also mentioned a few lines above: While
an energetic, short response to the one-mover type of attack remains a rare bird in planless equalities,
it’s still more likely to exist than an organised counterattack in plain-plan equalities. This means that
the “attack is the best defence” saying obtains more substance when it comes to those positions. I
would say that the following estimation summarizes my thoughts on the whole situation:

Plain plan equalities:

For every 100 organised attacks (where attack was mostly defined as a slowly culminating pressure)
85-90 of the responses should be of a purely defensive (tolerant) character, and only the rest 10-15, of
the counterattacking type.

Planless equalities:
For every 100 attacks (where the meaning of the word “attack” was relegated to one or two-move
deep threat because of the nature of these positions) only 20 of them will trigger an energetic
response of the same type.

23...Bxc3 24.Rc1

24...Bd4

Although there isn’t anything wrong with this move (I guess it is what most players would play,
including yours truly), it is worth pointing out that Black could have continued with the “tit for tat”
strategy:
24...b5!. It would have been objectively best, forcing simplifications. After 25.axb5 axb5 26.Rxa8
Qxa8 27.Nxd6
27.Rxc3 bxc4 28.bxc4 Qa5 29.Rc1 Qd8 30.h3 Bc8=.
27...Qa5 28.Nb7 Qb4 29.Qxb4 Bxb4 30.h3 Bf5 31.Bf1 Be4= the draw is imminent.

174
25.h3!?

The most principled, making a luft and questioning the Bg4-bishop.

The alternative 25.Qxd6 would have led to slightly simpler play after 25...Qg5! 26.Qf4 Qxf4
27.gxf4. Indeed, the engines tell us that the resulting positions deserve the 0.00 evaluation. Here are
the lines: 27...b5!?
27...Rad8 28.h3 Bf5 29.Rd2 Bg7 30.Ne3 Bh6= is easy equality for both sides.
28.Na5 b4 29.Nc6 Kg7!?
29...Bc3 30.h3 Bf5 31.Ne7+ Kg7 32.Nxf5+ gxf5 33.Rd1 Rfd8 34.Bf1 a5 35.Bc4 Rd7 36.Re2
Rad8=.
30.Nxd4 cxd4 31.f3 Bf5 32.Bf1 d3 33.Rd2 Rfd8 34.Rc5 Rac8 35.Rxc8 Rxc8 36.Bxd3 Bxd3 37.Rxd3
Kf6 38.Rd4 a5=.

Returning to the game continuation, Firouzja’s reply to it was not up to the task:

25...Bf5?

This seems to be a bad error, which puts White on top. Alireza tries to force the play by putting his
bishop on the aggressive square d3, but apparently his calculation had a hole. The logical problem
here is that Black tries to play aggressively following the “attack is the best defence” slogan. That is
faulty for two reasons:
1. White was simply not attacking. The two players were involved in a skirmish, which none of them
had started from a position of strength. He could easily have established that by evaluating the
situation. 2. Had he realised he was merely involved in a skirmish and not in a state of attack/defence,
Black would have also first and above all realised he wasn’t the attacker either.
Sending a piece like that to the enemy camp without capturing anything and no prospect of

175
anchoring it should have rung a bell that he was on the wrong path. It is important also to note that in
the last few moves White has improved the quality of his pieces – something that was denying black
circumstantial reasons for any such aggression to work.

After the solid, patient and correct 25...Bd7 equality would have been maintained. Sample lines
follow:
26.Nxd6!?. This is the only critical move.
Instead, 26.Re2 Re8 27.Rxe8+ (27.Rce1? Rxe2 28.Rxe2 b5 29.Nxd6 Qf6 is even better for
Black) 27...Bxe8 28.Re1! (28.Nxd6?? g5–+; 28.Qxd6?! b5³) 28...g5 29.Rxe8+! Qxe8
30.Qxg5+ Kf8! 31.Qh6+ Kg8 32.Qg5+ Kf8= leads to a perpetual, and it is White who has to
be more careful along the way.
26.Qxd6 b5 27.axb5 axb5= (27...Qg5!?) 28.Rxa8 Qxa8 29.Qxd7? bxc4 30.bxc4 Qb8!–+.

a) Any display of activity as 26...Qb6? is dubious – 27.Re2±.

b) The solid defensive 26...b6! 27.b4 (27.Ne4 Re8=) 27...Rb8 28.a5 Qe7! 29.axb6! Be5 30.Qe3 Bxd6
31.Qxe7 Bxe7 32.bxc5 Bxc5 33.Rxc5 Rxb6= is a simple draw.

c) 26...Rb8 is hardly worth the risk:

27.b4 b6 28.a5 transposes to 26...b6, but White also has the more enterprising:
27.Ne4!? b6 28.Rd2!, enabling the positional exchange sac on d4 at an opportunity.
28...Bf5 (actually, 28...Kg7! 29.h4 Bf5 may be simpler). We have apparently reached a standstill here
and the next few variations following the diagram below are meant only to confirm it. Before
presenting them though, I have to point out that for a human player calculating up to 28...Bf5 should
be normal, as he keeps marked the most dangerous piece of the opponent – the knight, and at the
same time maintains the queen in the vicinity of its king:

176
29.d6
After 29.Nd6 Bd7 Black intends ...Qd8-f6, and the only try 30.Rxd4 cxd4 31.Ne4 (31.Qxd4
Qe7 32.Ne4 f5÷) 31...Bf5= should produce a draw.
29...Kg7
29...Re8 allows White to show his hand – 30.Rxd4! cxd4 31.g4 with an initiative.
30.b4!
A status quo arises after 30.Rxd4 cxd4 31.Qe5+ f6 32.Qxd4 Rc8 33.Rd1 a5=.
30...Bxe4 31.Bxe4 a5!. Preventing the undermining a4-a5.
32.b5 h4!. The best move. It allows Black to establish a dark square blockade in the ending that is
about to arise but, most importantly, it allows his f8-rook to occupy the e-file.
32...Re8?! would be inferior
because of 33.Bc6! [33.Bd5!? Qf6 34.d7 Re5 (34...Qxf4 35.dxe8=N+! is the point) 35.Bxf7!
Kxf7 36.Rxd4! cxd4 37.Qxf6+ Kxf6 38.Rc8 Rd5 39.Rxb8 Rxd7 40.Rxb6+ wins a pawn, but the
arising rook ending is a draw.] 33...Re6 34.d7ƒ.

177
33.g4
Also drawish is 33.gxh4 Re8 (33...Rh8=) 34.Bd5 Bf6 35.h5 Re5 36.h6+ Kh7 37.Bxf7 Rg5+
38.Kf1 Be5 39.Qc4 Qf6 40.d7 Bd4 41.Rxd4 cxd4 42.Bg8+ Kxh6 43.Qf7 Qxf7 44.Bxf7 Rd8
45.Be8 d3 46.Rc6 Rd5=.
33...Qf6!?
33...Re8 34.Bc6!? g5 35.Qf3 Re6 36.d7 Qf6= is also excellent.
34.Qxf6+ Bxf6™!=. The threat ...Bf6-g5 gains time, so Black is ensured of getting the e-file for
himself, a factor that allows him to hold the ending easily.

26.Nxd6 Bd3

Once you play in this way, there is no going back. Black has gotten himself into a kind of
Maelstroem, and if you enter such whirlpools without a good ship, a wreck is almost certain.

178
27.Rd1?!

Attacking the intruder. It is possible that White just calculated the most obvious move and made it,
without checking other candidate moves!
The other natural move 27.Nxb7!? is clearly better for White as 27...Qb6 28.Rd2 will leave White a
sound pawn to the good after 28...Qxb7™±. Had Alireza went deeper into this line, he would have
surely realised Black can only lose at the end of the variation and would have never gone for this
pseudo-active ...Bg4-f5-d3 venture.

On top of all, White wins almost by force with 27.b4! g5 28.Qd2 Qxd6 29.Qxd3±

179
The hanging bishop at d4 prevents Black from defending against Qf5. That renders White’s opposite
coloured bishops attack decisive:
29...a5 30.bxc5 Bxc5 31.Qf5 b6 32.Qxg5+ Qg6 33.Qh4+–;
29...h4 30.bxc5 Bxc5 31.Qf5 hxg3? 32.Qxg5+ Kh8 33.Rc4+–.

27...g5™ 28.Nxb7 gxf4 29.Nxd8

29...fxg3?

Black returns the present on move 27. Naturally his chance was in the opposite coloured bishops after
29...Raxd8 30.Rxd3 Rfe8! – activity before all! White’s extra pawn or even two should not be enough
for a whole point.

30.Nc6 Bxf2+ 31.Kh1 c4

180
32.d6!+–

Sanal essentially closes the game with this move. The threats are too many for Black to withstand and
he is dragged to a hopeless ending with an exchange less.

32...Kg7

32...cxb3 33.Rxf2 gxf2 34.Rxd3 would be dead lost.

33.d7 Rad8 34.Nxd8 Rxd8 35.bxc4 Bxc4 36.Rc2 Be6 37.Rc6 a5 38.Ra6 Rxd7 39.Rxd7 Bxd7
40.Rxa5 h4 41.Ra8 Kf6 42.a5 Be6 43.Rb8 Ke5 44.Rb4 f5 45.Rxh4 f4 46.Rh5+ Kf6 47.Bf3 Bf7
48.Rh8 1-0

Coming to the end of this example, I managed to draw a few important conclusions:

A. Contrary to what an initial impression may suggest, positions with lots of pieces and a slight
asymmetry in the pawn structures could be plain-plan situations. Sometimes even at a complex
crossroads there is only one main stream of traffic.

B. Only a correct evaluation will tell us if there is an attack/defence situation on the board and who’s
the attacker.

C. It makes no sense to play actively just for the sake of activity. This is what Alireza did in the
above game and had to pay the penalty.

181
 Tomczak – Dragun

Warsaw 2019

The next example introduces us to a rather borderline case of plain-plan equality. The situation here,
as we are soon about to witness, justifies to a certain extent the approach “attack is the best defence”
as there is a combination of permanent, strong elements that injects life in the debatable slogan. But
there’s more to it. Actually, what I like most about this example is that it carries a vague flavour of
“attack before being attacked” or “attack before the opponent has a chance to impose his own plan”,
reminding us that attack can be a mean of anticipating unwelcome developments.
This is an attack of a prophylactic nature I would say, which tries to prevent a positional siege the
opponent plans to impose upon us. “When are we certain that such a mean is available?”, you may
ask. Is it a rule of thumb that the side who possess this “prophylactic attack” option should hurry with
using it? What happens if the attack seems to depend, apart from permanent positional features, on
conditional factors, too? Is it still a plain-plan situation? Shouldn’t there be an alternative, an all-
weather plan available in the original position to guarantee the validity of our evaluation of the
position as equal?

The critical position of this example first of all demonstrates that such type of plain-plan equality can
indeed exist. The subsequent analysis of its components aspires to help you identify and treat
accordingly such situations and answer the questions posed above.

1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6 6.d4 Bd6 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0 Re8 9.c3 Nd7
10.Qc2 Nf8 11.Bf5 Qa5 12.Bxc8 Raxc8 13.Bd2 Ne6 14.Rfe1

We join the game after White’s 14th move in a type of Caro-Kann structure, which the legendary
Victor Korchnoi used on a bunch of occasions in his brilliant career. His results with it were rather

182
mixed, but the positions he got were in principle interesting, characterised by two long-term benefits
the structure §h7/g7/f7/f6 can offer Black:

• Safety for his king. With such a solid pawn cover in front of him, the black monarch can feel in a
way blessed as the sight alone of these 4 musketeers is enough to discourage even the slightest
thought by White to attack on that part of the board.
• The prospect of becoming the attacker himself if White castles short, as is the case here. There is a
rational basis for this as sending one or two pawns to the attack will not strip his own king of
pawn cover, a couple of men staying behind to ensure the defence.

Of course these benefits don’t come for free as White has a 4-3 majority on the queenside, which
could prove an important asset in endings.
There is a question that naturally arises here – are these two long-term benefits enough to yield Black
a clear-cut plan of an attack on the kingside? Obviously not all positions with this particular structure
are the same (for example, here the light-squared bishops have been exchanged, something that has
its pros and cons for each side), so I had to try to increase my evaluation focus in an effort to reach
valid conclusions that would reflect the truth.
To be honest, looking at the diagram position for quite a few minutes, I was not convinced whether
Black can apply real kingside pressure in this middlegame. I sensed the possibility of an attack arising
for sure only if all three of the following conditions were fulfilled:

1. Black piled up superior forces on the critical part of the board.

2. Queens remained on board. In absence of them Black’s long-term advantages don’t amount to such
big play-makers anymore, although undoubtedly the possibility of gaining valuable kingside
space exists.
3. Black gets a lever to create play.

For the moment White’s pawn formation in front of his king is intact, a fact making a realistic attack
by Black difficult to carry out. I considered that condition 1 was achievable, so concentration of
forces wouldn’t be a conditional factor. However, I was not sure that Black could force the creation of
a weakness on the kingside that could be used as a lever to open up lines for an attack. I noticed that
if Black shifted his queen to h5 to threaten ...g7-g5-g4, White wouldn’t need to answer with a
precaution like h2-h3. He could wait instead for ...g7-g5 to occur, then plunge his queen to f5,
stopping ...g5-g4 and leaving Black with nothing better than to exchange queens from g6. Even if
White answered ...Qa5-h5 with an immediate h2-h3, I did not see how to attack, for the same reason.
Although condition 3 would in that case be immediately fulfilled, White could still deprive me of
condition 2 by planting his queen on f5 in case I lashed out with ...g7-g5.

So my evaluation process after considering all the above elements had reached the following stage,
where I got stuck:
There are serious permanent factors like a preponderance of forces and pawns on the kingside that
could yield Black an attack, but in the absence of a lever I could not be certain the attack would

183
eventually be launched successfully. Even if White voluntarily gave me that lever by playing h2-h3, I
still could not see how to get my pawn to g4. What to do?
Is this a plain-plan situation, a no-plan situation, a “no plan=best plan” situation, a complex-plan
situation or is it something else? At this point I decided to reconsider the situation as a whole to make
sure that first and foremost the position was indeed approximately equal, something that had been
born out from a fast first assessment. The second round of evaluation merely confirmed the first:

• Black has the safer king long-term, but currently both kings are safe.
• White has the better pawn structure, giving him a slight preponderance in all endings.
• Black feels a bit more comfortable on the light squares. This means that even if a kingside attack
failed, he would maintain chances to block White’s majority on those squares. On the other hand
the absence of light-squared bishops deprives Black of an extra unit he could use to mount
pressure on the kingside.
• Black overall has a slightly better piece mobility, especially when it comes to the queens.

“Well, this position could not be anything else but equal!,” I told myself. This is safely established, so
let’s check again, what are the plans? Doing that I did not discover any new ones apart from those
deriving from the pawn structure, yet I realised that while it was difficult for Black to boast of a clear
way to implement his attacking plan on the kingside, it was at least as difficult for White to find a
clear way to put his queenside majority in motion. Neither saw I a way for White to force major
simplifications that would ensure a better ending.
After some more thinking, I nevertheless decided to classify this eventually as a plain-plan equality
and I think I am right. Why is that? Let me first of all number the reasons that played a role in my
decision:

1. The pawn structure is imbalanced and every side derives a long-term benefit from that on different
flanks.
2. Some simplification has taken place and the position is semi-open, of a rather quite nature.
3. While there is no clear way forwards for either side, it is hardly a planless state of affairs nor a “no
plan=best plan” situation. This happens because there are clear aims, arising from the long term-
components of each side’s position.

So what distinguishes the present situation on the board from other plain-plan equalities? Why,
although I knew what I wanted to achieve as Black, and the definite strategic imbalance and overall
evaluation suggested it was a realistic target, I nevertheless could not see a way of doing it in spite of
the apparent clear atmosphere in the centre and both flanks?
The answer is as simple as it is complex:
I was blinded by conventional wisdom suggesting that I needed at all costs my queen to mount an
attack, or otherwise I’d be worse. It was not a conditional factor because I didn’t realise that if White
exchanged queens on the particular g6-square, he would be very close to becoming worse in the
ending, so he should in fact avoid that!
Thus, the full explanation assembled in a few lines goes like this:

184
• It is already difficult for White to launch a queenside campaign as we hold well on the light squares.
• Once ...g7-g5 has been played, a queen trade on g6 would allow us to fortify the space gained by
...f7xg6, taking control of the f5-square and preparing to bring our king towards the centre to the
nice f7-square.
• The resulting pawn mass would be already quite advanced, and therefore menacing. It would cramp
White to such extent, that it would be no exaggeration to say that it would render White’s
queenside majority insignificant.

When you realise this, the riddle is solved. The existence of conditional factors would have blurred
the classification of the position as a plain-plan equality, but now such factors were not standing in
the way: I knew that Black’s activity would be enough to force h2-h3 at some point, then ...g5-g4
could be prevented only at the cost of a queens trade that would improve Black’s chances in the
ending.

Before proceeding to see how the two strong Polish GMs handled the situation, I think it is worth
making a few final clarifications:
If we encounter a case of a real conditional “prophylactic attack” (in other words, there is no
guarantee we’ll ever get this attack going), and our original evaluation is still that of equality, this
means that equality is probably based on another permanent factor of the position. It could still be a
plain-plan equality, but the central source of our strategy should be that other factor. If on the other
hand we realised that the “prophylactic attack” was the only reason that makes the position equal, we
should try to execute it as soon as possible, adhering strictly to an intensified move by move mode,
even more intensified than it is usually in a common plain-plan position. The difference is that the
opponent’s advantages are more long-term valid than ours, so we have to hurry and be accurate.
The basic characteristics of this special move by move mode should be the following:

• Harmonising the attacking units.

• Exploiting all the momentum the position can offer.
• Properly timing the strikes.

I’m afraid I have said too much already and bored you, so let’s get on with the game:

14...Qh5

Undoubtedly the best move, starting to create the kingside concentration needed to mount an attack.
Black already has a queen, bishop and a knight closing in at the white king. Then an advance of the g-
pawn would add a fourth unit, bringing about the threat ...g5-g4.

15.h3

This offers Black a lever and a more or less clear plan of proceeding, creating it already an obvious

185
plain-plan situation. We know from the evaluation stage that in the long run h2-h3 could not have
been avoided, but it is always important to see if practical variations confirm the theory. Looking at
the position from White’s point of view, we understand the need for opening further the centre. White
would love to exchange his d-pawn for Black’s c-one as that would give him the possibility of
activating his bishop and pursuing more exchanges. Since there is no clear-cut way of doing that, he
could have simply centralised his a-rook or deployed his bishop on the e3-square, passing the move to
the opposition. Let us check how could Black have proceeded in those cases:

After 15.Rad1 I think Black can go on with his main idea of a kingside attack all the same: 15...g5!

a) Trying to attack with pieces instead is just ineffective. After 15...Ng5?! 16.Bxg5 fxg5

17.Qf5! g6! 18.Qf6! g4 19.Ne5 Bxe5 20.Rxe5 Rxe5 21.dxe5 Qf5™ 22.Qxf5 gxf5 White is slightly
better with either 23.f4² or 23.Rd7 b5 24.f4 gxf3 25.gxf3 a5 26.f4 a4 27.Kf2².
b) Perfectly viable, however, are both 15...h6!?= or:
c) 15...Re7 16.Be3 Rd7=, intending to follow up with ...Rc8-d8 and ...Bd7-c7(b8), keeping to a
restrictive policy. This tells us that in the initial position the plan of a kingside attack, albeit dominant,
isn’t the only idea.

16.Qf5. This should be a critical response, exerting to the utmost White’s right to play the position
without weakening himself.

Instead 16.h3 is also a natural retort. Here it is important to conduct the attack by trying to build a
momentum and not in a naive, careless way:

186
16...Qg6! Exploiting the fact that White can hardly exchange on g6, Black deprives the enemy queen
of control over the e4 square.
a) Instead 16...g4? 17.hxg4 Qxg4 would be a mistake because of 18.Re4! Qg6 19.Rde1, and Black
simply cannot build pressure along the g-file because he lost too much time. For example, 19...Kh8?!
20.Nh4 Qh5 21.Qd1+– and White already has a won position.
b) 16...Kh8?! is also a wrong way, not so much because it puts the king on the sensitive a1-h8
diagonal, but rather because it gives White time to anticipate the attack – after 17.c4! g4 18.hxg4
Qxg4 19.Re4!
Not 19.Qe4?! in view of 19...Bf4! 20.Nh2 Bxh2+! 21.Kxh2 Qh5+ 22.Kg1 Rg8, e.g. 23.d5 cxd5
24.cxd5 (24.Qxd5 Ng5=) 24...Nc5 25.Qe3 (25.Qd4 Qf3!=) 25...Qxd5 26.g3 Qf5 27.Bc3 Rg6=,
and Black will be fine after putting his knight on e6.
19...Bf4

187
20.Kf1!! Rg8 (20...f5? 21.Ne5+–) 21.Bxf4 Nxf4 22.g3 Qh3+ 23.Ke1!±. The white king escapes to
the queenside and Black has no compensation for the weaknesses he created while trying to attack.
Let us now return to 16...Qg6!:

17.Qb3
Here we have a good chance to confirm that the exchange on g6 leads to an excellent endgame
for Black. After 17.Qxg6+ fxg6! the second player intends ...♔g8-f7 followed by ...h7-h5, and
it is rather White the one who has to be more careful – 18.Be3 (The attempt to open files with
18.d5 leads to easier game for Black after 18...cxd5 19.Be3 Bc5! 20.Rxd5 Red8! 21.Rxd8+
Rxd8 22.Bxc5 Nxc5³) 18...Nc7! 19.Nd2 Bf8 20.a4 Kf7 21.Nc4 b6 22.Bd2 Red8³.

188
 Black has a tiny edge – he controls more space on the kingside, with chances to expand further,
his minor pieces stand pretty. On the queenside, ...b6-b5 at an opportune moment may create a
kind of minority attack. Strangely enough, even the computer recognises those features, valuing
them higher than White’s queenside pawn majority.

17.Qa4 is actually liked by the engines a bit more than 17.Qb3. The idea is that the queen
maintains some contact with the kingside along the 4th rank. However, we can evict it with
17...b5! obtaining the much wanted attacking momentum on the kingside. After 18.Qxa7 g4
(18...Qc2!?) 19.hxg4 Qxg4 20.d5! cxd5 21.Qb7 (21.Be3 b4 22.Rxd5 Bf4 23.Qd7 bxc3 24.bxc3
Bxe3 25.Rxe3 Red8 26.Qb7 Rxd5 27.Qxc8+ Kg7 28.Ne1 Qa4 29.Rg3+ Rg5=) 21...Bf4!
22.Qxd5 Red8 23.Qxb5 Rc5° Black has dangerous compensation, but the engines say 0.00, so
it amounts to no more than a draw with perfect defence.

After 17.Qb3 Black still sacrifices a pawn for the sake of the initiative:
17...Kh8!. Preparing to play ...g5-g4 and follow up with all the attacking moves a tempo. Such a
move requires thorough calculation though. Let us see a couple of lines after it:

189
18.Qxb7
Declining the sacrifice is no advantageous either, e.g. 18.Be3!? g4 19.Nh4! Qh5 20.g3 (20.d5
Ng5 21.Bxg5 Qxg5 22.dxc6 Rxe1+ 23.Rxe1 Qxh4 24.cxb7 Rg8 25.Qxf7 gxh3 26.g3 Bxg3=)
20...gxh3 21.Qc2 Rg8 22.Kh1 Rg4! 23.Qf5 Rxh4 24.Qxf6+ Kg8 25.gxh4 Bf4! 26.Rg1+ Kf8
27.Bxf4 Qf3+ 28.Kh2 Qxf2+ 29.Kh1 Qf3+=.
18...g4! 19.hxg4 (19.Nh4 Qh5 20.g3 gxh3„ is also at least equal) 19...Qxg4 20.Qxf7

20...Rg8!!. It is the momentum that counts, not the pawns! 21.Qxf6+ Rg7 22.Nh4 Rf8™ 23.Qxe6
(Not 23.f3? Qg3 24.Qxe6 Qh2+ 25.Kf1 Rxf3+! 26.Ke2 Rxg2+! and White gets mated.) 23...Qxh4
24.f4 Rfg8 25.Re2 Rg6 26.Qe4 Rh6 27.Ree1 Rhg6=. In spite of being three pawns down, Black’s
attack is so strong, that it forces White to take a repetition.

190
Let us return to White’s attempt to play without h2-h3 on move 16, namely:
16...Qg6. Forced, but good, as trading queens would now be inferior for White for the usual reasons.
17.Qa5 Has Black been sufficiently distracted from the attack? Having witnessed the above lines,
what would you play here?

17...b6!?
Same method, same effectiveness! Black forces the queen to lose contact with the kingside,
making sure that his attack will progress unhindered. Besides, the unhurried 17...Bb8 18.Be3
Red8= is fine, too. It may well be Black’s best way to impose long play.
18.Qxa7 Qh5 19.h3
Or 19.d5 exd5 20.h3 g4 21.Qxb6 Bf4 22.Bxf4 gxf3 23.Be3 fxg2°.
19...g4 20.hxg4 Qxg4. Once again the motifs are more or less the same and White has nothing more
than a draw – if he finds the best moves!.
21.d5!?
Realising the Black threatens 21...Kh8 22.Qxf7 Rg8 23.Qxf6+ Rg7 24.Nh4 Rf8 25.Qxe6 Qxh4,
the computer tries to create a counterattack in the centre.
21...cxd5 22.Qb7 Bf4! The chief protector of the f4 square has to be removed. After 23.Be3! Kh8
24.Bd4 Nxd4 25.Rxe8+ Rxe8 26.Rxd4 Rg8 27.Ne1 Re8= the game according to the silicon entities
should end in a draw.

15.Be3 is actually a move Black should be even more happy to see than 15.Rad1 because after
15...g5! 16.h3 (16.Qf5 Qg6 17.Qa5 f5!?ƒ) he can play 16...g4! immediately as White cannot attack
anymore the queen when it lands on g4. After 17.hxg4 Qxg4 18.Bd2! Bf4! 19.Qd1 Kh8 20.g3 Rg8
21.Bxf4 Nxf4 22.Nh2 Qg6 23.Qf3 Ne6 24.Qe4 f5 (24...Rcd8!? 25.Qxg6 hxg6=) 25.Qe5+ Ng7
26.d5 f6 27.Qd4 cxd5÷ the position is highly unclear, one possible continuation being 28.Rad1 Qh6
29.Kh1 f4 30.Qxf4 Qxf4 31.gxf4 Rc4 32.Rxd5 Rxf4 33.Re2 Rh4 34.Rd7 Nh5 35.Rxb7 Nf4 36.Re3

191
Rd8=.

I will give one final line to demonstrate that Black’s attack is substantial and not depending on
conditional factors: 15.a4!? g5! 16.h3 Qg6 (16...Rcd8!?) 17.Qb3 Kh8!

18.Qxb7!?
18.Be3 Rg8 19.Qd1 Nf4 20.Qb1 f5 21.d5 c5 22.c4 Rce8 23.b4 b6 24.bxc5 bxc5 25.Qb2+ f6
26.Bxf4 gxf4 27.Nh4 Rxe1+ 28.Rxe1 Qg7 29.Qb5 Be5 30.Qxc5 Qg5 31.Rxe5 fxe5 32.Qc7
Qf6 33.c5 Qxh4 34.Qxe5+ Rg7 35.Qb8+=.
18...Rg8 19.Qa6 g4 20.Nh4! Qh5 21.g3 gxh3 22.Re4! Rb8! 23.Qe2!
This looks like the safest course, giving up a pawn to transpose to an equal ending. The
alternative is a highly complicated position arising after 23.b4 Qd5 24.Rae1 Rxg3+!! 25.fxg3
Bxg3 26.Qe2 Rg8°.
23...Qxe2 24.Rxe2 Rxb2 25.Kh2 Rd8 26.Nf5 Bf8 27.Rae1 c5 28.Be3 Rb3 29.Rc2 Rd5! 30.Nh4
cxd4=.
Let us go back to the game’s 15.h3:

15...g5!

Dragun realises that Qc2-f5 is harmless, so he prepares to attack in the spirit of what we’ve seen so
far.

16.Qb3

As we already know, 16.Qf5 Qg6 17.Qxg6+ fxg6³ would have been excellent for Black.
16.Be3 would have once more allowed an immediate 16...g4! 17.hxg4 Qxg4 18.Bd2 Bf4! with
excellent play for Black. After 19.Qe4 f5 20.Qe2 (20.Qd3 Bxd2 21.Qxd2 Nf4=) 20...Rcd8= Black’s

192
kingside pressure guarantees at least equality.
16.Rad1 transposes to 15.Rad1.

16...b6!

The same effect would have had 16...Re7. There is no hurry to attack immediately, after all shifting
the queen to b3 did not really improve White’s position.
In principle Black would like to play an immediate 16...g4 in such a situation, but on this occasion the
sacrifice fails:
17.hxg4 Qxg4 18.Qxb7 Kh8 19.Qxf7! Rg8 20.Qxf6+ Rg7 21.Nh4 Rf8 22.f3!! Qg3 23.Qxe6 Qh2+
24.Kf1 Rxf3+ 25.Ke2!+–. As we already know, had the a-rook been on d1, White would have been
checkmated with 25...Rxg2+ here, but having kept that square vacant allows him to escape with his
king to the queenside, winning comfortably. This instructive difference serves to highlight one thing I
guess we all are aware of:

Strategy is as good as tactics allow!

17.d5

Tomczak didn’t like the prospect of having to tolerate Black’s attack and tries to distract the opponent
by opening up the position in the centre. However, this is an admission that Black’s strategy has
succeeded as White’s forces are not deployed well enough to give him chances of an edge.

17...cxd5 18.Qxd5 Red8! 19.Qf5 Qg6 20.Qxg6+ hxg6 21.Be3 (21.Kf1!=)

193
21...Bc5!³

Black even has a slight initiative now, but didn’t feel like putting pressure on his opponent in the
ending, so the game was soon drawn:

22.Bxc5 Rxc5 23.Rad1 Rcd5 24.Rxd5 Rxd5 25.g3 Kg7 26.Re2 Rd1+ 27.Re1 Rd5

He could try 27...Rd3! 28.Kg2 f5 as 28.Re3? loses a pawn to 28...Nc5.

28.Re2 Rd1+ 29.Re1 Rd5 30.Re2 ½-½

This example demonstrated an attack in a plain-plan equality. It was based on the most dominant
feature of the position, and was used as a prophylactic means of anticipating future positional
pressure from the opponent. It is true that in the game Black could have applied also a restrictive
strategy, but the luxury of having two options isn’t always available. To be certain that such a choice
exists isn’t easy business, as we already saw. This happens because some dominant structural or
dynamic features could be there, but in view of the apparently quiet nature of the position we might
not perceive them enough to yield an attack. In principle though, a higher concentration of forces,
coupled with a weakness (or a lever, as I like to call it) in the opponent’s camp, should be enough
indication to shift the focus of our analysis in that direction. Sometimes you could recognise in a
game of yours this form of “prophylactic attack” as an available weapon, but will not know whether it
is part of a plain-plan equality, or a complex-plan equality. You can live with that, no big harm done.
Still, recognizing the type of equality as a plain-plan equality will give you the additional advantage
of knowing that the tactics you may need to use will not be too difficult to find, but also that the cost
of the attack’s failure will be higher than usual – it is quite likely that you would not be able to switch
to positional defence anymore.

194
 Topalov – Giri

Shamkir 2018

The following example is the last one we will devote on the “attack is the best defence” slogan. It
bears certain similarities to the Tomczak-Dragun example, but there is also a difference. Here, as
we’ll see, there isn’t a permanent (or archetypal) feature of the position in Black’s favour to justify an
“attack is the best defence” type of conduct, based exclusively on it. In fact, the second player seems
to be positionally very slightly worse on all parts of the board mainly as a result of having the long-
term inferior bishop. And yet the “attack is best defence” strategy works here. Why? To understand
the reasons, we’d better join the game immediately jumping to the position after White’s 20th:

1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.a3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Qc2 Nxc3 7.dxc3 Bd6 8.e4 0-0 9.Bc4 Qe7
10.Bg5 Qe8 11.0-0-0 Be6 12.Bd5 f6 13.Be3 Bxd5 14.Rxd5 Ne7 15.Rdd1 Qc6 16.Nd2 a5 17.Qb3+
Kh8 18.Qc4 Qd7 19.a4 b6 20.f3

As it has been customary for this work, we’ll start by evaluating the situation:

• There is material equality on the board.

• White has the slightly superior piece mobility.
• White has the long-term better bishop as his blocked pawns are on light squares. Thus, all endings
should be better for him. In addition, the Nd2 seems better than the Ne7 as it has a nice base on
c4 to put the opponent under pressure, especially if an ending arises.
• Space-wise, equality seems to reign on the board.
• Black’s king is slightly safer, with no levers in his castled position to be used for an attack.

That said, White’s king doesn’t seem to be in any serious danger either. Indeed, it seems difficult to

195
organise ...b6-b5 by utilising the move ...c7-c6, as that would entail a serious weakening along the d-
file. As for playing ...b6-b5 without pawn support, it seems to be a positional suicide because it would
result in a wrecked pawn formation on the queenside. And yet, Anish went for the latter, apparently
outrageous idea. Was it because he forgot how to play chess? Hardly so. He is a positional player
with a lot of experience, facing day after day great connoisseurs of the game. So the question persists:
Why would he weaken Black’s queenside against all odds in such a manner? Is there something
wrong in our evaluation? I think that once more we have to look at the position deeper, like in the
previous Tomczak-Dragun example, to form conclusions that accurately reflect the truth:
It is obvious that the character of the game is quiet, and that basically White has a plan to exchange
queens and press in the ending, in view of his superior bishop. Looking at things from White’s point
of view, this is a plain-plan situation. However, it isn’t a plain plan equality because, even if the
position is objectively equal (which indeed is the case as we are soon going to witness by examining
the analysis), looking at the position from Black’s point of view we don’t immediately capture that
feeling of equality due to the lack of concrete assets in his position. We see for him the plan of ...b6-
b5, but we cannot know whether this works or not. We see for him the possibility of relying on
passive defence, but we cannot know whether this eventually draws. Actually, if White had castled
kingside, we wouldn’t be speaking at all about the prospect of equality for Black as there wouldn’t be
a single shred of factor in his favour that could allow him to counter-balance the bad bishop. So we
have to elaborate more on the very fact that White has castled queenside, and focus on that §a4-
hook that gives us remote chances of counterplay.
Obviously, there are two ways to play chess: to calculate everything like a computer (the “planless”
way), or evaluate, form plans and execute them (the human way). Since it is almost impossible to
follow the first path even for a single game, it is absolutely necessary for us humans to evaluate
positions accurately. Here it’s evident to me that Anish made such an accurate evaluation based on
the following thinking steps:

1. Strategically Black is worse and should avoid endings, unless a change in the pawn structure
occurs. But that pawn on a4 in conjunction with queenside castling by White gives me chances to
generate counterplay, so let me try to calculate how serious they are.

2. Playing ...Ra8-b8, ...b7-b5, ...Rb8xb5 ...Rf8-b8 gives Black some activity. These moves may appear
plain and crude, but they come with a tempo, and the opponent cannot hinder them. The only question
is whether the attack would be real or not after they have been executed. If it isn’t, Black will get
stuck, slowly pushed back and eventually lose as a result of the numerous weaknesses.

3. To make sure the attack is real, Black has to establish that White will not stall it by putting his
knight on c4. If White can create an unshakable §b2/Nc4 formation, he will have the advantage. In
contrast, if the b2-pawn has to move to b3, then Black will get permanent pressure on it as a
compensation for his pawn weaknesses.

4. So far, one part of the evaluation is easy to comprehend and establish as trustworthy. Playing
natural moves that build some pressure always gives partial compensation for the weaknesses that this

196
particular sequence of moves may entail. But to be certain that Black has full compensation, I’ll have
to spot either a positional feature that neutralises the formation §b2/Nc4 or a concrete tactical
sequence that counters it. If my research indicates a positional feature doesn’t exist, only then will I
seek refuge in an intensified move by move mode, looking for a particular sequence.

Now I can hear again this rude young self of mine addressing to me his enraged questions: “What??
You have never told us that a move by move mode could be a part of an evaluation! You are
adjusting everything to your needs like a sophist, aren’t you? An evaluation should be an evaluation,
not a calculation of variations!”
Well, once more I will not tell the young boy to hush, as answering his questions might benefit us.
Indeed, evaluation should mostly be a procedure of weighing strengths and weaknesses, but there are
cases where it may depend exclusively on conditional factors like momentum, a secret mechanism, a
fortress, and other untypical or rarer dynamic or static features. In these cases it will be usually a
blend of things we can understand on the base of general considerations and things we‘ll find
out in the process of calculation. The move by move mode takes care of the latter. With these in
mind I will now proceed to what could be Anish’s next thinking steps:

5. I’ll have to find a way for Black to make headway after the introductory active moves finish. The
problem will be how to meet (after ♔c1-c2) the shift Rd1-a1-a2, a manoeuvre that defends b2 without
weakening it while preparing both Rh1-a1 and Q-somewhere followed by Nd2-c4. Have I something
against it?

6. Yes, I see an idea! I could exchange the dark-squared bishops through c5, gaining that square for
my knight if possible. Manoeuvring the knight to e6 or b7, followed by ...Bc5 should be the key to
achieving that. Exchanging bishops removes from the board White’s good minor piece, weakens the
white king, and allows me to access the b3 square. In that case the position would look equal.

What you have seen above is my attempt to describe how a GM thinks in situations where he has to
make the most of the slightest detail in order to anticipate impending positional pressure. Super GMs
could execute those steps semi-subconciously, getting the final result as a flash of intuition.

The difficult thing in this particular example was to find out what to do after all the standard moves
have finished and Black doesn’t see an active plan. From my experience, it can be one of the
following:

a) A tactical line that for some reason we have difficulty seeing.

b) An appropriate exchange, weakening the opponent’s defence and thus balancing out our own static
weaknesses.
c) A quite move or micro-plan, which demonstrates that in spite of our worse structure the position is
balanced.

If none of these possibilities is available, then we are simply worse, and we should avoid the

197
operation in favour of passive defence.

20...Rab8!

The Dutch GM starts to carry out his plan. I am sure he had worked out most of the details, the only
thing I would be curious to know is how much time it took him to play his 20th move. Obviously
deciding to weaken the pawn structure the way Black does it in the game requires courage and
confidence, even if one has calculated a great deal. One slight mistake is enough to condemn the side
that takes the risk to a sure defeat. Players of this level are aware of it better than anyone else.

21.Kc2!?

Veselin allows Black to proceed with his active operation. It is hard to say whether he considered it to
be a desperate measure or not, but the fact is that White rejected the wise alternative 21.Qb5!?.
Black cannot avoid the trade of queens since 21...c6 22.Qd3 b5 stumbles into 23.Nc4!.
21...Qxb5! 22.axb5 Rbd8. Checking the complex ending with the computer merely confirmed my
suspicion that it was drawish as the change of the structure means that White will not be able to
progress on the queenside – a natural consequence of the exchange on b5. Here is the computer’s
main line:
23.Nb1!?, trying to redeploy the knight to a better position.
23.Nc4 Nc8 24.Rd3 Be7 25.Rhd1 Rxd3 26.Rxd3 Rd8 27.Rxd8+ Bxd8 28.Kc2 Kg8= is too
drawish.
23...Nc8 24.Kc2 Kg8

25.Kb3!?
Instead 25.c4 Bb4! 26.Nc3 Nd6 27.Kb3 Bxc3 28.bxc3!? (28.Kxc3 Kf7 29.Rd5 Ke6 30.Rhd1
Rb8= highlights the inflexible white pawns) 28...Nb7! 29.Rd5 Rxd5 30.cxd5 is a fortress after

198
 either 30...f5= or 30...Kf7=.
25...Be7 26.c4 Kf7!
Not 26...Bb4? now, as with an extra tempo the idea 27.Nc3 Bxc3 28.bxc3! works, e.g. 28...Nd6
29.Rd5 Nb7 30.Rhd1+–, and White wins as having settled the rook on d5 assures him of
carrying out c4-c5.
27.Nc3 Nd6 28.Nd5 Rd7=. Black will create a fortress by putting his knight on b7 next.

It is worth comparing the above ending where the pawn lies on b5 with the following recent game of
mine against GM Bartlomiej Heberla where in a similar structure the pawn was on a4. I’m sure it will
freshen up your awareness of how important is a flexible pawn formation in chess:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.c3 Bd7 6.0-0 g6 7.d4 Bg7 8.h3 Nge7 9.dxe5 Nxe5 10.Nxe5
dxe5 11.Be3 Bxa4 12.Qxa4+ Qd7 13.Qb3 Qc6 14.Nd2 0-0 15.a4 a5 16.Rfd1 b6 17.Qc4 Rfd8
18.Qxc6 Nxc6 19.Nc4

19...Kf8 20.g4 Rxd1+ 21.Rxd1 Rd8? 22.Rxd8+ Nxd8 23.b4! Here the flexibility of White’s
queenside pawns makes possible this strike which creates an outside passed pawn.
23...axb4 24.cxb4 Nc6 25.b5 Nd4 26.Kf1 Ke7 27.Bxd4 exd4 28.Ke2 f5 29.exf5 gxf5 30.gxf5 Kf6
31.Nd6! Bf8 32.Ne8+ Kxf5 33.Nxc7 Ke4 34.f3+ Ke5 35.Kd3 Bd6 36.f4+ Kf5 37.Nd5 Bc5 38.Kc4
d3 39.a5 and 1-0, Kotronias-Heberla, Djerba 2020.

21...b5! 22.axb5 Rxb5 23.Ra1 Rfb8

199
Black has completed the first stage of his operation, playing all the active moves. Now it is Topalov’s
turn to make an important decision, and the Bulgarian GM, rather uncharacteristically, didn’t play the
most testing continuation:

24.b3?!

Falling in with Black’s plans right away. Moving the b-pawn prematurely doesn’t help White’s cause.
24.Ra2! would have been the most testing, for reasons we have mentioned during the evaluation
process. Then 24...Nc6! 25.Rha1
25.Qd3 Qf7 26.Rha1 Bc5!= allows Black to achieve the strategic aim of exchanging the bishops
effortlessly, obtaining a very comfortable equality and perhaps, in a practical sense, even more
than that.
25...Nd8!
25...a4!? is pointless as Black doesn’t get full compensation after 26.Qxa4 Bc5 27.Bxc5 Rxc5
28.Nb3 Rcb5 29.Rd1!²
The knight manoeuvre leads to a position where both sides have to proceed with caution, but I think
Black’s task is slightly more complicated:

200
26.Qe2!. White of course has to vacate c4 for his knight, and this is the most accurate way to do so.
Instead 26.b3 Nb7 to be followed by ...Bd6-c5, easily equalises.
26.Qd3 Qe8 27.Nc4 Nb7 is excellent for Black as the white queen has to move again, in
anticipation of the ...Bd6-c5 idea. After 28.Qe2 (28.g4 Bc5 29.Bc1 Bb6!„ looks more
dangerous for White.) 28...Bc5! 29.Bxc5 (29.Bc1 Bb6=) 29...Nxc5 30.Nxa5 Nb3! 31.Nxb3
Rxb3= White is a pawn up, but tied up to defending b2 and with an exposed king, so he has no
advantage. The following lines confirm that: 32.Qc4 (32.h4 Qc6 33.Rc1 Qb6 34.Kb1 Qc5
35.Qd2 h6 36.g4 R3b6=) 32...Qg6! 33.g3 h6 34.Rd1 Qh5! 35.Rd2 Qxf3 36.Qe2 Qxe2 37.Rxe2
Kh7=.
Returning to 26.Qe2!, it is again 26...Nb7! the move that has to be played, as the alternative route
26...Ne6? proves to be a blunder due to 27.Nc4±, and this time the a5 pawn falls without
compensation.
27.Nc4!
27.b4!? axb4 28.c4 b3+ 29.Nxb3 Rb4 30.Bd2 Rb6 31.Be3= is non-critical.

201
27...f5!=. I am not sure any player in the world would have easily found this. The idea is to weaken
the pawn on e4 and give Black an additional source of counterplay besides the one on b2.
To be fair, making a luft with 27...h6 is a decent alternative.
On the contrary, Black cannot play 27...Bc5 with impunity when his queen isn’t already on e8 in
view of 28.Bxc5! (28.Bc1 Bb6³) 28...Nxc5 29.Nxa5 Nb3 30.Rd1! Qe8 31.Nxb3 Rxb3
32.Qd3±.
27...Qe8 doesn’t work either as White anticipates ...Bd6-c5 with 28.Bc1! and the a-pawn hangs.
After 28...Qe6 29.Nxa5 Nxa5 30.Rxa5 Qb3+ 31.Kd2 it isn’t clear to me that Black’s
compensation will be enough.
28.Bc1
28.exf5? Qxf5+ 29.Qd3 Qf7³ leaves Black better as the opening up of the position has exposed
the white Monarch.
28...fxe4 29.fxe4

202
29...Qe6! 30.Nxa5 Nxa5 31.Rxa5 Qb3+ 32.Kd2
32.Kb1 Rxa5 33.Rxa5 Qxc3 34.Qb5 (34.Rb5 Rxb5 35.Qxb5 Qc5=) 34...Qb4 35.Qxb4 Bxb4
36.Rxe5 Bd6 37.Rh5 g6 38.Rh4 Rf8°.
32...Rxa5 33.Rxa5 h6°. It’s easy to recognise the difference – with the f-file open Black has
counterplay against the white king, and he is by no means worse. Chess is a wonderful game!

24...Ng6

White has weakened b3 and is a tempo down on pressurizing a5, so the knight has the luxury of a
more natural route than the ...c6-d8-b7 we considered above.
That said, 24...Nc6! 25.Ra2 Nd8 26.Rha1 Nb7= would have been quite strong, too.

25.Qa4!?

Risky, and quite typical of Veselin, with whom I had the pleasure of working as a second for a few
years. White pins the b5-rook, hoping to bring quickly pressure on the a5-pawn and, possibly, along
the d-file.
25.Rhd1= would have been more solid, but Black already has a comfortable game in any case.

203
25...Qe7

The incisive 25...Bc5! 26.Bxc5 Nf4‚ would have brought a lot of pressure upon the Bulgarian super
GM. There is only one way out: 27.Bd4! (27.Kd1? Rd8µ) 27...exd4 28.Qxd4 Qc6 29.g3 Ne6 30.Qe3
Nc5 31.Ra3 h6 with the usual computer 0.00 equality, but in a practical game I would be slightly
concerned here as White in view of the weakness of the d3-square.

26.Nc4 Bc5 27.Bxc5 Qxc5=

Thus, “attack is the best defence” approach has worked on yet another rare occasion in a plain-plan
situation, but I guess everyone understands that the success was 95% based on conditional factors –
mainly the key manoeuvre ...Ne7-c6-d8-b7, exchanging the bishops. It compensated Black’s inferior
structure by softening the enemy king’s defence. My praise for Giri’s play is based on the fact that
this was an extreme borderline case. It is difficult for common mortals to conjure up such
prophylactic attacks without having at least one tangible long-term asset on their side. If you ask me,
the lever on a4 will be from most players’ viewpoint a drop in the ocean, and even the vast majority
of players over 2200 will hardly be able to complete correctly more than 5 out of 6 steps of the
evaluation process. It may look as a plain-plan equality a posteriori, when we have all nicely
explained by experts and computers, but in fact it isn’t. During an actual game 99% of rated players
would have considered Black’s position worse, finding it impossible to squeeze counterplay out of it,
as is required by the situation on the board. The funny thing is that after performing masterly the task
and playing a brilliant game up to this point Anish soon erred:

28.Rhd1 Nf4 29.Rd2 h6 30.Qa3

204
30...a4?

I am not aware of the time management of the players in this game, but it is quite possible that they
were approaching time trouble. After all, finding all the previous nuances must have been a highly
energy-consuming business, especially for Black. Anish’s last move is a tactical mistake that could
have thrown away the fruits of his labour.
I am sure that Kasparov would have played automatically 30...Qc6! here, planning to answer the
decentralising 31.Nxa5?! (In fact, 31.Qa4! Qe6 32.g3! Rxb3 33.gxf4 R3b4 34.cxb4 Qxc4+ 35.Kd1
Qf1+= is the correct reply.) with 31...Qe6!³, and the queen eyes greedily b3. Garry Kimovich was at
his prime years feeling literally like a “fish in the water” in open positions where the opponent had
some weaknesses, and would rarely let pass by such possibilities. Although it has to be admitted that
White isn’t on a losing track even in that case, he would have to face many dangers due to the
insecure position of his king, e.g. 32.Qa2!? (32.Nc4? Rxb3 33.Qxb3 Rxb3 34.Ra8+ Kh7 35.Kxb3
Qf7µ is very dangerous for White.) 32...Rxa5 33.Qxa5 Qxb3+ 34.Kc1 Kh7‚. The evaluation may be
0.00, but the pressure persists.

31.bxa4 Rb4

205
32.Rb1!

Apparently blinded by the anticipation of a well-deserved draw approaching, Black missed this lethal
move. It can happen to the very best, and it can be very painful, indeed.
Anish must have been expecting only 32.cxb4? Rxb4 33.Kd1 Qg1+ (33...Qxc4 34.Rc1 Qf1+ 35.Kc2
Qc4+ should be a draw, too.) 34.Kc2 Qc5 35.Kd1=, and it is draw time.

32...Qxc4

Luckily for Black, he can still play for some tricks in view of the somewhat unsafe placement of the
white king.

33.Rxb4 Rxb4 34.Qxb4 Qa2+ 35.Qb2 Qxa4+ 36.Qb3 Qa6 37.g3 Ne6

206
38.Qd5?

Throwing away the unexpected gift of luck. 38.h4!+– would have followed a good old rule for
endings – suppress, suppress, suppress! Pushing the h-pawn forwards denies the black knight the g5-
square, practically sealing Black’s fate. After 38...Kh7 (38...Nc5?? 39.Rd8+ Kh7 40.Qg8+ Kg6
41.h5+ Kxh5 42.Qxg7 leads to checkmate, sooner or later.) 39.Qd5+– Black is running out of moves
and must acquiesce to the inevitable.

38...Ng5!

The knights are dangerous creatures that coordinate well with the queen as they can hop all around,
give nasty checks and attack weaknesses. The present situation is no exception, and the text move
more or less secures the draw.

39.f4 Nf3 40.Rd1 Qe2+

40...c6!= was the most accurate move, forcing the white queen to relinquish its hegemonic position
before proceeding to invade. However, there isn’t anything wrong with Giri’s move.

41.Kb3

White decides not to indulge himself in further adventures. 41.Kc1!? Qe3+ 42.Kb2 Kh7! 43.Qd3
Qf2+ 44.Kb1!?
Or 44.Kc1 c5!°, intending 45.Rf1 Ne1!.
44...Nxh2 45.Qd7 Qxg3 46.Qf5+ Qg6 47.fxe5 (47.Qxg6+ Kxg6 48.f5+ Kg5=) 47...fxe5 48.Qxe5
Ng4= would have led to a draw too, as Black’s kingside pawns give him strong counterplay.

207
41...Nd4+! 42.Rxd4 exd4 43.Qxd4 Qxh2 44.Qd8+ Kh7 45.Qd3 Kh8 46.e5 fxe5 47.fxe5 Qg2
48.Qd8+ Kh7 49.Qd3+ ½-½

Veselin didn’t see anything better here than to take the perpetual, and indeed the engines give their
beloved 0.00 evaluation. White’s passed e-pawn isn’t dangerous because the black king is near it.

Reaching the concluding part of this example I think it is time to make a summary of all the
noteworthy points:

A. “Attack is the best defence” may from time to time apply as a prophylactic weapon even in a
plain-plan position that is (seemingly) worse or slightly worse for one side or the other, according to
its basic strategic elements and conventional wisdom.

B. We must be aware that even if the position is objectively equal in a plain-plan situation, if we
cannot see or sense it immediately, it isn’t a plain-plan equality, so the rules of the game change.
If we suspect it belongs to the category “attack is the best defence” case, we’ll have to insert move by
move mode into the evaluation process in order to fill its gaps. Calculation could reveal that the attack
is after all unrealistic.

C. In the rare case “attack is the best defence” works, that will be due to some lever which we would
tend to underestimate initially, perhaps in conjunction with a good dose of forcing moves and
concentration of forces. The less we see of the above elements, the more unlikely it becomes that the
attack is sound.

D. If we sense a lot of threats for us, we may even take a risk and resort to the operation in question
intuitively, especially if the passive defence option is too depressing. If we see that the attack comes

208
to a standstill after a few moves, perhaps there is some sort of a hidden manoeuvre or trick at that
point, that an intensified move by move mode could discover.

I hope I have offered enough food for thought to those aspiring to build their own chess philosophy
by my handling of this sensitive topic.

209
Chapter 4

Fighting the Fear of Exchanges

Do not be afraid to give up the good to go for the great.
John Rockefeller

Carlsen – Naiditsch

Grenke Chess Classic, 2019

Now we will try to see how the possibility of exchanges can affect the play, and more specifically, the
decisions we take in positions that have a semi-drawish flavour.

With the rather sophisticated term “positions of semi-drawish flavour” I refer to positions mainly
characterised by symmetrical features or positions where a great deal of simplifications has already
taken place or is about to take place. I have to confess to the readers that this issue is one of the
greatest headaches for ambitious or simply higher rated players in both open and closed events. It has
tortured yours truly many a time in his chess career. I always believed that the drawing margin is
much bigger in chess than in other sports where all three results are possible and as such, it doesn’t
favour players who have great hunger to win and a great desire to work hard for it. While this opinion
doesn’t lack a logical background, I have to admit that my fears most of the time were rather
excessive for two reasons:

1. I mistakenly trusted that my opponents would find all the best moves in positions heading towards
a draw.
2. My technique was not up to the task when my chances appeared, or simply I was not smart enough
to lure my opponents into making errors.

In the past few years there has been some sort of revolution as regards to the above problem, with
many players around the world refining their technical ability to cope successfully with the task. The
main issue is how to walk the narrow path of keeping some chances alive without sinking into
inferiority, and although there is a psychological factor in the equation, knowledge and precision play
a significant role. We ‘ll start with examples of prominent technical players. The first one displays
that even the reigning world champion Magnus Carlsen can sometimes fail to make the most of his
chances in such a situation:

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 Bb4 5.Nd5 a5 6.Bg2 0-0 7.0-0 Re8 8.d3 Nxd5 9.cxd5 Nd4
10.Nxd4 exd4 11.e4 c6 12.Bf4 cxd5 13.a3 Bc5 14.b4 Bf8 15.exd5 d6 16.bxa5 Qxa5 17.Bd2 Qa6

210
18.Qf3 g6 19.Bb4 Bf5 20.Rad1 Re5 21.g4 Bd7 22.Qf4 h5 23.h3 hxg4 24.hxg4 Qb6 25.Bf3 Ba4

We join the game between Magnus and leading GM Arkady Naiditsch at a moment where the white
rook on d1 is attacked and the world champion has to make a fundamental decision. With a couple of
minor pieces exchanged and a symmetrical pawn structure on the board, it would seem that whatever
chances White has to generate play in this rather drawish position are associated with the possibility
of pressure down the h- file, so any exchange of rooks would be out of place. However, this is a rather
superficial assessment as we are about to see:

26.Rc1?

Perhaps this move doesn’t merit a full question mark for the majority of us common mortals, and by
computer standards it doesn’t even deserve the “?!” sign, but I am sure that later on Magnus must
have been quite disappointed to discover that the right practical choice was actually to propose an
exchange of a pair of rooks (!), which has the opposite result than the expected: it manages to drag the
game on and on with some real chances to outplay the opponent. Since in chess there isn’t anything
inexplicable if one is determined to seek the truth, I think it is again the tool of evaluation that should
be used to give us answers:

Looking at the situation before White’s last move we can notice the following:

• There is material equality on the board.

• The white king is relatively safer than its counterpart, which might be attacked later along the h-file.
• The pawn structures are almost identical. The mutual weaknesses along the d-file tie several pieces
to their protection, but White’s men are overall more impressively placed as they combine attack
and defence – the finely anchored Bb4 defends a3 and attacks d6, while the Qf4 eyes d4, but also
retains options of joining an attack on the h-file or to the f7 pawn.

211
• Generally speaking, White’s pieces enjoy the slightly higher mobility, his queen in particular being
a better piece than its opposing number. The only black piece that looks better than its white
counter-parts is the well-placed Re5 which shields the pressure on the d6 pawn and keeps the d5-
pawn under surveillance.
• White’s small pluses are of a temporary nature, but his position conceals two disadvantages that
could prove of a more permanent nature if he fails to act properly:
a) the weakness of the dark squares on the kingside, caused by the advance g3-g4, and
b) the potential weakness of the c3-square, which for the moment seems well defended, but in an
ending could prove to be the Achilles heel of White’s position.

Taking into account all the above, it’s easy for us to make a proper assessment, determine what type
of situation this is, and define the plans for each side.

1. Regarding the evaluation, we can say that the balance of power has essentially not been distorted.
White’s assets need precise and incisive handling to yield tiny bits of pressure, and the ghost of
exchanges of heavy pieces is always there, his major problem being that there are enough open files
for the opponent to pursue them.

2. Obviously this is a plain-plan equality, there’s no doubt about it. White wants to attack on the
kingside, Black would love to restore the balance on that sector by seizing the dark squares, or failing
to do that, to obtain counterplay by harassing White on d5 and d3. The question for White is whether
he can keep the game going by making the most out of his slight initiative, giving thus his opponent
as many chances as possible to go wrong.

3. In principle White would love to keep the queens on the board and only one pair of rooks! The
latter is important since if Black insisted on having a rook on e5, then his eight rank would be weak –
inviting the white rook to invade through the c-file.

Of course it is very hard in such a situation to have all things going your way. To keep chances, you
need to make compromises of the following kind: Give something, take back something, but
always watch out not to give more than you take.

What was important for White in the present position was to prevent his adversary from carrying
out an easy bail-out operation by attacking the d5 pawn. For this reason the powerful e5-rook had to
be challenged. Besides, White’s space advantage on the kingside gives him remote chances of
attacking even by f2-f4-f5 at a later stage, so not all hope would be lost by allowing an exchange of
just one pair of rooks.

26.Rde1! was the right choice as far as I’m concerned, as it yields more chances than the game’s
course. Objectively White isn’t better after it, but I like the fact that he would be the one calling the
shots. I have already revealed the move’s main point – preventing Black from attacking the d5 pawn.
Let us now delve deeper and try to understand in what way the pressure could be maintained. Black’s

212
best retort is:
26...Rae8!. In order to keep the equilibrium, Black should threaten to exchange all four rooks! In that
case Magnus would have to bar the e-file with:
27.Be4!, keeping thus all the heavy artillery on the board!
“Why all this should happen”, you may ask. Why should Black refrain from ...Rxe1 and why wasn’t
White afraid anymore of the pressure against d5 after 26...Rae8 27.Be4!, what has changed?
Starting by answering the second part of the question, the point is simple, but easy to overlook. When
the a-rook is lured to e8, the operation ...Ba4-b3xd5 isn’t easy to carry out as this rook would be
unprotected at the end. Black would need a lot of time to make the whole thing work, giving White
the tempi he needs to prepare his attack on the h-file.
Switching to the first part of the question, let’s consider
26...Rxe1? 27.Rxe1 Re8. White is simply not exchanging the second rook:

28.Rc1! Only now is this move good. Or, if you prefer the term, convenient, in contrast to the game.
We have removed the pressure on d5 by exchanging Black’s good rook, and well, we didn’t have to
pay any great price for this exchange as with a pair of rooks still on the board we can hope to increase
the pressure on the kingside later on.
Instead 28.Rxe8?! Bxe8 29.Qf6 Bb5 leads to a dead draw because with all the rooks gone White
doesn’t have any real firepower left to generate threats: For example, 30.Be2 (30.Be4 Qc7!
31.Qxd4 Qc1+ 32.Kg2 Qd1! 33.f3 Qe2+ 34.Qf2 Bxd3 35.Qxe2 Bxe2 36.Kf2 Bc4=)

213
 30...Qc7! 31.Qxd4 Bg7 32.Qe3 Ba4 33.Kf1 Bb3 34.Bf3 Be5 35.d4 Bc4+ 36.Kg1 Bf6 37.Qc3
Bd8 38.a4 Ba6 39.Qxc7 Bxc7 40.a5 Kf8 41.Be4 Ke7=.
Returning to 28.Rc1!, it takes us not much time to realise that Black isn’t only worse, but could well
be close to lost:
28...Bb3
I also looked at 28...Bb5 29.Be4 Qd8 30.Kg2 Bd7 31.Rh1 Bg7 32.Bd2 Qf6 33.Qg3 Qe7
34.Rb1 Bc8 35.a4, swinging the rook between both flanks, e.g. 35...Be5 36.f4 Bf6 37.Rh1, when
Black has no real counterplay.
29.Kg2 Qb5 30.Rc7!

30...Bxd5 31.Qxd4 Bxf3+ 32.Kxf3 Qg5 33.Bc3 Qh6 34.Kg2 Bg7 35.Qc4! Rf8 36.Bxg7 Qxg7

214
37.Rxb7 Qf6 38.a4±. White has very good chances of victory with a sound extra pawn. So, wow,
symmetries can have life!
The computer era has demonstrated that in such situations a lot depends on the accurate handling of
the pieces and it could bring much more dividends than we thought in the past. The above
variations give us a small hint that exchanging pieces could be a very important part of a success
story in those symmetries, and the defender has to make sure that exchanges don’t decrease the
energy levels of his position.

Pursuing, avoiding or allowing exchanges without making significant concessions is a real art, even
more so in equalities where the defending side wants to force a draw.

To give you more proof of how delicate the subject is, I deem it worthwhile to provide you with some
lines I initially intended to skip while presenting this example. They reveal that it could be
unnecessary for the defender to avoid exchanges at all cost, but allow them at his own terms. That is
what 26...Rae8! does.

Actually, before proceeding to analyse it, I tried to explore just out of curiosity the consequences of
the move 26...Bg7, which at first sight looks like a more “clever” way to play than 26..Rae8!.

The idea is that after 27.Be4 Bb3 there is no rook hanging on e8, so the threat ...Bb3xd5 becomes
real. However, in spite of that, Black doesn’t seem to equalise, and there is a strategic explanation
why this happens – he abandons the economic defence of d6, assigning this function to a heavy piece
like the queen. It is tied to defending d6, the Bb3 is far from the kingside, the Re5 is subject to
eviction by f2-f4. Such a position cannot ever be good enough for equality.
28.Qf3! Qd8. Relatively best.
After 28...Rf8?! it turns out that White simply plays 29.Qg2 and the threat f2-f4 rears its ugly

215
 head over Black’s position, leaving him with great, if not insurmountable problems. There is
actually nothing better than the exchange sacrifice 29...Rxe4!? (29...Rc8?! 30.Rb1 Bc2 31.Rbc1
Qb5 32.f3 Rxe4 looks hopeless. The same can be said about 29...f5?! 30.f4 Rxe4 31.dxe4 d3+
32.Kh2+–.) However, after 30.Qxe4 Qb5 31.Bxd6 Bxd5 32.Rb1!? Qxb1 33.Qxd5 Qxd3
34.Bxf8 Bxf8 35.Kg2 Bxa3 36.Qxb7± it is quite unlikely that the game will be saved.
29.Qh3!

29...Qd7
29...g5?? 30.Qh7+ Kf8 31.f4+– is of course suicidal.
30.f4 Rh5 31.Qg3 Rh7 32.Re2!±.

We’ll now return to the best move after 26.Rde1!, namely 26...Rae8!, and see how play could have
evolved from there:

216
27.Be4!. Now that the pressure on d5 is unlikely to succeed for reasons already explained, White
switches to constriction mode! This move not only fits with the main strategic conception of keeping
the heavy artillery on board in order to attack, but also aspires to prove that the enemy rooks have
fallen into an ambush as they seem over-crowded on the e-file. Black’s escape is narrow here, and
involves the reactivation of his queen and a fine geometrical nuance:
27...Qd8! 28.Qg3!
28.Kg2 Bb3! and Black survives.

28...Bb5!!. This is the move Arkadij would have to foresee in order to keep the position equal, in case
Magnus had correctly assessed the merits of 28.Rde1!. Here we have yet another case where although
the evaluation process certainly helps to indicate the right strategic path, a move by move assistance

217
is instrumental in supporting it. It is, so to say, part of it. Finding such a move like 28...Bb5!! two-
three moves in advance is described by many as talent, but I will just label it as a recognition of a
geometrical pattern, or if you so desire, a feel for temporary uncoordination, caused by the
blocked rook on f1. I would like to stress something at this point:
In the present example, the features of the position, unlike in Topalov-Giri, clearly indicated that the
position is a plain-plan equality and not a plain-plan situation. This should give you a certainty that
a move like 28...Bb5!! does exist, you only have to find it. Still, I recommend finding such key
moves in advance (unless you have fantastic intuition), during the move by move confirmation
procedure which follows the evaluation process or even forms the last part of it.
29.f3. In this way, White safeguards himself against the ...Re5xe4 liquidation threat, but at the same
time his offensive is put under a halt. An approximately equal manoeuvring game would await the
players after 29...Bh6!
29...Bg7?! 30.a4! Ba6 31.Qh3 b6 32.Kg2ƒ.
30.a4! Ba6 31.Kg2 Qf6 32.Rh1 Bf4 33.Qh3 R5e7

Black has achieved some sort of blockade, while White has bolstered his position in the centre and
avoided massive liquidations. Actually at this point the attempt to lift the blockade by the exchange
sacrifice 34.Rc1!? Qg7 35.g5! Bxc1 36.Rxc1° wouldn’t be out of place, but of course it would entail
a certain risk.

Time to return to the game and Carlsen’s choice of 26.Rc1:

26...Bg7 27.Kg2 Bb3

Now the d-pawn falls and, most importantly, Black’s queen gets space for infiltration through the
light squares. That should force a trade of queens. It will soon become obvious that instead of having
on the board an equal (at least!) position with some play, White has secured for himself just a safe,

218
drawish structure, which under normal circumstances would not require any further commentaries.
But strangely enough, the remainder of the game sees two excellent endgame players commit some
uncharacteristic errors:

28.Rh1 Bxd5 29.Bxd5 Rxd5 30.Rh3 Qd8 31.Qf3 Rb5 32.Qg3 Qg5 33.Rc7 Rd8 34.Rh1 Qd5+
35.Qf3 Qxf3+ 36.Kxf3 d5?!

Black makes his life a little more difficult than it should have been, but obviously the position
remains a draw. The most accurate way to keep the balance was doing nothing with:
36...Bf6!=, when there is absolutely no play left for either side and the players can shake hands.

37.Rhc1!

219
Now White obtains a slight initiative, but still it should not have been enough to scare Black, who is
an experienced endgame player.

37...Be5

Inviting more exchanges, something White cannot avoid.

38.Rc8 Rxc8 39.Rxc8+ Kg7 40.g5 f6?

Black complicates his defensive task. 40...f5!= was the right way, obtaining by force the position he
gets in the game. White has no winning chances. For example, 41.gxf6+ Kxf6 42.Kg4 Ke6, and there
is no progress.

41.Re8! Rb6 42.Re7+ Kg8

43.Kg4?
Magnus returns the favour. The most natural follow up would have been 43.gxf6 Bxf6 44.Rd7,
preserving some pull. The computer suggests a way to win a tempo with the really counter-intuitive
retreat:

43.Kg2!. Black has no useful moves, and after 43...Kh8 44.gxf6 Bxf6 45.Rd7 he would still have to
solve the problems he created to himself. This can perhaps be accomplished by 45...Kg8!?
45...Rb5 46.Kg3 Kg8 47.Kg4 Kh8 48.f4 Kg8 49.f5±.
46.Kg3 Bg5! 47.f4 (47.Rxd5 Bc1! 48.Rxd4 Ra6²) 47...Bh6 48.Rxd5 Rf6 49.Rxd4 b5

220
50.Re4!
50.Bd6 Bf8 51.Be5 Ra6 52.Rd7 Rxa3 53.Kg4 b4 54.d4 Ra2 55.Kg5 Ra6 56.Rb7 Bd6².
50...Kf7 51.Kg4 Rf5 52.d4 Rd5²/±, but there’s no guarantee of eventual success anymore. What is
worse is that in such positions the side with the advantage can press on for ages.

43...f5+! Now it is definitely a dead draw. 44.Kf3 Bh2 45.Rd7 Rb5

46.Bd6 Bxd6 47.Rxd6 Rb3 48.Rxg6+ Kh7 49.Rh6+ Kg7 50.Kf4 Rxd3 51.a4 Rc3 52.Rd6 Rc5
53.Rd7+ Kg6 54.Rxb7 Rc6 55.a5 d3 56.Ke3 Rc5 57.f4 d2 58.Kxd2 Rxa5 59.Rd7 Kh5 60.Ke3 ½-½

Reviewing this game, I think we can draw some valuable conclusions:

221
A. Symmetrical plain-plan equalities may still have life in them, especially if we insert into the
equation mutual weaknesses, relative king’s safety and piece mobility/functionality. Don’t be
deterred or misled by the fact that the two sides are expected to anticipate each other’s plan because it
is obvious. In fact we every too often encounter in practice insufficient accuracy in the execution of
the respective plans. My experience has taught me there is always room for errors, even in games
between world class players.

B. There are situations where the side that is supposed to press should not hesitate to offer an
exchange just because it is an exchange. It could serve the pressing side well, especially if it
challenges an opposing unit that causes us discomfort or is the adversary’s most active piece.

C. The defending side should not accept exchanges that have a negative impact on its energy
level. Do not look at what has left the board, look at what remains on it!

222
 So – Fedoseev

FIDE World Cup, Tbilisi 2017

The previous example featured a case of symmetrical equality that nevertheless was not as plain as it
seemed. Mutual weaknesses and several dynamic factors made the price of every mistake high. In
retrospect, it was much beyond a case of “trade, trade, draw”. But I would understand many of you
who would ask me the question: “What do we do, for example, in the dreaded Petroff Defence’s
positions, many of which feature just one open file, a couple of minor pieces already departed by
move 20, and few possibilities to avoid further exchanges? Isn’t there the ghost of a virtually
“unplayed” draw lurking around?”
The important thing in such situations is to see the fight as a challenge, and not to feel baffled after
just 10-12 moves have been played. There are quite a few advantages for the more comfortable
side in positions where the drawing tendency becomes felt immediately after the opening, which
a patient and well-trained player may put to good use.

I present below the most important ones:

• The probability of defeat is considerably reduced for the player who holds the small edge or
initiative, even more so than it is for his opponent. It is always nice to grind a position with the
knowledge that you are playing for two results only.
• If he is well prepared, he will have 2-3 chances during the game to pose problems. Maybe not big
ones, but still problems that might demand an accurate answer.
• The defender, in search of a quick draw, may start to “sink” – he could make concessions in order
to accelerate exchanges, or even carry out wrong exchanges.

Stamina, alertness, knowledge, should all be there to exploit the slightest slip. I know it isn’t easy for
anyone to have this magic mix, but keeping chances alive in such a type of struggle is a real artistic
achievement and one should face this task with reserved optimism rather than with fear. These are the
positions where you win if you don’t think much of winning.

Let us now see how a world class player tackles the issue mentioned above by refusing to fear the
reduction of material and adhering to a move by move approach:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0-0 Nc6 8.Nbd2 Bf5 9.Re1 Nxd2
10.Qxd2 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 0-0 12.c3 Qd7 13.Bf4

We have joined the game as early as on the 13th move in a highly topical variation of the Petroff
Defence, known for producing a large number of draws.

223
The contestants, Wesley So and Vladimir Fedoseev, require no introduction from me as they have
been members of the chess elite for several years and the game was played under the classical time
control in a prestigious competition such as the World Cup, a fact adding to its importance. Bearing
in mind that every participant gives his best in these mini matches, there’s no doubt the players were
well prepared for the game, and it is quite possible the next few moves were also part of their
preparation.

13...a6

Obviously Black’s only slight source of problems in this line is the rather awkward position of the
♘c6. If he had instead a formation with the knight on d7 and the pawn on c6, he would have felt
more comfortable. But well, when you are Black and play a symmetrical opening, you cannot expect
to have everything going your way. Fedoseev’s last move is designed to prevent Qd3-b5 invasions
once and for all, and is a typical prophylactic measure. The idea is to follow up with ...Ra8-e8, ...Be7-
d8, achieve mass exchanges along the e-file, and lead the game to an inevitable draw.

Fine, but why not an immediate 13...Rae8?, was the first question that crossed my mind when I sat
down to analyse this game. A precaution is good if there is a real reason for it, otherwise it is a waste
of time. Wasn’t this an example of inaccurate play by Black? To be honest, looking at the existing
evidence and some brief analysis I’ve made, I’m not sure whether 13...Rae8 is better or worse than
the move Fedoseev played. The only way to “exploit” the omission of ...a7-a6 is 14.Qb5!?, but then
again, the worm of doubt asks: “What is so terrible about it?”

224
14...Bd6!. This is what the computers recommend. Well, maybe there isn’t anything too scary in
14.Qb5!? indeed, but 14...Bd6! is quite hard to find in a practical game if someone isn’t aware of the
nuances as it leaves en prise two pawns. Once I saw the move on the computer screen I quickly
calculated that the d-pawn could not be taken in view of 15.Qxd5? Ne7! 16.Qg5 (16.Qe4 f5!µ)
16...f6 17.Qg3 Nf5 18.Qg4 h5! and White loses a piece. Yet I am not sure I would conceive the
whole idea in tournament conditions as the key first move is hard to find.

Instead, 14...b6?! is what the majority of amateurs and professionals would choose. I am in fact ready
to count this as a first possibility for Black to go wrong in this line, my ambition being to show that
many natural moves are not the optimal ones in apparently simple positions. 14...b6 has actually been
played even in a correspondence game. It continued
15.h3?! Bd6!. Now this is a successful exchange operation since White has nothing better than
16.Bxd6. The point is that 16.Qxd5!? Ne7 17.Qg5 f6 18.Qg3 Nf5 19.Qh2 Qb5!°

225
gives Black compensation because the white queen is far away from the undefended queenside.
A nice variation is 20.g4!? g5!! 21.Bg3 Nxg3 22.fxg3 f5! 23.Nxg5 fxg4 24.Ne4 Rf3! 25.Nxd6
cxd6 26.hxg4 Ref8!= with enough counterplay.
Let’s now return to 15...Bd6!.After 16.Bxd6 it’s still not so easy for Black, but with accurate
play he should draw. This is what happened after 16...Qxd6 17.Rac1 g6 18.a3 Kg7 19.Rxe8
Rxe8 20.c4

20...Re4! 21.Qxd5 Qxd5 22.cxd5 Nxd4 23.Rxc7 Nxf3+ 24.gxf3 Re1+ 25.Kg2 Rb1 26.b4 a5
27.bxa5 bxa5 28.Rc5 a4 29.Ra5 Rd1 30.Rxa4 Rxd5 31.Kg3 h5 32.Rb4 Rd3 33.a4 Ra3 34.h4 Kf6
35.Rb6+ Kf5 36.Rb5+ Ke6 37.Rb6+ Kf5 38.Rb5+ Ke6 39.Ra5 Ra2 40.f4 Kf6 41.f3 Ra1 42.f5!?
g5! 43.Ra6+ Ke5! 44.hxg5 h4+!! 45.Kg4 Rg1+ 46.Kh3 Kf4 47.g6 Kxf3 48.Kxh4 Kf4 49.Kh3

226
 and ½-½ in Bultman-Mudra, corr. 2013, in view of 49...Kf3 50.Kh2 Rg2+ 51.Kh1 Rg5 52.Rc6
Rxf5=.
This game stresses the fact that these positions are very delicate to handle even for players
armed with engines and great amounts of time at their disposal.

Obviously, White should try to prevent the freeing idea ...Bd6. Since it works only because the
f4-bishop is hanging, my thought was to protect it with:
15.Bg3!?. It seems to me that White is already in the driver’s seat! For instance, 15...f5
(15...Bd8 16.a4!± leaves Black tied up) 16.Bf4! h6 17.h4!± and Black is suffering, having no
clear plan to achieve liquidations.
To be fair, Black can revive the idea with the very difficult and counter-intuitive move
15...Rd8!.

He is holding after 16.a4 Bd6! 17.Bxd6 Qxd6 18.Re2 Rfe8 19.Rae1 Rxe2 20.Rxe2 Qd7,
although White is still a tiny bit better – 21.g3, making a luft. The final position explains why
the engines recommend:

15.g3!, which is an improved version of 15.Bg3, e.g. 15...Rd8 (threatening ...Ne5) 16.Kg2 Bd6 as in
the previous line, but with extra tempi. Later White could gain space with h4-h5.

Let us now return to 14...Bd6!: 15.Rxe8 Rxe8 16.Bxd6 Qxd6

227
17.Re1!!. You see, exchanges are not always bad for the pressing side!, the computer tells us. White
can go for a simplified position, where his queen and knight will be more active than their
counterparts. As we’ll see below, Black should better avoid such position.
Instead, 17.Qxb7 is drawish after 17...Rb8 18.Qa6 Nxd4 19.Qxd6 Nxf3+ 20.gxf3 cxd6=.
17...Rb8! This can safely be called “the only move”.
The alternative 17...Rxe1+?! is the second plausible continuation in our analysis, but it is worse.
After 18.Nxe1 b6 (18...Nd8 19.Qe8+ Qf8 20.Qd7 Qd6 21.Qxd6 cxd6 22.Nc2±) 19.Nc2 g6
20.Ne3 Ne7 21.Qa6± White keeps relentless pressure on Black’s position in spite of the
reduced material.
18.Qe2²

228
By obtaining an undisputed control of the e-file White has achieved a typical slight advantage for this
line and can press for a long time. Thus it isn’t clear whether 13...Rae8 is an improvement over the
game.

Another move that has occurred in practice is 13...Rfe8. However, after 14.Re2 Bd6 15.Bxd6 Rxe2
16.Qxe2 Qxd6 17.Re1² the position is almost identical to the one we have seen above. White actually
managed to win it in Firouzja-Lenderman, Astana 2019, but to be honest, Black missed at this point
what seems to be the best defensive idea in such positions, namely 17...a5!.

The aim of this move is to restrict the fighting solely on the kingside, where in view of the reduced
amount of material Black will have good chances to neutralise White’s pressure. Then best seems:
18.Nh4! to force a weakening of the dark squares. After 18...g6 (18...Qd7?! 19.Nf5±) 19.g3 Rd8
20.Ng2 Rd7 21.Qb5 b6 22.Nf4 Re7 23.Rd1 Rd7 24.a4 Kg7 25.h4 Ne7 26.Re1ƒ Black is somewhat
suffering because he has been forced to make the wrong luft (g7-g6), but he still retains decent
chances to hold.

14.Re2 Rae8 15.Rae1 Bd8

229
16.Nd2!?

Some more wood is soon going to leave the board, but the American GM isn’t discouraged – he
calmly manoeuvres the knight towards b3, from where it will threaten his opponent with the nasty
invasion Nb3-c5. This is a real annoyance for the defender since Black cannot avert the invasion with
...b7-b6 as his pawn on a6 would then fall.

16.h4 is another interesting way to anticipate further exchanges. We have already mentioned that the
way to create chances in symmetries is by taking space, which is what this move does. Besides
being an attacking gesture, the pawn’s thrust aspires to provoke ...h7-h6, which would not only
weaken the light squares, but would also leave the kingside pawns unfavourably placed for all
endings. In practice Black has more or less managed to hold his own, but I think that by viewing my
analysis below, you will agree that his task is unappealing:
16...Rxe2. This has been played in the majority of the games.
16...Re7 tries to be “clever” with the exchange of rooks – 17.Rxe7 Bxe7 18.h5 h6

230
19.Qe3!?
19.Re3 Re8 20.Qe2 Kf8 21.Ne1 Bd8 22.Rxe8+ Qxe8 23.Qxe8+ Kxe8 24.Nc2 was only a
shade better for White in Benassi-Sorbi, corr. 2017, and in fact a draw was agreed at this point.
19...Rd8!?
19...Re8 20.Nh2! Kf8 21.Qg3! Qf5 22.Bxc7 Qxh5 23.Ng4² results in an imbalance in the
pawn structure that should slightly favour White.
I doubt that Black equalises completely in view of the following nice idea which I came to appreciate
after thinking about the position for about forty-five minutes, this time without the help of the
computer:

20.b4!. You need to fight on two fronts if you want to retain chances of winning such battles. The

231
material is simply too reduced for White to hope for a successful attack by operating solely on the
kingside, mainly because Black hasn’t succumbed to the temptation of providing a lever there.
Instead 20.Nh2 Bd6 21.Bxd6 Qxd6 22.Ng4 a5!²/= is close to equal, no matter how much White
shuffles around, because the defence has managed to make the right luft (h7-h6) for the Q/R/N
positions. Black should be able to protect his f5-square from knight invasions by putting his
own knight on e7 whenever the threat arises. The front of defence is simply too narrow for
White to accomplish a breach in it.
After 20.b4! a likely continuation is 20...Bd6 21.Bxd6 Qxd6 22.a4!ƒ, and Black has practical
problems as fighting off pressure on two wings isn’t easy.

Let us return to the more natural 16...Rxe2:

17.Qxe2

17...Qg4!?. This move is designed to slow down White’s play by pinning the Nf3 with a tempo.
After 17...f6 18.Nd2! Rf7 19.Nb3 Re7 20.Be3 Nb8 21.Nc5 Qc8 22.b3 c6 23.c4². White clearly
had some game and eventually prevailed in Siigur-Larghi, corr. 2010.
18.Bg3 f6 19.Qd3
19.b4!? Na7 20.c4! is also thematic. (After 20.a4 Rf7 21.Nd2 Qxe2 22.Rxe2 Kf8 23.Nb3 b6
Black held his own in Krueger-Hrzina, corr. 2017.) 20...Qd7 21.Qd3

232
 White has created some tension in the centre. For instance: 21...dxc4 22.Qxc4+ Rf7 23.d5.
19...Qd7 20.Nd2². White has a pull. The idea is once again Nd2-b3-c5, and it is unpleasant for
Black. For example:
20...f5!?
20...Re8? 21.Rxe8+ Qxe8 22.Nb3 Be7 23.Qf5±;
20...Rf7?! 21.Nb3 Re7 22.Rf1!? Na7 23.Nc5 Qc8 24.h5±.
21.Nf3 f4 22.Bh2 Be7 23.c4ƒ

Black has burned bridges by putting his pawn on f4 as it is weak there, a fact that should give White
chances as soon as the game opens up.

233
16...Rxe2 17.Qxe2

Some more material has left the board, a fact that should normally make the defender happy.
However, this is hardly a plain-plan equality as White controls the only open file and the annoying
idea of a knight invasion to c5 is still there. If we want to be accurate, we must evaluate this as a
plain-plan situation where in order to equalise Black has to arrange an exchange of one more major
piece without making any concessions. This means that the defending side should still be careful
and above all, refrain from underestimating White’s potential.

17...a5

I haven’t watched the game live, but my guess is that this was played fast as it is the first choice of
the engines. I know very well that nowadays even super GMs occasionally include into their
preparation engine recommendations without scrutinizing them thoroughly, and execute them quickly
on the board to gain time. However, such a move obviously rings a bell as it puts a pawn on a dark
square and pawns don’t move back. By blocking the pawn on a5, White will get the option of using it
as a lever to open lines on the queenside later on with b2-b4, so in a long-term sense playing 17...a5
favours White.

Looking at the position once again without a computer, but this time from Black’s point of view, I
started to wonder what an old geek like Kramnik would play here, and the first move that crossed my
mind was 17...Qf5!? with the clear aim of invading c2 with a tempo. After 18.Bg3 Qc2 19.Nb3 Qxe2
20.Rxe2 b6 Black seems at first glance to be perfectly okay, but White has some initiative on his side:

234
21.Nc1!. The knight is on its way to f4 to attack the exposed soldier on d5. Having reached this
position in my calculations, I felt slightly disappointed as I saw that Black can prevent White’s
intentions only at the cost of weakening his kingside pawn structure, an event that would present
White with an opportunity to open up the game for his better placed pieces. So, does White get a
serious advantage after all?
21...g5™ Although this weakening move is forced, a closer inspection revealed to me that its
consequences are not that frightening. To be sure, Black seems still to be under some pressure, but the
position is defendable if he makes the right trades, as the following analysis indicates: 22.Nd3 h6
(22...f6 23.h4)

a) Now White’s main constructive plan is based on:

23.f4, aiming to assure f4 for the knight.

235
 After 23.f3 f6 24.h4 (24.Re6 Ne7! 25.Bxc7 Kf7∞ was my human trick.) 24...Kf7 the computer
gave 25.h5!? Re8 26.Rxe8 Kxe8 27.f4!? as slightly better for White, however Black defends as
follows: 27...g4 28.f5 Ne7 29.Bf4 Nxf5 30.Nb4 c6! 31.Nxc6 a5!, and danger has faded away.
23...f6 24.fxg5 hxg5 25.h4! gxh4

26.Bh2!
The obvious 26.Bxh4 is less menacing – 26...Kf7 (or 26...Ne7!?) 27.Nf4 (Perhaps 27.Rf2 a5
28.Rf5 Rh8 29.g3 Ke6 30.Rf1 poses more problems.) 27...Rh8 28.Bg3 Ne7 29.Ne6

29...c6. Forced but good. Black ends up a pawn down but keeps the more agile minor piece in
the ending and this should secure an easy draw for him in my opinion. A plausible continuation
is 30.Nxd8+ Rxd8 31.Bc7 Rd7 32.Bxb6 Nf5 33.Kf2 Nd6 34.Bc5 Ne4+ 35.Ke3 Ke6°, and

236
 once again Black’s beautifully coordinated pieces offer enough compensation for the pawn. We
can conclude of all this that the strength of some historically well tested and approved motifs,
such as was here the R+N+light square control combination, can often outweigh a small
material handicap and even overturn initially unfavourable engine evaluations.
We keep the bishop focused on the bull’s-eye c7. Even in that case Black seems to hold as follows:
26...Kf7! 27.Nf4 Ne7 28.Ne6 Rg8 29.Nxd8+ Rxd8 30.Bxc7 Rc8! 31.Bxb6 Nf5. From being a pawn
up Black is already a pawn down, but he has the dynamically better pieces. They coordinate nicely,
yielding good compensation. For example: 32.Bc5
32.Kf2 Ng3 33.Rc2 Ke6°; 32.Kh2 Ng3 33.Rc2 Kg6 34.Kh3 Kf5°.
32...Rg8 33.a4 (33.Kh2 Rg3°) 33...Rg3 34.Kf2 Rd3 35.Bb6 Ng3 36.Bc7 Ne4+ 37.Ke1 Ke6 38.Rc2
Re3+ 39.Kd1 h3 40.gxh3 Kd7 41.Bb8 Kc8 42.Bh2 Rxh3 43.Rg2 Rd3+ 44.Kc2 Rf3°. At the end of
the day, Black’s pieces are too active, so he isn’t in any real danger of losing.
The above analysis suggests that White should attempt to lure the black pawn on a5. It would be a
juicy target there after White takes on c7 and b6. So the most cunning try is:

b) 23.a4!
Then 23...f6? 24.Re6 Ne7 suddenly loses to 25.Bxc7! Kf7 26.Rxb6 Bxc7 27.Rxa6, when the
remote kingside pawns decide the outcome.
23...a5 24.f4! f6 25.fxg5 hxg5 26.h4 gxh4

27.Bh2!!
Now the previous defence 27...Kf7 doesn’t work well due to 28.Nf4, so Black has to play:
27...Rf7 28.Nf4 Rd7 29.Ne6 Kf7 30.Kf2!. The opponent doesn’t have useful moves and White
preserves a pull after 30...Kg8 31.Kf3 Kf7 32.Kg4 Ne5+ 33.Bxe5 fxe5 34.Rxe5.

It turned out that the seemingly simple symmetrical position was hiding a lot of positional traps!

237
18.Nb3 b6 19.Nc1

From this point onwards, as a result of playing ...a7-a5, Black has to make crucial decisions.
Although I cannot be sure 100% about it, Fedoseev’s preparation must have been ending around here,
and it is quite possible that he was satisfied with the result of the opening. However, taking into
consideration that Black’s strategy is to exchange pieces solely with the aim of achieving a draw, the
most convenient way to accomplish the final wave of exchanges still needs to be found. Looking at
the next few moves I get the impression that the Russian grandmaster was playing with the rush and
the ease of someone who had prepared much more than mere 20 moves. Yet this was hardly the case
as any decent engine will confirm that the quality of his play sinks. In my view, mentally he simply
had dismissed the game already as a draw, and wanted to sign the score sheets as soon as possible and
get rid of it.

I remember that a long time ago I played some Benoni line in an open tournament in Bulgaria. I had
analysed it up to move 25, got all my preparation on the board, and still blundered on move 26 having
a huge time advantage over my opponent. I have tried hard to convince myself since then that a good
piece of preparation alone was not enough to automatically win or draw a game. Your attitude should
be to continue the game as if it starts from move one at the point where your theoretical knowledge
ends. This is my advice to all young players. The sooner they manage to adhere to this important rule,
the quicker their results will improve.

19...f6

This move has the clear plan ...Rf8-f7-e7 when further reduction of material cannot be avoided.
However, in view of White’s next, Black could have considered playing 19...Ne7!?, preventing his
pawn from being fixed on the same colour as that of his bishop, at least for the time being. The
engines then give 20.Nd3 Ng6 21.Bg3 Qb5!? 22.Qf3 h6 23.a3 Nh4 24.Bxh4 Bxh4 25.g3 Bf6 26.h4

238
Qd7 27.Kg2 c6 28.a4 with a small edge for White, but I would not be too worried about having Black
here. After all, the famous coordination between queen and knight is good when there are weaknesses
to exploit, but I don’t see any in the black camp.

20.a4!²

Wesley grasps his chance with both hands. Now White gets realistic chances to have the better bishop
in endings, as well as a lever to stir up some play on the queenside with the advance b2-b4. Of course
White’s advantage isn’t big yet, but for the first time in the game it is based on a permanent feature of
the position, rather than a temporary one – an awkwardly placed piece can often be improved, control
of an open file can sometimes be lost, but a pawn blocked on the wrong square will almost always
stay there for the rest of the game. An important gain from White’s point of view is that from now on
not every exchange will suit Black. He will have to weigh carefully on every turn which pieces to
keep on the board in order to avoid falling into a strategically inferior ending. This already makes
White’s game considerably easier.

20...Ne7

The immediate 20...Rf7?! would have allowed 21.Qb5! Kf8 22.Nd3 Re7 23.Rc1!², and Black is kept
under pressure. It isn’t clear what White threatens, but there is a multitude of ideas to improve the
position, whereas Black is merely reduced to passivity.

21.Nd3

21...g5?!

I don’t know how to describe this reaction, but there are several explanations in my mind, the two

239
most plausible ones being lack of consistency or positional greed. Whichever one you choose, please
be aware that you cannot play in such a way against a 2800 player and have more than 10% chances
of getting away with it. I can justify this move only as a result of the tension that surrounds important
encounters for, strictly speaking, it lacks a realistic background. Of course we know the axiom about
the importance of space, and I am sure the desire to gain more room on the kingside must have been
the instigator of Vladimir’s choice, but there is an even more important axiom than that: One cannot
strike effectively from a worse position, and Black’s position was already slightly worse.

The natural sound move was 21...Rf7!, defending the Ne7 and thus making the threat to the a4 pawn
real.

a) After 22.b3 Ng6 23.g3 Re7 Black has finally completed the desired manoeuvre. To avoid further
exchanges White has to retreat his bishop: 24.Be3 c6 25.Qh5

White’s plan is to carry out c3-c4 with a slight initiative, but Black has a final nice move to improve
the piece which has been the source of his troubles, the knight:
25...Nh8! 26.c4 dxc4 27.bxc4 Nf7²/=. If White has an edge, it is only a tiny one. He has more space,
but also soft spots on the light squares. Black is solid and with a finely restored coordination of
pieces. It would be no exaggeration to say that both sides should be satisfied here – White because he
has altered the structure and avoided further exchanges while gaining space, Black because he has the
more solid pawn structure and all his pieces are now functional.

b) Another plan is 22.Qd1 Ng6 23.b4!?

240
Again, White is slightly more active on the queenside and he can play on.

22.Bc1 Ng6

Black logically follows ...g7-g5 by fortifying the space conquered. To the common eye it would
appear that he is perhaps doing not badly, but the game course serves to show that he is still
struggling, mostly because f2-f4 or h2-h4 will underline his weaknesses:

23.b3 Be7?

An error that seals Black’s fate irreversibly. Obviously Fedoseev felt the need to improve his bishop
and perhaps prevent Bc1-a3 ideas, but the move is tactically flawed. Correct was:
23...Rf7!, still aiming to get the rook to the e-file. However, in that case White can exploit the
weakening of Black’s kingside to avoid the exchange of rooks with impunity:
24.Rf1!. The surprisingly virulent idea is to strike with f2-f4. After:
24...Re7! 25.Qd1 Qe6! 26.f4 gxf4 27.Bxf4 (27.h4!?) 27...c6 28.Bd2 Qe4 29.Qf3 Qxf3 30.Rxf3 Re2
31.Rf2 Re4 32.Kf1 Kg7 33.g3 Bc7 34.Rf5 Ne7 35.Rf3² the ending is not trivial for Black as he has to
endure a worse pawn structure, but nevertheless it looks defendable.

241
24.h4!±

This frees the f4 square for the white pieces, exposing the weaknesses in Black’s camp. White already
has a substantial advantage.

24...gxh4 25.Nf4 Rf7

25...Nxf4 proves to be no improvement for Black after either of the following continuations:
26.Qxe7 Qf5 27.Bxf4 Qxf4 28.Qe6+ Kh8 29.Qxd5 Qd2 30.Qe4 Qxc3 31.Re3 Qb4 32.Qxh4±/+– or:
26.Bxf4 Rf7 27.Qh5 Bd6 28.Bxd6 Qxd6 29.Re8+ Rf8 30.Qg4+ Kh8 31.Re3 Rf7 32.Qxh4+–.
Remarkably, once Black gets a worse pawn structure, White isn’t averse to exchanges as they
highlight the weak enemy king and the inability of his remaining pieces to defend everything.

242
26.Qe6!?

Here too, exchanges are all of a sudden a good way forwards as Black has too many weaknesses and
will inevitably succumb to White’s endgame superiority.
However, to be honest, I would have played with closed eyes 26.Qh5! instead, as I believe that
Black’s position is weak enough to collapse in the middlegame. After 26...Nxf4 27.Bxf4+– we have
transposed to a line mentioned above, where the defender is fighting a lost cause.

26...Qxe6 27.Rxe6 Nxf4 28.Bxf4 Bd8

29.b4!+–

243
This is the toll Black has to pay for having placed his pawn on a5. To avoid giving his opponent a
passer on the a-file, he will now have to drop the all-important c-pawn, after which the result is a
foregone conclusion at this level. I will not comment on the rest as So’s technique makes it self-
explanatory:

29...Kg7 30.bxa5 bxa5 31.Ra6 c6 32.Rxc6 Kg6 33.Rc5 Rd7 34.f3 Kf5 35.Bd2 Ke6 36.Rc6+ Kf5
37.Be1 Kg5 38.Rc5 f5 39.Kh2 Kh5 40.Bf2 Rd6 41.Be3 Bb6 42.Rb5 Bd8 43.Bf4 Rd7 44.Be5 Kg5
45.Rc5 f4 46.Rc6 Kf5 47.Ra6 Kg5 48.Kh3 Kf5 49.Rc6 Kg5 50.Re6 Be7 51.Rc6 Bd8 52.Bd6 Kf5
53.Kh2 Rg7 54.Be5 Rd7

55.Rd6!?+– Rxd6 56.Bxd6 Kg5 57.Kg1 Kf5 58.Kf2 Kg5 59.Kf1 Kf5 60.Ba3 Ke6 61.Ke2 Kf5
62.Bc1 Kg5 63.Kf1 Bc7 64.Bd2 Bd8 65.Be1 Kf5 66.Ke2 Ke6 67.Kd3 Kd7 68.c4 Kc6 69.Bc3 Bb6
70.Bb2 Bd8 71.Bc1 Bc7 72.Bd2 h5 73.Bc3 Bb6 74.Bb2 Bc7 75.Ba3 Bd8 76.Bf8 Bg5 77.Bg7 Kd6
78.Be5+ Kc6 79.Kc3 Bh6 80.Bf6 Bf8 81.Kd3 h3 82.gxh3 Bd6 83.Be5 1-0

In my opinion this was a very instructive example. You should go through it over and over again. It
demonstrated very well several points, which are important when we try to get play in symmetrical
equalities.

A. Try to lure the opponent into creating permanent disadvantages. They might look
imperceptible at the moment they are created, but could prove of great use at a later stage.

B. When the opponent prepares liquidation, it is important to pose obstacles in his path, so that they
are not achieved in the best possible conditions. Switch mentally sides, put yourself in his shoes,
and try to figure out what he would not like.

244
C. Spot critical moments and try to make use of them. For example, immediately after playing
quickly a successful sequence of moves, the opponent might be relaxed and play below par. It is
important to be aware this can happen, sense it, and take advantage of it.

D. When it rains, it pours: In positions where one thinks he has a draw in his pocket, such as the
symmetries we are examining, any mistake will have a greater impact than usual. It is quite possible
that the better side will have the opportunity to acquire a winning advantage quickly, exploiting a
psychological collapse. To do that, intensify your move by move concentration at the first hint a
mistake has occurred.

245
 Ioannidis – Kotronias

Patras 2017

The following example is a case from my own practice on the theme of playing a dull symmetrical
position. My opponent is the promising Greek junior Evgenios Ioannidis, who has received twice top
honours in European junior competitions and hopefully has a bright future ahead of him in our noble
game. The example is instructive not only chessically, but also from a psychological viewpoint as
during its course we’ll see White gradually sink in his stubborn effort to make a draw, ultimately
losing. As the readers are about to witness, I didn’t try to avoid exchanges at all costs, but tried
instead to play a normal game, following all the rules that govern the play in symmetries. This is nice
and correct as an attitude, but difficult to carry out in over the board play because to keep the game
going on one needs to create maximum possibilities for his pieces on every move, as a counter-
balancing factor to exchanges and symmetry. Even then, the possibilities for success are low, but as I
have stressed in the previous example, not as low as people tend to believe.

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bf4 Bg4 4.e3 e6 5.h3 Bh5 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.c3 Nf6 8.Nbd2

8...Bg6!?

This agrees to an exchange of all four bishops, and yet I didn’t shy away from it in spite of the fact I
was required to play for a win. There was a reason for this and it was twofold:

• The move achieves a strategically favourable exchange of pieces, as the Bd3 is White’s “good”
bishop.
• The continuation was included in my notes as the most flexible, keeping the option (according to
White’s reply) to castle on either side.

246
9.Qc2

This move was not in my notes. It isn’t bad, but at the same time it isn’t critical. The principled
continuation was 9.Bxg6 hxg6 with some nuances related to the idea of castling long:

10.Qb3!? The point of this move is to reduce Black’s castling options.

I had also checked 10.Bg5 Qd7!, when the idea is to make the Bg5 feel uncomfortable. After
11.Qc2 (11.Qb3 0-0-0!∞ is excellent for Black. The same can be said of 11.0-0 Nh5! 12.e4 f6!
13.Be3 0-0-0„, with ...0-0-0 vindicating in both cases Black’s choice to delay castling on move
8.) 11...e5 12.dxe5 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bxe5 14.Nf3 Qe6 15.Nxe5 Qxe5 16.Bf4 Qe7 17.0-0-0²/=.
My conclusion had been that in the resulting position White holds the tiniest of edges, but I
would nevertheless be happy to play it as we have an interesting fight in prospect.
10...Bxf4!. Refusing to comply with White’s intentions. This dynamic reply had been my prepared
solution after 10.Qb3!?.
The clumsy 10...Rb8 11.Bg5! Qd7 12.0-0 Nh5 13.e4± leaves Black without active play.
11.Qxb7
11.exf4 Qc8 or 11...b6 is roughly equal.

247
11...Nxd4! 12.cxd4 Bd6 13.Qc6+ Nd7!
Black is worse after 13...Kf8 14.0-0 a5 15.Rfc1 Qe8 16.Qc3 Rh5 17.a4!².
14.0-0 Rb8 15.Nb3 Rb6! 16.Qa4
16.Qc2 looks more human, but with the benefits of home preparation I would have unleashed
the accurate 16...Qf6! , threatening ...Rh8xh3 and fully equalising the chances. For example,
17.Nbd2 g5!? 18.e4 Bf4! 19.e5 Qf5 20.Qxc7 Rxh3!! 21.gxh3 Qxh3 22.Rfc1 Rb8 23.Qxa7 g4„.
16...Qc8 17.Rfc1 Qa6 18.Qxa6 Rxa6=. Black isn’t worse in this ending as he has good control over
c5 and the more active king and rooks.

9...Bxd3 10.Qxd3

Thus, the first exchange of wood has been carried out, and the result is a rather dull middlegame. To
be honest, I wasn’t too optimistic about my prospects of winning, but I wasn’t pessimistic either.
After all, good friend and chess celebrity GM Baadur Jobava has won so many equal or worse
positions in his life that for him the remainder of this game may look trivial. It is essential not to put
limitations to oneself. Unquestionably, winning dry equal positions requires hard work on and off the
board! I’ll leave now aside the justly remembered legendary tune “With a little help from my
friends”, and return to the chess content of the present game. My next move may appear a little weird,
but if we take into consideration the rules for playing dull positions, it is perhaps best.

248
10...h6!?

I wanted to avoid the unfavourable exchange Bf4-g5xf6 which would leave White with a good pair of
knights against my awkward N+B. But then, why not 10...Bxf4, you may ask, which has an
additional virtue of unbalancing the pawn structure?
The answer is that 10...Bxf4, albeit good enough, surrenders space to the opponent and gives him
some easy moves and an open file. After 11.exf4 0-0 12.0-0 Ne7 13.g3 c6 14.a4 a5 15.Ne5 Qc7
16.b4 Rfc8 17.Rfb1= the position remains equal, but besides the fact that Black is worse in space,
there was the likelihood that my opponent would not be bored. I deemed it right to keep my space
property intact, even if it meant a most uninteresting struggle for me, rightly perceiving that it would
be even more uninteresting for my inexperienced opponent. The complete player should be able to
adjust to all environments, but also (most importantly) to the psychology of his opponent.
Summing up: When you dispose of two or three continuations of equal strength, make a choice
according to what is most annoying to your opponent. Especially in symmetrical, plain positions,
psychologically the simple for you could be complex enough for your opponent to handle.
Especially if he is inexperienced.

11.Bxd6 cxd6

249
12.c4

A meek move, and a sure sign that my opponent eventually decided to play only for a draw. If I was
in his place I would have castled and then followed up with e3-e4, but in that case of course Black
gets higher chances to play for a win himself as the position becomes asymmetrical.

12...0-0

Of course 12...Bxf4 may be objectively stronger, but as you surely have noticed already, I’m a
maniac on the theme “space”!

13.0-0 Rc8 14.Rfc1 dxc4 15.Nxc4

Obviously this type of position doesn’t make me happy when playing chess, for many reasons:

• It isn’t spectacular.
• There are few winning chances.
• There isn’t much room for creativity.
• When playing a lower rated opponent it might cost me rating.

So, what is the way to playing it? The only correct advice is:

Forget all of the above and play as if you just woke up from a coma!

Follow the rules we have forged for playing these specific positions and have no anxiety about the

250
outcome. My experience, as that of many others, shows that anxiety can only have a negative effect.

15...b5!

Our rule say, grab space, if that doesn’t weaken your position! So, here we are, I thought:

• Having my pawn on d6 helps as it controls e5, so White cannot jump there and seek further
exchanges.
• The move ...b7-b5 takes space and does that with gain of time.
• I will subsequently be able to bolster that space by putting my queen on b6, a really nice square.

As a result, the pawn on b5 doesn’t seem to end up being a weakness, and all looks to be in order.
The outcome of my thoughts was a silent “Let’s go!”, and I executed the move rather quickly as there
is no need for an intensified move by move mode here. It is obvious there isn’t anything better.
As for the evaluation, the position is clearly equal, but without prospects to stir up play, so what
Black should be aiming for in the first place is a transition to a plain-plan equality situation, where he
will have something more concrete to work on.

16.Ncd2 Qb6

251
17.a4

Evgenios plays the computer’s first choice, which I was glad to see though. The reason is that the b4
square is weakened permanently, but most importantly, we would now end up with symmetrical b-
pawns facing each other, a fact that renders liquidation of the whole queenside improbable.
I was actually more concerned about the prophylactic 17.a3, preparing to double rooks on the c-file.
My intention was to answer that with 17...Rc7 18.Rc2 Nd5 but the position is basically drawish, and
no less drawish than it was before:

19.Rac1. Doubling rooks is a natural consequence of White’s previous play.

Instead the optically promising (for Black) 19.Ne4!? Ncb4!? 20.axb4 Nxb4 21.Rxc7 Nxd3 was
a tactical sideline of my calculations, although even that is probably nothing more than equal

252
 after 22.Raxa7 b4 23.Rab7 Qa5 24.Nxd6 Qa1+ 25.Kh2 Nxf2 26.Kg3!=.
19...Rfc8 20.e4 Nf4 21.Qe3 e5. Here my analysis ended, with a faint hope that Black is perhaps a
shade better. However, the engines say that Black has absolutely nothing after 22.Nb3 Ne7 23.Rxc7
Rxc7 24.Rxc7 Qxc7=. I guess I have to believe them.

17...a6 18.axb5 axb5 19.Ne4

There’s no reason not to play this. White’s aim is to draw, and the text carries out an exchange
without worsening his position, so it is a sound way to proceed.

19...Nxe4 20.Qxe4

20...Nb4

This is the first moment in the game where Black can consider that he has acquired something
tangible. He has a tad more space than his adversary, and his knight has settled on b4, eyeing some
critical light squares. White’s next caught me by surprise as I expected him to carry out a massive
exchange of rooks:

21.Qb1!?

Objectively not bad, but perhaps overelaborate.

21.Rxc8! Rxc8 22.Ra8 Qc7 (22...Qd8 should amount to the same thing) 23.Rxc8+ Qxc8 24.Kh2!=
would have surrendered the c-file, but there isn’t much to be gained from it. Black is only nominally
better, and White should draw rather easily. At this point it has to be stressed that such positions (like
the one after the opening here) could be won only if the opponent starts to see ghosts here and there,
and it seems that on this occasion I created the “right” ghosts for my young opponent.

253
21...Qb7 22.Ra3?!

This is White’s first real inexactitude in the game. 22.Rc3= was much more natural as Black gains
nothing by taking on c3, e.g. 22...Rxc3 23.bxc3 Nd5 (23...Nc6?! 24.d5!²) 24.c4=.
In fact, I intended to meet 22.Rc3 by 22...Rc6, but the computer gives the very simple 23.Rxc6 Qxc6
24.Qd1 Rc8 25.Ne1=, when the dreaded 0.00 makes again its appearance.

22...Nd5!

Stopping Ra3-c3. From here onwards I realised my opponent was going to lose as he was panicking
due to an impending shortage of time and no clear ideas how to force massive trades.

23.Kh2?!

23...b4?!

Inaccurate. I should have geared up my move by move approach here. Then I would have probably
found 23...Nf6! 24.Rxc8
I missed the idea 24.Nd2 b4 25.Ra1 Qb5!³.
24...Rxc8 25.Ne1 Ne4 26.Kg1 Rc4 27.Qd1 Qc6³, when the black pieces operate at maximum
capacity.

24.Ra5?!

I was lucky that Evgenios returned the favour here. 24.Ra1 would have restored the balance. My
intention was to gain space by 24...f5, but after 25.Qd3 Rxc1 26.Rxc1 Rc8 27.Rxc8+ Qxc8 28.Qb5

254
Kh7 29.Qa4= the position is a dead draw.
After 24.Ra1 the computers mention also the alternative way of gaining space by 24...g5!?, but to be
honest I didn’t bother to look at it as I was stuck with trying to set up the archetypal formation
§f5/Ne4. In any case, after 25.Qd3 Nf6 26.Nd2 Kg7 27.e4 Rxc1 28.Rxc1 Rc8 29.Rxc8 Qxc8 30.e5
dxe5 31.dxe5 Nd5 32.g3 Qc1 33.Nc4= Black is fine, but once again, nothing more than that.

24...Qb6

I was longing to get my queen to b5 here, having finally spotted the idea of penetrating through the
light squares into the enemy camp, hence the text move. However, 24...Nf6!³ was better, eyeing the
critical e4-square and posing more serious problems to White in view of the approaching time
pressure.

25.Rxc8 Rxc8 26.Qa1 Qc6 27.Ne1! Qc4

255
28.Qd1?

A clear mistake. 28.Ra8! was the right defence. I intended to drive a wedge into the enemy camp by
28...b3, but the engines find an ingenious defence:
29.Nf3 Nf6. Who wouldn’t think that Black is on the way to a serious advantage here? He is about to
invade e4 and c2 with his knight and queen respectively, and White seems to be facing a lot of
problems because of an inferior king and that dangerous looking pawn on b3. However, there is a
solution in the shape of a deflection-evacuation sacrifice:

30.d5!! A marvellous move! It frees d4 for the white knight and deflects the Nf6 from the defence of
e8, thus allowing White the much-needed counterplay.

256
30...Nxd5 31.Nd4 Rxa8 32.Qxa8+ Kh7 33.Qe8 Qc7 34.Qb5 Qb6 35.Qe8 Qb7 36.Qd8=. And White
has enough guerilla threats to draw. An amazing idea.

28...Qc1?

This move could have ruined a small masterpiece as up to here my play had been almost impeccable.
I repeat: Once you realise your opponent has started making mistakes in this type of symmetrical
game, intensify your move by move mode, looking at more candidate-moves. This should be done for
two reasons:
a) It is likely that if you miss your chance, you will not have a second one.
b) It is also as much likely that if you play accurately, the opponent will collapse and the game will
end quickly.

28...Qf1! was the right move and of course I saw it. However, I missed something in my calculations
afterwards. The critical line runs 29.Qd2 Nf6 30.f3, and here I didn’t see the brilliant idea 30...g5!!µ
which threatens ...Nf6-d5, ...f5-f4 and forces White into complete passivity.

For example: 31.Ra1

31.e4 Nh5!µ displays the strength of ...g7-g5 as the f4-square cannot be defended in a
satisfactory way, e.g. 32.g3 b3 33.Ra1 e5!‚.
31...Nd5 32.Rd1 b3! 33.Ra1 (33.Nd3 Nxe3!!–+) 33...Kg7 34.Ra3 Qb5 35.Ra1 Rc7 36.Ra3 Qc4
37.Qf2 f5 38.Ra1 f4! and Black should win.

29.Qe2

Now it should have been a draw but time pressure proved nasty for Evgenios.

257
29...Qb1 30.Ra7! Rc1

31.Nd3??

Forgetting about one of the the essentials of chess, counterattacking. But it can happen when you are
literally with seconds left on the clock.
31.Qh5! could have saved White. After 31...Qg6 32.Qe2! Qb1 33.Qh5 Black can choose between a
repetition or 33...Rc7!? 34.Ra8+ Kh7 35.Nf3 Qg6 36.Qxg6+ Kxg6 37.Rb8 f5 38.Rd8 Kf6 39.Rxd6
Ke7 40.Ra6 Rc2 41.Ra7+ Kd8 42.Kg3∞, when the most likely result of the ending is a draw.

31...Rh1+ 32.Kg3 Nf6 33.e4 Rd1–+

The rest is easy by anyone’s standards. Evgenios resigned after:

34.Nxb4 Nxe4+ 35.Kf3 Nd2+ 0-1

Mate or colossal loss of material is imminent.

This example makes it clear to us that there are over-simplified symmetries which can be won
perhaps only due to psychological factors. The means should be a mix of psychology and pure chess
tactics, and below you can find some of them:

A. Do not give away space and keep the king safe. Especially against young players who are
seeking ways to attack and display a tactical superiority, this can be surprisingly effective.

B. Be ready to exploit the boredom this type of struggle may cause to the opponent.

C. Drive wedges into the enemy camp, or create a temporary superior concentration of forces at a

258
particular part of the board. The latter is something I have already referred to on several occasions.

D. Enter move by move mode with not too long, but dense calculation when the execution stage
approaches.

In the above game I failed to cope with the task successfully as I didn’t have enough patience to
detect the move 30...g5!. I would like to take the chance here and note that the zugzwang element
could sometimes be useful in such situations, so keep it in mind.

259
Chapter 5

Long-term Assets
Chess is war over the board. The object is to crush the opponent’s mind.
Bobby Fischer

Carlsen – Matlakov

Wijk aan Zee 2018

Before entering our next example, I felt the need to add some nuances to the subject “evaluation/move
by move mode”. I have already touched it several times so far in this book as I believe it is of primary
importance for those who want to build a solid playing philosophy. And well, if I repeat some things
more than once, I hope I will be forgiven. It is because I feel repetition should be a part of tuition. We
have referred to the move by move mode many times in this book, mentioning that it has a positional
aspect and a tactical one. The positional aspect is connected with improving the functionality of the
pawn formation and the mobility/coordination of the pieces. The tactical component is looking for
traps, blunders, micro-sequences, etc.
Essentially, the move by move mode is treating each position that occurs in the game as a
separate entity, both from a positional and a tactical viewpoint. But it’s short-sighted. As such, it
has a unique value in positions where there is no clear plan or there is no plan at all. We saw
several positions of the above type in the beginning of this book, and hopefully I have managed to
inspire you how to spot such positions and treat them accordingly. During our journey so far we have
further noticed the following:
The move by move mode can also be quite helpful in positions where there are plans, plain or more
complicate, plans we have clearly defined during the evaluation process. The move by move mode in
those cases helps to implement the plans properly.
Up to now, we have mostly examined plain-plan situations/equalities. Once you evaluated a position
as such, you immediately diagnose it as containing clear paths for action. Consequently, the main role
of the move by move mode in those cases is to provide tactical accuracy. Its positional element stems
from the general strategy as already defined by the evaluation, and it will hardly need any
modifications.

You may ask why I separate evaluation from the move by move mode? Aren’t they two sides of the
same coin? After all, while we are evaluating the position, we are also subconsciously checking a
number of short lines and threats.
Evaluation relies on accumulated experience of years and is a kind of chess god. It can tell you if
you are better, equal or worse and why you are better, equal or worse. It can indicate the paths to
follow (plans) or the need to stay where you stand. Here I would like to mention that people tend to

260
separate the evaluation process from the process of spotting plans, but I don’t. I have been used to
consider finding plans as part of the evaluation process because they are a direct consequence of
measuring facts.
Move by move mode, on the other hand, has different characteristics. I referred to it above as short-
sighted, which perhaps requires some more clarification. By that we mean that it doesn’t check for
long-term plans, nor does it forge them. It mainly tries to create conditions for plans to exist by
avoiding tactical slips and preserving or improving the positional features according to conventional
chess wisdom. If plans already exist, it helps in their implementation. An additional, occasional
function of the move by move mode is to aid the evaluation when we are uncertain. We saw that
happen in the game Topalov-Giri, where move by move mode helped us discover the missing part of
the overall evaluation in steps 5 and 6. I would like to end this digression by drawing some parallels
that might help you conceive the differences between evaluation and move by move mode in poetic
fashion:

If evaluation is a philosopher, move by move mode is an engineer. If evaluation is god, move by move
mode is a doubting Thomas.

And may I add, a Thomas who says he believes, but still wants to verify...

The next example is perhaps one of the best illustrations ever on the following theme: A concrete
evaluation of a position as a plain-plan situation, followed by an exemplary move by move conduct
that leads to exploiting a miniscule advantage. In the game we’ll witness once more a case of one
player “sinking”, probably as a result of having discarded the game mentally as a dead draw, and the
other player totally focused solely on playing chess, disregarding the reduction of material. The
position here isn’t a symmetrical one, but is no less instructive for the topic this chapter discusses as
not only does it look drawish, but it is drawish, very much so. And winning it by normal means is a
form of art.

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 Qc7 6.Be3 a6 7.Qd2 Nf6 8.f4 Bb4 9.Bd3 Na5
10.a3 Bxc3 11.Qxc3 Qxc3+ 12.bxc3 d5 13.exd5 exd5 14.Nb3 Nc4 15.Bd4 Ne4 16.Nc5 Nxc5
17.Bxc5 Bd7 18.0-0-0 0-0-0

261
We have joined the play after Black’s 18th move, in yet another game of Magnus Carlsen, this time
against Russian super-GM Maxim Matlakov. It was played at the 2018 edition of the traditional Wijk
aan Zee tournament, nowadays known more as Tata Steel. I can imagine that 30-40 years ago leading
grandmasters would give up shortly as draws positions such as the one pictured on the diagram, but
nowadays a new wave of technically strong players led by Magnus has adopted and promoted the
Fischer’s attitude of mind:

Fight to the last pawn, and do it well.

Evaluating the position, we get the impression that it is dead equal as kings are out of danger in the
ending, the material is equal, and neither side has bad pieces. White has two bishops, but his weaker
pawn structure seems to outweigh that advantage. However, there is a “hook” that allows us to
classify this as a plain-plan equality and not as a planless one. This “hook” is the weakness of the b6-
square!

19.Bxc4! dxc4 20.Bb6

Magnus has apparently managed to create some sort of play for himself by confining the black king
in the corner:

262
20...Rde8 21.Rd4

This position has been reached on 9 occasions (including this game), and White won twice with the
rest ending as draws. What is most noticeable is that all correspondence games were effortlessly
drawn by Black, but in OTB play he experienced difficulties. This speaks volumes about the
importance of psychology in tournament chess. It is a common occurrence in such situations that the
defending player will start seeing ghosts or overreacting. In both cases the opposite side will have its
chances.

21...Re6

This move is logical and is an expression of human concern: Black doesn’t like the idea of tolerating
the nasty bishop on b6 and tries to expel it or force exchanges. He doesn’t mind the pawn, after all
this is a position with opposite coloured bishops. He only wishes to free his king from the cage, and
then the position will be a draw.

Correspondence players, on the other hand, have chosen to leave this bishop on b6 undisturbed
because engines tell them that Black can live with the restricted king:
21...Bc6!? 22.Rxc4. According to the machine’s thinking, this gives White a slight advantage. But I
think this was not Matlakov’s concern as then his king would break its chains.

a) If I were Black, I would most probably be worried of 22.Rhd1 Bxg2 23.Rd7. Humans are averse to
calculating variations that allow an unpleasant penetration of the enemy forces in their camp.
Obviously such is the case here. However, after 23...Bf3 24.R1d4 Black has the accurate, albeit
clumsy move 24...Rhf8! and it turns out that White has nothing as the following sample lines
demonstrate:

263
25.Rc7+
The attempt to anchor the bishop by 25.a4 is answered by 25...Bg4 26.R7d6 (26.Rc7+ Kb8
27.Rcxc4 Rc8 28.Rxc8+ Rxc8 29.Kd2 Bf5=) 26...Be6 27.Kb2 Kb8 28.Ka3 Rc8 29.Kb4 Rfe8=.
When you are armed with computer assistance and a lot of time at your disposal, you know that
there is nothing in all these positions and the evaluation will remain at 0.00 for ever, but in game
conditions many people tend to invent ghosts out of fear.
25.Bc5 is met, among others, by 25...Rd8 and Black is at least equal.
25...Kb8 26.Rdd7

The rooks look impressive on the 7th, but White has nothing. After 26...Re6! 27.Bd4 g6 28.Be5 Ka7
29.Rxf7 Rxf7 30.Bd4+ Kb8 31.Rxf7 h5 32.f5 gxf5 33.Rxf5 Bg4 34.Rc5 Rc6= his initiative dissipates

264
and the draw is certain.

b) Another option for White is 22.f5, aiming to take on c4 without allowing an escape of the king
towards the centre. However, in that case Black just grabs the pawn: 22...Bxg2 23.Rg1 Re2!=. Once
again the game is equal. After 24.Rd2 Rxd2 25.Kxd2 Bd5 26.Rxg7 the contestants agreed a draw in
Siigur-Eljoseph, corr. 2018.
Let us now return to 22.Rxc4:

22...Kd7! 23.Rd4+ Ke6 24.Re1+ Kf5. The black king has broken free. After 25.g4+!? there is an only
move, but it is sufficient: 25...Kg6!=
25...Kxg4? 26.Rg1+ Kf5 27.Rg5+ Kf6 28.Rd6+ Re6 29.Bd8+± loses the exchange and most
probably the game.
26.Rg1 f6 27.f5+ Kf7 28.g5. Draw agreed in Hesse-Dieguez Vera, corr. 2018 as White’s extra pawn
is useless, being doubled and with opposite colour bishops on board.

Returning to Matlakov’s 21...Re6, we can say it complies with Black’s plans to force matters by
trading a pair of rooks or repelling the b6-bishop from its hegemonic position. In no way could it be
bad.

22.Rxc4+ Rc6

Although not a mistake, this is practically where Black starts to drift.

Better was 22...Kb8!, continuing to harass the b6-bishop. I like energetic defence in such cases, and
not to give the opponent respites.

265
After 23.Rd1 Bb5 24.Bc7+
24.Rb4 Rxb6 25.c4 Rc8 26.cxb5 axb5= is totally balanced.
24...Kc8! 25.Rc5 Rhe8! (threatening 26...Bc6 26.Bb6 Re1 to exchange the cramping rook) 26.Bb6+
In the event of 26.Rd2 Rc6 27.Rxc6 Bxc6 28.Bb6 the accurate 28...Bd7! ensures the expulsion
of the Bb6 as 29.c4 Re4 30.c5 Rxf4= is a comfortable fortress for Black.
26...Kb8 27.Re5 (27.c4 Rxb6 28.cxb5 axb5 29.Rd7 Re2=) 27...Rxe5 28.fxe5 Rc8 Black exchanged a
pair of rooks, and most importantly, has assured himself of expelling the annoying enemy bishop.
There might follow 29.Rd4 Rc6 30.Rd8+ Rc8 31.Ba7+ Kc7=.

23.Rxc6+ Bxc6

I would have preferred here 23...bxc6!?, in spite of the fact that it looks a bit anti-positional. After all,
it’s an ending with opposite coloured bishops and White is only a doubled pawn up, so why should I
be in any danger if I extricated my king? The following lines show that Black shouldn’t experience
any difficulties:

266
24.Kd2 (24.Bd4 f6 25.Kd2 Kc7= only helps Black) 24...f6 25.Rb1 h5! This is the key move! Black
has to take space on the kingside and create counterplay. After 26.Bc5
26.Bd4 Kc7 27.Rb4 (27.Rb6 Bc8) 27...h4= changes nothing.
26...Kc7! the major point of playing ...h7-h5 is seen in the following variation:

27.Rb6. Trying to snatch a pawn. Others are also harmless:

27.Re1 Re8=;
27.Rb4 h4 28.Bb6+ (28.Ra4 h3! 29.g3 Bg4 30.Rxa6 Rd8+„; 28.Re4 h3! 29.g3 Rh5 30.Bf8
Rd5+=) 28...Kc8 29.Re4 h3 30.g3 Re8 31.Rxe8+ (31.Ke3 Rxe4+ 32.Kxe4 Bg4=) 31...Bxe8
32.f5 Bh5 33.Ke3 Kd7=.
27...Rd8! 28.Kc1 Bc8 29.Rb4 Re8 30.Bb6+ Kd6 31.Rd4+ Ke6!=. Thanks to the pawn standing on h5

267
the black pieces can cruise unhindered on the light squares. White has absolutely nothing.

24.Rd1!

Thus, as a result of not choosing the methods that would enable a direct liberation of his king, Black
is somehow struggling here, at least optically. Still, the balance of power hasn’t essentially been
distorted. However, having chosen to defend passively, Black should have stuck to that. But as it so
often happens with the defending side, the temptation to exchange a couple of pawns proved
irresistible:

24...Bxg2?!

This is an unfavourable exchange for Black. The opening up of lines on the kingside gives White
more space to operate on both flanks simultaneously. And this is something that should have
definitely been avoided.
24...h5! was once more the right way to proceed, taking space on the kingside and intending ...Bc6-d7
followed by ...Rh8-h6. After 25.g3 Bd7 White is forced into 26.c4 Rh6 27.c5 Re6 28.Rd5 g6 29.Kd2,
but here Black plays simply 29...Re4 and there seems to be no way for White to improve as his king
cannot break through to the enemy camp.

268
The best the engines can find is 30.h4 Ra4 31.Rd3 Rc4 32.Rd6 Re4 33.f5 gxf5 34.Rh6 f4 35.gxf4
Bg4= with a position easy to draw as Black even for the average club player. With the dubious game
choice Matlakov is moving rapidly towards the danger zone.

25.Rg1 Be4 26.Rxg7 Bg6 27.a4

The rook on g7 is hardly in danger as it can always be freed with f4-f5. It is obvious that in spite of
the reduction of material Black has created problems for himself which he is now called upon to
solve.

27...Rf8!?

Worse is 27...Re8 28.f5! Bxf5 29.Rxf7 Bg6 30.Rc7+ Kb8 31.Rd7 Kc8 32.Rd4 Be4 33.a5 h5 34.h4
Bc6 35.Kb2 Rg8 36.Rd6 Re8 37.Rh6 Re5 as played in the subsequent game Srijit-Thilakarathne,
Delhi 2019, in view of 38.Rh7±.

28.Kb2!

The king is a strong piece – use it!.

28...Kd7

269
Black’s king has also finally joined the game, but as we are going to see, at a rather high price. With
his next couple of moves Magnus achieves a favourable exchange of pawns:

29.f5! Bxf5 30.Bc5 Rc8 31.Rxf7+ Ke6 32.Re7+ Kf6 33.Bb4!?²

Gradually the position is becoming more and more difficult for Black. It is already obvious that he
cannot build a fortress anymore, so he will have to endure a position with a clear pawn down.

33...a5 34.Ba3

34...Rc4?

270
Taking the a4-pawn with the rook is clumsy. It’s a strange move for a player of Matlakov’s class. It
indicates that he was already psychologically affected by the turn of events. The position he had
expected to draw easily against the world champion had turned out to be not so easy due to Carlsen’s
perseverance. Perhaps he started to have all kinds of ghost visions in his calculations here.

It is hard to imagine any great player of the past or present not to have played 34...Rg8! at this point.
The move is harmonious and flexible, and it gains a tempo over the game continuation. After 35.Rxb7
Rg2 36.Ra7 Bxc2! 37.Bd6 Bxa4+ 38.Ka3 Be8 39.Rxa5 Bf7² Black has prevented the white c-pawn
from crossing the important c4-square and White’s advantage is just nominal.

35.Rxb7 Rxa4 36.Ra7 Re4 37.Rxa5 Re2 38.Bd6 Bxc2 39.c4!

The difference is now obvious. The white pawn makes it to c5, anchors the bishop and creates real
winning chances. The continuation of the game confirms what I have already pointed out:
When someone makes a mistake in what he considered to be a dead drawn position, he gets
demoralised and a collapse is to be expected. Magnus obviously knows this better than anyone else.
Playing in a perfect move by move mode, he confidently conducts the game to a favourable for him
conclusion:

39...Ke6 40.Ra6 Bf5+?! 41.Kc3 Be4?! 42.Kd4! Kf5 43.Ra5+ Kg4 44.c5±/+–

White advantage has increased in the past few moves as a result of Matlakov’s indecisive handling of
his bishop. I will not comment on the remainder as with his king so far away from the critical region
Black has no real chances of survival.

44...Bf3 45.Ra7 h6 46.Rh7 Re4+ 47.Kd3 Re6 48.Kc4 Bc6 49.Rc7 Bh1 50.Kb5 h5 51.Rg7+ Kh4
52.Rg1 Ba8 53.Kb6 Re2 54.Kc7 Bd5 55.Rg3 Bh1 56.Rc3 Kg4 57.c6 1-0

271
At the end of this game let’s underline:

A. In a drawish situation lure is one of the few means to create play. The bait could be some exchange
of material that the opponent might find appealing, but that gives us more freedom of movement.

B. The defender should not vacillate between different approaches. It is important not to switch from
a passive treatment to an active one and vice versa. Such mixture can prove disorganising for his
psychology.

272
 Kotronias – Strikovic

Zagreb 2019

The last example was rather too extreme in view of the presence of opposite coloured bishops on the
board. Nevertheless it demonstrated that the nominally inferior side can drift even in cases where the
draw is virtually at hand, provided that it is confronted with implacable determination and a relatively
wide choice of continuations. The next example features a different type of situation where although
the material isn’t scarce and there is no symmetry on the board, one nevertheless gets the feeling that
his chances of generating a full-fledged fight are slim. To understand why that happens, we’ll try to
shed some light on the problems White (yours truly) was facing during the game, as well as on the
approach I chose in order to fight the source of these problems. Unsurprisingly, as you will soon
witness, the main issue was none other than suppressing the fear of simplifications.

1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e5 4.Nf3 Nbd7 5.Bc4 Be7 6.0-0 0-0 7.a4 a5 8.Re1 c6 9.h3 Nb6

The Philidor Defence is a tricky opening which has undeservedly been underrated, as there is
essentially nothing wrong with it. And why should there be? Black fortifies the centre, castles
quickly, reserves the option of striking back with a well-timed ...d6-d5 later on. The only problem I
can think of is the development of the c8-bishop, but I guess it isn’t more acute than in the King’s
Indian and besides, sometimes this piece can be quite helpful without moving at all as it oversees a lot
of critical squares from its original position.

10.Ba2

This move looks like the most principled, but essentially it is a direct product of chess greed. By
adopting it I threw away whatever chances of an advantage White may have had, although objectively

273
speaking, White’s edge in the diagram position is very small.
I will take the chance at this point to explain what chess greed consists of and why it rarely succeeds.
Chess greed is my own way to describe chess maximalism. My career indicates that the side which
always aspires to play uncompromisingly often gets the opposite result than the one expected, very
much in the same way it happens in life.

There are different types of obsession that are directly connected to it, such as keeping an intact pawn
structure at all costs, keeping the queens on for the sake of a more complicated fight, maintaining
pressure on a traditionally weak spot even when the omens say its not weak anymore, occupying
space at all costs, refusing to trade a powerful piece even if safeguarding it means losing time and
harmony, etc. I wouldn’t rule out completely chess maximalism as a viable strategy, but to go for it
you must be prepared to invest a huge amount of time in your games and forget about being practical.
Above all though, you shouldn’t fear to bear the consequences of your actions.

Maximalism is mostly connected with what one wants or likes and much less with the objective
board situation, which often requires a more flexible approach. Chess maximalism prioritises
usually one element of the position over others and tries to build around it, but in doing so assumes an
obvious risk. This happens because it is by no means certain this element is the key one (actually
such an element may not exist at all!), so by sticking to it one becomes too one-sided, inflexible,
predictable. However, there are a few players in this world who have a special gift for direct play in
positions where such an element exists, notwithstanding the objective evaluation of the situation on
the board. Still, even they rarely have the chance to reach the absolute top because their approach
requires a good portion of luck. Conventional wisdom teaches that the universal beats the partial, the
flexible beats the inflexible, the rounded up beats the uneven.

Coming to the specifics of the present situation, the move 10.Ba2 is clearly a quite committal choice
because the bishop loses contact with the kingside and does it in the “all or nothing” manner: It
retreats all the way back to a2 in order to avoid being hit later on by ...Nf6-d7-c5, but in doing so it
weakens the a4-pawn and creates the risk of ending up with a misplaced piece on a2 if White’s
kingside enterprise failed. There were two better possibilities at this point and objectively speaking I
had to prefer one of them (and also one which I justifiably avoided):

The continuation which I had to avoid as it leads to a very easy game for Black was 10.Bf1, a move
that clearly fails to take into account Black’s ability to counter in the centre. After 10...exd4! 11.Nxd4
d5 12.e5 Ne8!

274
Black is in my view at least equal as the pawn chain b7-c6-d5 makes a very healthy impression and I
don’t see a way to challenge it. White does have a 4-3 pawn majority on the kingside, but his pieces
are not optimally placed for an attack, and the undermining ...f7-f6 will be an annoying possibility to
consider for the moves to come. I believe Black’s practical chances are superior. Sample lines:

13.Nce2. This is the main computer suggestion, trying to improve the badly placed Nc3 and enable
perhaps c2-c3, followed by Bc1-d3 at a later stage.
13.b3 looks clumsy after 13...Nd7! 14.Nb1 Nc7 15.Bb2 Nc5 16.Nd2 Bd7 17.N2f3 Re8 18.c3
N7e6 with an excellent game for Black.
13...g6! 14.Nf4 Ng7 15.g3 Re8 16.b3 Bb4! 17.Bd2 Bc5 18.c3 Bf5 19.Bg2 Nd7 20.g4 Be6 21.Nf3
Bb6 22.Rc1 Nc5∞. White’s position looks a bit artificial to me, so I’d rather take Black if offered the
choice. Let us now see which were the better options for White.

In view of the above line, 10.Bd3!? comes strongly into consideration, as it takes the sting out of
...e5xd4. 10...Nfd7
10...exd4 11.Nxd4 d5 12.e5 Ne8 13.Nb1!² is here slightly better for White as his bishop is
actively placed and he controls f5.
11.Bf1!. Only now White pulls the bishop back – 11...exd4 12.Nxd4 Nc5 13.b3 Bf6 14.Ba3²

275
The first player’s position is for preference here as there is some pressure on d6 and he has no
weaknesses or potentially bad pieces. 14...Re8 (14...Be5!? intending ...Qd8-f6 might be a better try.)
15.Qd2 Qc7 16.Rad1 Bd7 17.Qf4!
17.f4 Bh4 18.Re3 Rad8 19.Nf3 Be7 20.Qf2 Bc8 21.Ree1 Nbd7∞.
17...Be5 18.Qe3.
The method of playing flexibly and gradually gaining space seems to have worked as the annoying
threat of f2-f4 followed by e4-e5 rears its ugly head over Black’s position. For example:
18...Rad8?! 19.f4 Bf6 20.e5! dxe5? 21.Nf3!+–, and suddenly White’s advantage acquires decisive
proportions.

Obviously the above manoeuvre Bc4-d3-f1 is a bit difficult to resort to if one doesn’t know the
theory, but there was a plausible way to continue with 10.Bb3!?, which I would surely have chosen if
I had been more objective on that day, curbing my positional greed. Okay, the bishop becomes a
target on this square, but on the bright side a4 is protected and Black should waste several tempi to
grab this bishop, allowing White a pleasant space advantage. For example:
10...Nfd7 11.Be3 exd4 12.Nxd4 Nc5 13.Qf3 Nxb3 14.cxb3 Nd7 15.Rad1

276
15...Ne5!
15...Re8 16.Qg3 Ne5 17.Re2 Bh4 18.Qh2 Qc7 19.f4 Ng6 20.g4 h6 21.Nf5ƒ.
16.Qe2 f6 17.f4 Nf7 18.Qf3 Bd7 19.Nce2! Re8 20.Ng3 Bf8 21.Bf2². Having failed to assess
properly the two possibilities mentioned above, I was doomed to lose my chances for an advantage
pretty quickly:

10...Nfd7 11.Be3 exd4 12.Bxd4

I played this capture instantly. To my surprise there have been a lot of games with the unnatural
12.Qxd4 Nc5 13.Rad1 Be6! 14.Bxe6 fxe6 15.e5 d5 16.Qg4 Nbd7, but the sight alone of Black’s
superior centre and better minor pieces would be enough to deter me from taking up White here.

277
The following lines show that the position is actually not worse for White, but also confirm that for a
human it is easier to play the black side:
17.Ne2. The knight is doing nothing on c3.
After 17.Re2 Rf5! 18.Rde1 Qe8 19.Bc1 Rh5!? 20.b3 Qf7 21.Bg5! Bxg5 22.Nxg5 Qg6 23.f4
Rf8 24.Rf1 Rxf4! 25.Qxf4 Rxg5 26.Rff2 Rf5 27.Qd4 b6°. Black has full compensation for the
exchange.
17...Qe8! 18.Ng3 b5!. This is an instructive move, showing that the pawn on a4 provides Black with
a lever for counterplay quite often in such positions. 19.axb5 cxb5 20.Rd4 Qg6 21.Qxg6 hxg6∞.
According to my understanding of chess Black has the easier game, but White isn’t worse, says the
cold logic of the machines.

12...Nc5

278
13.Bxc5?!

This is a meek capture, and totally out of place if one has to remain ambitious, as was the case with
me in this game. Since my initial decision was to play the positionally greedy 10.Ba2, I should have
remained faithful to this style, burning all bridges behind me. I believe that if there are multiple plans
in a certain position, consistency in following the chosen one is a key factor for success, even if this
plan is committal or too demanding. 10.Ba2 gave an attack signal three moves ago, and now I
suddenly cancelled this signal with a pedestrian surrender of the powerful dark-squared bishop.

Intuition should have advised me that 13.Qd2!? was the only interesting way to continue, even if it
gave up a pawn. Taking it Black loses time and allows White to build some sort of attack. As shown
by the following game, it isn’t easy for Black to fathom the complications: 13...Nbxa4!. The pawn
has to be taken, or else Black would stand simply worse. 14.Nxa4 Nxa4 15.Qf4! c5! 16.Be3

279
16...Nb6? A mistake. There were two better possibilities for Black at this point.

a) 16...Nxb2 not only grabs a second pawn, but also denies the white rook the d1-square. After
17.Qg3 Be6 18.Bc1 Nc4 19.Bh6 Bf6 20.Bxc4 Bxc4 21.Rad1 d5 22.e5 Qb8!∞ the engines say that
Black should be able to survive even though his position looks scary.

b) 16...b5! is probably the best idea, toying with either ...Na4xb2 or ...c5-c4, blocking the a2-bishop.
After 17.Qg3 Ra6! 18.Bh6 Bf6 19.Rad1 Bd7! White’s pressure shouldn’t yield anything more than a
draw: 20.Bf4
The imaginative 20.Rd5!? should lead to a draw all the same after 20...c4 21.e5! dxe5 22.Red1
Nxb2 23.Rxd7 Nxd1! 24.Rxd8 Rxd8 25.Ng5 Rd4 26.Nf3 Re4 27.Ng5 Rd4=.
20...c4! Again, blocking the Ba2. 21.Bxd6 Be7 22.Bxe7 Qxe7 23.Qc7 Nc5 24.Rxd7! Nxd7 25.Rd1
Qb4 26.Rxd7 Qxb2 27.Rxf7!! Qc1+. A perpetual seals the draw at the end of the day, a quite
common occurrence nowadays in many of the deeply analysed opening lines.
27...Rxf7?? loses to 28.Qb8+ Rf8 29.Bxc4+.
Or 27...Qa1+ 28.Kh2 Rxf7 29.Qc8+ Rf8 30.Qxa6 h6!∞ (30...Qxa2? 31.Qe6+ Kh8 32.Ne5±).
28.Kh2 Rxf7 29.Qc8+ Rf8 30.Qxa6 Qxc2 31.Ne5 Qxf2 32.Qxb5 Qf4+=.

After 16...Nb6? Black’s game disintegrates rapidly: 17.Rad1 Be6 18.Bxe6 fxe6 19.Qg4 Qc8

280
20.Bg5!± Bxg5 21.Nxg5 Nc4 22.Nxe6 Rf7 23.f4 Qc6? 24.b3 Nb6 25.Ng5 Rf6 26.e5 dxe5 27.fxe5
Rg6 28.e6! h6 29.e7 Re8 30.Rd8 hxg5 31.Qf3! Qc8 32.Qf8+, and Black gave up in Dragun-Gorovets,
chess.com 2018. This is a clear case where chess maximalism was rewarded with an eventual
triumph, but when playing in such a way we must be aware that there are fewer critical junctures
where the opponent can go wrong. Even reaching those junctures might prove energy absorbing to the
utmost extent for the side who tries to dictate the play. So, don’t be misled by the nice glorifying end
of this game, things are not always as smooth as they were on this particular example for the side that
tries to impose his own “grand-style” strategy.
Let us now return to my game with Strikovic:

13...dxc5 14.Qe2

When I played this natural move, controlling the c4 square, I gradually started to realise that I had
landed in a situation where White’s chances to fight for the advantage are meagre if not nil. I actually
became somewhat pessimistic about my prospects of winning this game, as deeply inside me I felt
that my choice of taking on c5 didn’t fit with my committal yet principled 10.Ba2. Having chosen to
play aggressively, I should have continued to do so, like Dragun, as I have already explained above.
But moves cannot be retracted, and pressing realities are most often the rule rather than the exception
in games of common mortals. An objective look at the position on the board will easily explain to you
the reasons for the frustration I was experiencing:

281
White does have a structural superiority, but this is where the good news ends. The more I looked at
the position, the more I was getting aware of the strength of the enemy bishop pair, the weakness of
my a4 pawn, the need for a constant surveillance over the c4-square in order to keep the a2-bishop
alive. The bad thing in such situations is that almost every move has some defect and the position can
easily deteriorate if one decides that he is still better. Fortunately on this occasion, I didn’t fall in this
trap, nor did I blame myself too much for getting a position without real chances. And the secret of
my eventual success in the game is two-fold:

1. I first of all decided to enter a disciplined move by move mode. Knowing that my opponent had the
better piece mobility, I would have to be tactically alert and restrain it. There was simply no other
way.

2. Secondly, I focused on eliminating my opponent’s long term asset, which was the bishop pair. I
knew that my opponent’s greater overall mobility meant that I wouldn’t be able to avoid exchanges if
he wanted to force matters, so I ruled out in my mind the possibility of attacking in the middlegame
and avoiding simplification at all costs. The only vague light at the end of the tunnel was allowing or
pursuing exchanges that would:
• reduce the pressure on my weak a4-pawn;
• lead to a N vs B position, where I would have hopes to generate some play in purely Tiviakov style,
by simply exerting pressure on the light squares.

14...Qd6!

A very strong move, which has the merit of activating immediately the queen along Black’s 3rd rank.
From d6 it eyes all three possible destinations for it, namely h6, g6 and f4, whereas from c7 it would
have access only to f4, which is actually not the ideal choice.

282
Why is this so becomes evident from the line 14...Qc7 15.Rad1! Qf4 16.e5 Qf5 17.Ne4 Qg6 18.Ng3
Be6 19.Bxe6 Qxe6 20.Qe4 Rad8 21.Rxd8 Rxd8 22.Nf5ƒ, and the first player has the initiative.
Black’s queen reached the key g6-square with some delay, allowing White to organise himself
properly.

15.Qe3

I deemed it right to gain some dark square control, pinning at the same time Black’s c-pawn so that
...c5-c4 would be impossible.
After 15.Rad1 Qg6 16.Kf1 (16.Ne5 Qg5=) I didn’t like the looks of 16...Qh6! and I was right –
unsurprisingly, upon returning to my hotel after the game I discovered a bunch of correspondence
encounters from this position all ending in draws, a fact speaking volumes about the soundness of
Black’s opening.
17.Nd2!? This rare move is the best try, but all the same there is no advantage.
After the customary 17.Qd2 Qxd2 18.Nxd2 Rd8 19.Nc4 Nxc4 20.Rxd8+ Bxd8 21.Bxc4 Bc7!
22.e5 Bf5 the game should end quickly in a draw, e.g. 23.Ne4 (23.e6 Bxc2 24.exf7+ Kf8
25.Ne4 Bxe4 26.Rxe4 Bd6=) 23...Bxe5 24.Nxc5 Bf6 25.Nxb7 Bxc2 26.Nc5 Bd4 27.Re2 Bxc5
28.Rxc2 Bd4=, Pommrich-De Visser, corr. 2017.
17...Be6 18.Bxe6

283
18...Qxe6! The best move, avoiding to creating weaknesses.
A correspondence game has continued instead 18...fxe6, but I highly disapprove of this move as
it creates three pawn islands and weaknesses on the light squares for insufficient attacking
chances. After 19.Kg1! Rf6 (19...Rad8 20.Rf1 Bf6 21.e5 Bxe5 22.Qxe5 Rxd2 23.Rxd2 Qxd2
24.Qxe6+ Rf7 25.Ne4 Qd5 26.Qg4²; 19...Qg6 20.Nc4 Nxc4 21.Qxc4 Rf3 22.Rd3²) my
novelty 20.e5! seems to guarantee White an edge after some more accurate moves. (Instead, the
cautious 20.Rf1?! Raf8 21.Nc4 Nxc4 22.Qxc4 Qh4 23.Qe2 c4! 24.e5 Rf5 25.f3 Bc5+ 26.Kh1
Ba7= led to a draw after 27.Ne4 Rxe5 28.Qxc4 Bb8 29.Qe2 b5 30.b3 Rh5 31.Qe3 b4 32.Rd7
Rd5 33.Rd1 h6 34.Kg1 Rff5 35.Kf1 Rxd7 36.Rxd7 Rd5 37.Rxd5 exd5 38.Nf2 Qf4 39.Qe8+
Kh7 40.Qxc6 Qc1+ 41.Ke2 Ba7 42.Nd1 Qg5 43.g4 Qe5+ 44.Kf1 Qd4 45.Ke2 in Lejsek-
Kleiser, corr. 2011. Returning to 20.e5!, here are some lines where White seems to be doing
well:

284
 20...Rg6 (After 20...Rf5?! 21.Nce4! Rxe5 22.c4!± Black’s weaknesses and bad knight offer
White more than enough for the sacrificed pawn.) 21.Kh2! Qg5 22.g3 Rh6 23.Nf3 Qf5 24.Ng1!
Rf8 25.f4 g5 26.Rf1 Nd5 27.Nxd5 cxd5 28.fxg5 Qxg5 29.h4 Qh5 30.Rxf8+ Bxf8 31.Re1 Bg7
32.Nh3 Qxe2+ 33.Rxe2 Rh5 34.Ng5². Unfortunately for White’s chances in the variation, the
recapture 18...Qxe6! is much better:
19.e5 Rad8 20.b3 Rd7 21.Qg4 Qxg4 22.hxg4 Rfd8 23.Ke2

23...f6!. In this way Black obtains powerful counterplay, nullifying White’s structural superiority.
After 24.exf6 Bxf6 25.Nde4 Bd4= further ...c5-c4 is unstoppable, leading to a completely equal
endgame. At this point I would like to mention that I didn’t show all these lines here in order to imply
that my game choice was better than 15.Rad1, as the plain truth is that there is no advantage for White

285
no matter what he does. My intention was merely to reveal the type of play this particular structure
demands. It is noteworthy that an exchange of the bishops doesn’t bring White anything special, apart
from securing him against becoming worse, which is always a good thing to achieve in situations
where the opponent’s play looks dangerous.

15...Qg6

This move, albeit the most natural one in the position, marks the turning point of the game. Starting
with it Black will slowly drift, eventually allowing me to get a win practically out of nowhere. My
opponent, esteemed Philidor connoisseur GM Aleksa Strikovic, told me on the next day that he
couldn’t find complete equality for Black in our game, but I presume what he really meant was that
equality didn’t exist anymore after 15...Qg6, although even that is, as we shall see, debatable. Black
was certainly able to achieve comfortable play by reinforcing the positional threat of shutting the a2-
bishop out of the game. For that he had to prefer a highly unnatural move over the game continuation:
15...Qc7!!. Who on earth would think that a manoeuvre like ...Qd8-d6-c7 is the best for Black in the
given position? Well, apparently no less than seven (!) people who have used it already in their
games, the idea being introduced by Roberto Mogranzini back in 2011. The plan is simple – to defend
the Nb6 so that ...c5-c4 becomes feasible, having dragged first the white queen away from controlling
c4. But it is simple only when you see it, as it isn’t an easy decision to lose time in the opening in
such a way. To be honest, I didn’t regard 15...Qc7!! as much of a threat during the game, because I
thought “oh, the queen retreats, so I must have something”. In fact I was worried more about the
move played, as I was afraid that after the impending exchanges following Nf3-e5-c4 I would have
nothing at all in view of the awkward position of the c3-knight. That is in essence what I would like
to call the “perception of the ignorant chess player” – a guy who does face real problems, but they are
other than the ones he fears. And when his problems disappear as a result of his opponent’s
inaccuracies, he goes on to quote Paulo Coelho: “When you want something, all the universe
conspires in helping you to achieve it.”
Well, I am afraid I am going to disappoint Coelho’s fans here, but the universe has better things to do
than conspire to help us achieve something we want much. In fact, the bitter reality is something like
that:

1. In nowadays world of intense competition, when you start from a position of strength compared to
the others, your chances are still low, but slightly better than theirs.

2. Adversely, when you start from a position of weakness or equality, your chances are very small
and will require a combination of factors to convert into success, the most important one being luck.
What can we do then? In my view, not much. The extreme desire to achieve something creates
illusions and mistakes, and makes success usually even more remote that it actually was. In my view
the best attitude to achieve a target in life (or in chess) is studying things carefully and managing
one’s energy well, actually hoping that the universe will be too much occupied doing other
things rather than trying to stop us.

286
Success is never guaranteed, I want to debunk this myth here. What is guaranteed though is that we
can improve our chance of achieving it, as universe hates inflated egos. At this point I am sure many
would directly ask me: “What about the great champions of the past and present, don’t they have an
inflated ego?” In my view, even if some had, they managed at some point to curb it, before achieving
success. It was only then that their relative merits could come to the fore, aided quite often by a
certain dose of luck. These relative merits may have been talent, appetite for work, a proper
environment, good trainers, etc.
To exploit your luck, if and when it appears, you must be prepared as well as possible to use your
inherent strengths. Objectivity and restrained desire are better counsellors than an ambition without
boundaries, but the majority of people for psychological reasons fail to adhere to this truth. Thus they
waste whatever chances to achieve the target they might have had.

Now it’s time to return to pure chess. Let us see why 15...Qc7!! would have worked:
16.e5. This is a classical case where every move has a defect. This happens because Black’s long-
term asset (the bishop pair) is simply too powerful.
The alternative 16.Rad1 c4! also sees White achieving nothing in view of the threat ...Be7-b4.
Another nice point is 16.Nd2 Qe5! 17.Rad1 (17.Nc4?! Nxc4 18.Bxc4 Bd6‚; 17.f4?! Qd4
18.Nf3 Qxe3+ 19.Rxe3 c4 20.Kh2 Bb4³)

17...Qd4!! 18.Qf3 Qb4!, and the pressure on a4 and b2 gives Black very powerful counterplay.
The computer gives 19.e5 Nxa4! 20.Re4 Nxc3! 21.Rxb4 axb4 22.bxc3 Rxa2 23.Ne4 Be6
24.cxb4 cxb4 25.Qd3 h6 26.Nd6 Rfa8 27.Nxb7 R8a3 28.Qe4 Rc3 29.Nd8 Rc4 30.Qd3 Rc3
31.Qe4=.
16...c4! (16...Re8 17.Qf4!) 17.Qe2
17.b3 cxb3 18.Bxb3 Bb4 19.Red1 Be6 20.Bxe6 fxe6 21.Ne4 Nd5 22.Qg5 Rf5 23.Qg4 h5
24.Qg3 Nc3 25.Nxc3 Bxc3 26.Rab1 Raf8=.
17...Be6 18.Nd4 (18.Nd2 Bb4=) 18...Bc5! 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Ne4 Qxe5 21.Bxc4 Nxc4 22.Qxc4 Ba7

287
23.Qb3 b5=. Black’s strong piece placement and pressure against f2 nullifies his worse pawn
structure, so we may consider the chances as completely level.

16.Ne5!

As I said above, I was afraid my knight on c3 wouldn’t be a good piece after the exchanges that are
now going to take place, but I didn’t see anything better than to force them. By this point I wasn’t
thinking at all about victory, but only how to play the best moves and exchange light-squared bishops.

16...Qf6!

A strong move by Aleksa. I must mention that the Serbian Grandmaster is a seasoned player, who has
been successful in a plethora of open tournaments and is a former Yugoslav champion. He is a very
dangerous opponent with a style that is difficult to beat in either a tactical or positional fight. In view
of his great experience I knew that I couldn’t hope for any major inaccuracies, especially in an
opening like the Philidor Defence which has been his trademark for several years.
Awkward is 16...Qd6 17.f4! Qd4 18.Qxd4 cxd4 19.Ne2 Bf6 20.Nxd4 Nxa4 21.Bxf7+ Rxf7 22.Rxa4
Bxe5 23.fxe5²/=, and White maintains a tiny edge. By placing his queen on f6 Black is ready to
answer 17.f4 with 17...Bd6!, after which he would be at least equal. In view of this possibility I chose
to proceed with the intended course of trading knights.

17.Nc4 Nxc4 18.Bxc4

288
18...Be6?!

Although this isn’t a serious error, it should have been avoided. At the same time, it confirms the fact
that even strong players cannot resist the temptation to follow the conventional rules of development
when there was no real reason for them to be followed.
A stronger possibility was 18...Qe5!, when the threat ...Be7-d6 forces White to weaken himself. After
19.f4 Qd4! 20.Qxd4
Also equal is 20.b3!? Rd8 21.Kh2 Qxe3 22.Rxe3 Be6! 23.Bxe6 (23.Bd3!? f6 24.e5 f5! 25.g4 g6
26.gxf5 gxf5 27.Rg3+ Kf7 28.Rag1 Bf8!∞ reminds us that f4 can easily turn into a weakness.)
23...fxe6 24.Rd1 e5! 25.fxe5 (25.f5?! c4! 26.bxc4 Rd4³) 25...Kf7 26.Rf1+ Ke6 27.Ne2 g6= in
view of Black’s excellently centralised king.
20...cxd4 21.Ne2. Only now is the exchange of light-squared bishops strong: 21...Be6 22.Bxe6 fxe6

289
Looking at the new situation on the board we realise that Black’s pawn structure has been redeemed
and that the pressure on f4 will not let White consolidate his slight preponderance on the light
squares. For example, 23.e5!?
23.g3 e5! 24.Kg2 Bd6 25.Rad1 c5 26.c3 exf4 27.gxf4 Bxf4 28.cxd4 cxd4 29.Nxf4 Rxf4
30.Rxd4 Raf8=.
Here Black has two plausible continuations to anticipate White’s plan of bringing his king to e4 and
improving his knight as well:
23...Rad8
23...c5!? 24.g3 Ra6! 25.Red1 Kf7 26.Rab1 Rb6 27.Kf2 Rb4 28.b3 Rd8= is also excellent and
actually my preference.
24.Red1 g5! 25.g3 c5 26.Kg2 Rd5! 27.c4!? Rd7 (27...dxc3 28.bxc3²) 28.Ra3 Bd8 29.Kf3 gxf4
30.gxf4 Rg7=.

After the game’s 18...Be6?! White gets a chance to slightly improve his prospects by freeing the
important e4-square.

19.e5! Qg6 20.Bd3!

20.Bxe6 Qxe6 21.Qe4 essentially loses a tempo over what I try to achieve in the game. After
21...Rad8 22.Rad1 Black exploits the awkward position of the Nc3 in the following highly instructive
manner:

290
22...g5!! Practically isolating the e5. After 23.f4 Rxd1 24.Nxd1 f5! 25.exf6 Qxe4 26.Rxe4 Bxf6
27.fxg5 Bd4+ 28.Kh2 Rf1 29.Nc3 b5!= Black has excellent compensation for his pawn and the
ending is equal.

20...Bf5

After the game I told my opponent that 20...Qh5!? was worrying me most, avoiding the trade of the
light-squared bishops. The idea is to apply a restricting strategy of White’s pawn majority on the
kingside by utilising the bishop pair and the annoying queen. However, it seems that White can
maintain a slight plus in that case:
21.Ne2! Qh4 22.b3 Rfd8 23.f4 Rd7 24.Rab1! Rad8 25.Rf1 f5!? 26.Ng3!
Not 26.exf6?! Qxf6 27.f5 Bf7 28.Nf4 Qd4 29.Qxd4 cxd4 30.g4 Rb8! (30...Bb4 31.g5 g6
32.fxg6 hxg6 33.h4²) 31.Rfe1 Bb4 32.Re5 Re7 33.Rxe7 Bxe7=.
26...g6 27.Ne2 Bf8 28.Kh2 Qe7 29.Ng1!², and in spite of Black’s solid stand it is clear that White
has a promising middlegame initiative.

21.Bxf5 Qxf5

291
22.Qe4!

Although I felt that White shouldn’t have anything special after it, I didn’t hesitate to offer an
exchange of queens here. There was an important bonus accompanying it now as it would help me
improve the position of my knight. Then I could try to make something out of my kingside pawn
majority in the ending.

22...Qxe4

After 22...Qe6 Black would be a tempo down on the 20.Bxe6 variation, but does that represent a big
gain for White? I am not sure. The computer gives 23.Rad1 Rad8 24.f4 g6 25.Kh2 c4!? 26.g4 Rxd1
27.Rxd1 f6 28.exf6 Rxf6 29.Rd4 Qxe4 30.Rxe4 Bd6 31.Ne2 g5 32.Kg2 gxf4 33.Nd4 f3+ 34.Nxf3
b5„, and it seems to me White has very little.

23.Nxe4 Rfd8

292
Although the game is still within drawing boundaries, a comparison to the opening stage where Black
still had his bishop pair should be enough to convince anyone that the second player had slipped from
the right path. During that period Black missed a number of possibilities that would have hindered me
to consolidate my structural superiority. Now I’m very close to achieving that. My next move sets a
positional trap but, nevertheless, was not the best:

24.Rad1

24.f4!² was correct, defending the e5-pawn and preparing to improve the king. There is no hurry to
contest the d-file. Besides, keeping the rook on a1 prevents any ...b7-b5 ideas.

24...Rd5?!

A rather serious inexactitude, weakening Black’s light squares.

24...b5!= would have revealed the weak sides of my last move. It is logical for Black to gain space on
the queenside and to put everything harmoniously on light squares there, hoping perhaps to undouble
the c-pawns. The best the engines can find is 25.Kf1 Kf8 26.Nc3 Rd4 27.axb5 cxb5 28.Rxd4 cxd4
29.Nxb5 Rb8 30.Nxd4 Rxb2 31.Ra1 Bc5 32.c3 Bb6 33.f4 g6 34.g3 f6 35.exf6 Kf7, which is
obviously quite drawish.

293
25.Rxd5!

My opponent probably missed this move, which is obviously the whole point behind 24.Rad1. The
idea is that the knight will find now an unassailable post on b5, putting Black under unpleasant
positional pressure.

25...cxd5 26.Nd6 Kf8

26...Bxd6? 27.exd6 b6 28.Re7 Rb8 29.Rc7± is obviously a bad rook endgame for Black.

27.Nb5 c4 28.Rd1 Rd8 29.Kf1 Bc5 30.f4²

294
From a middle game where I was struggling to find a reason to play on, a pleasant endgame for me
has arisen. In spite of improving his pawns, Black is confronted with an arduous task in view of his
compromised light squares and inflexible queenside pawn structure. Although I have no direct clue
why this has happened, I am almost certain that Black relaxed as a result of his good position in the
opening, abounding in interesting possibilities. Had he been in a move by move mode, he would have
at least succeeded to get something concrete in return for allowing the exchange of his best minor
pieces. Obviously he didn’t pay much attention to the details, drifting slowly into a worse position.
Now it seemed that I was going to make good use of my advantage and play a good game, which
fortunately I did.

30...Ke7 31.Ke2 f6 32.exf6+!?

This gives White the best winning chances. 32.Nc3 is answered strongly by 32...d4 33.Ne4 b6
34.exf6+ gxf6 35.g4 Kf7 36.h4
36.Kf3 d3!, intending 37.c3 Re8 38.f5 h5 39.gxh5 Re5 40.Kf4 Bf8!=.
36...Re8 37.Kf3 h5 38.gxh5 f5 39.Ng3 Re3+ 40.Kg2 Kf6„.

32...Kxf6!

32...gxf6? would be bad here in view of the simple 33.c3± and Black finds it hard to cope with the
weakness of the d5-pawn.

33.Kf3

295
33...Rd7?

If we want to be fair, Black’s only real mistake in the game is this one, leaving the c5-bishop
unprotected.
He had to choose instead the slightly counter-intuitive 33...b6! which may be putting one more
queenside pawn on a dark square yet has the important merit of defending the Bc5. This detail should
have saved Black, as the following lines demonstrate:
34.c3
If 34.g4, then 34...d4! 35.Ke4 Re8+ 36.Kd5 Re2 37.c3 dxc3 38.Nxc3 Rxb2 39.Ne4+ Ke7=
brings about a balanced rook ending.
34...Re8. Imperative and strong enough. After 35.Nd4 Bxd4! 36.Rxd4 Ke6 37.g4 Kd6 38.f5 b5!
39.axb5 Rb8 40.g5 Rxb5 41.Rd2 Rb3 42.Kg4 a4 43.Rf2
43.Re2 a3! 44.bxa3 Rxc3 45.f6 gxf6 46.gxf6 Rc1!=.
43...Kd7 44.f6 gxf6 45.gxf6 Ke8 46.Rc2 Kf7 47.Kf5 a3 48.bxa3 Rxa3 49.Ke5 Ra1= the draw
becomes apparent. In spite of the fact the game would still be drawn by 33...b6!, I will still insist that
it was Aleksa’s attitude in the earlier part of the game that cost him the half point. There is no point in
blaming oneself when it comes down to finding an “only move” instead of having used a number of
good choices when they were available. To do this one needs not to vacillate, but employ instead the
weapon of intensified move by move mode when he feels that the position is good enough.

34.Nc3!

Now Black cannot push ...d5-d4 because his bishop is hanging, and this detail makes a huge
difference.

34...Ke6 35.Re1+ Kf7 36.Re5 Bd4?!

296
36...d4 37.Rxc5 dxc3 38.bxc3 Rd2± would have put up a better fight, but the ending is lost for Black
in the long run.

37.Rxd5 Rxd5 38.Nxd5 Bxb2 39.Nb6+–

It’s all over as the knight is way stronger than the bishop in this particular position. The remaining
moves were:

39...c3 40.Nc4 b5 41.axb5 a4 42.b6 a3 43.b7 a2 44.b8Q a1=Q 45.Ne5+ 1-0

At this point Black stopped the clock. This has been one of the most difficult games for me to
comment in the book, and I am not even sure if I have done it well, but I guess it is time to make a
few conclusions out of it.

A. From time to time we’ll be facing positions where some annoying long-term asset of our opponent
will prevent us from generating real play.

B. These positions require patience and a strategy designed to defuse or extinguish that asset.
Exchanges should not be avoided as long as they help us get rid of that asset. If our opponent
acquiesces in that without getting anything concrete in return, that often signals the point where he
starts drifting.

C. Last but not least: It is of course a blessing for most chess players to avoid positions of the type
described above, and there are two ways it could be done. I’d rather recommend the method of
playing flexibly rather than the method of playing in grand style. It is breathtaking to play like
Chigorin, Pilsbury or Tal, but one will be more successful to follow the less committal styles of

297
Steinitz, Capablanca and Karpov, as they offer more opportunities. With these comments I’d like to
seal this short chapter, knowing I haven’t covered all I could. But a chess book has limitations and it’s
time to move to the next topic.

298
Chapter 6

Overpressing
You need not play well – just help your opponent to play badly.
Genrikh Chepukaitis

Kramnik – Shankland

Wijk aan Zee 2019

Our next topic touches the causes and consequences of overpressing in equal or approximately equal
positions, so it has mostly a psychological profile.
As many of you might already be aware of, I have stated many times at different points of my career
that chess is much more drawish than other sports. A direct effect of this more or less widely accepted
state of facts is that a lot of chess players feel in a way “trapped” inside the game’s drawish tendency,
wishing its character were sufficiently sharper to allow them display their talent or, if you so prefer,
reward their willingness to play for a win. On the other hand, there is a sort of contradiction in the
souls and minds of chess players – although many of us wished they gave more opportunities to play
for a win, at the same time we appreciate the rules of chess as they were forged through the evolution
of centuries, considering them part of a well-knit tradition. We love castling, we love stalemate, we
love the fact material doesn’t always prevail, etc. We also love the classical starting piece
configuration. There is some sort of amazing flavour of harmony in classical chess that cannot be
found in the versions of Fischerandom, for example. In the end, chess as we know it always emerges
the victor and its drawish tendency is something we decide to live with because in my humble
opinion we consider the game in its current widespread form a kind of highest spiritual property we
don’t want to abolish. Even if its competitive side becomes narrower and narrower and will
undoubtedly shrink completely some day. Those things said, living with chess’ drawish tendency
doesn’t automatically mean that ambitious players won’t try to beat it in over the board play. In
professional chess sphere a lot of preparation is done before the game, with the sole aim of creating
chances during the opening phase, and a lot of energy is consumed during the encounter in order to
preserve them and turn them into something tangible. But the latter isn’t necessarily what we call
“overpressing”.
The issue of “overpressing” typically makes its appearance when the higher rated or more ambitious
player fails to realise either:

• that an equilibrium has been reached (he mistakenly thinks he is better), or

• that the equilibrium which arose is plain enough for the opponent to maintain, so any attempt to
break it by violent or exuberant means will rebound on the offender.

299
To fight convincingly against this problem one needs to have the following qualities:
1. Proper position evaluation, which is the first step towards making the right decisions.
2. Enough discipline and humility to accept that playing well isn’t an exclusive privilege of
himself/herself.
3. Maturity to take from life what is offered by it.
4. Ability to seek comfort in the thought that not every day will be like this and that more
opportunities will arise in the future.
5. A developed sense of danger, based on past experience, which will prevent him from repeating the
same mistakes over and over again.

What happens in the next example is rather exceptional for this level of chess, but still something
which can be explained if we take into account that extreme ambition can dim (if not erase
completely) one’s judgement – a former world champion refuses to make a simple draw and ruins his
game, completely blinded by his absolute desire to win. There is no doubt in my mind that Vladimir
Kramnik developed all five of the above-mentioned qualities during the course of his brilliant chess
career, but in this case we have something else, at least according to my own perception of the
situation: From some point on, Volodya simply doesn’t play the game. He only thinks about winning,
and this creates a state of mind and soul where none of the above qualities can be used. One could
say, contradicting my view, that in this game he lacked quality #2, but then again, how can someone
possess a certain quality one day and lose it the next one? This can hardly happen. My final verdict is
that the 14th World Champion didn’t even sit back to evaluate the position at the critical moment
where he lost the thread. He entered this game as a clear favourite, obtained a nearly decisive
advantage at some point, lost it, and then simply ceased playing. In the concluding phase of the
struggle he was only making some moves.

So, first and foremost, it is of highest importance to enter a chess struggle free of considerations that
could at some point disconnect you from it.

These could be personal problems or a desire to win at all costs, so an effort should be made before
the game to isolate oneself from them. Failing to do that can have similar consequences to the ones
we witness below:

1.c4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.g3 g6 4.Qa4 d4 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.d3 Nd7 7.0-0 Nh6 8.Nbd2 0-0 9.b4 e5 10.c5 a6
11.Nc4 f6 12.Qb3 Nf7 13.e3 dxe3 14.Bxe3 Kh8

300
Sam Shankland is already an accomplished super-GM and one of the most promising players the
United States have produced in the past few years, but in this game he has not fared well in the
opening: It would be no exaggeration to say that Kramnik has completely outplayed him in only 14
moves. Black has a disadvantage in space and a whole set of dark square weaknesses (a5, b6, d6)
which could be easily accessed by White if the position opened up. Kramnik doesn’t make the most
out of his chances:

15.Rae1

15.Rad1! was the best choice, placing the rook in the most natural way, opposite to the black queen.
White would have obtained a considerable advantage in that case as the following variations show:
15...Re8
Black is also much worse after 15...Qe7 16.Rfe1 Rd8 17.d4 e4 18.Nfd2 f5 in view of the
following typical break, opening up the position: 19.f3! Nf6 20.Nb6 Be6 21.Ndc4 Ra7 22.Bf4!
a5 23.fxe4 fxe4 24.Bxe4 axb4 25.Bf3 g5 26.Bc1 Re8 27.Qxb4 Rxa2 28.Qb1 Ra6 29.Bg2±.
Black’s men are awkwardly placed and White dominates the centre.
16.Rfe1 Nf8 17.d4 e4 18.Nfd2 f5 19.Nb6 Be6 20.Ndc4 Rb8 21.Bf4 Nd7 22.Qa3 Bxc4 23.Nxc4 Rc8
24.Na5±. With the a5-knight exerting strong pressure over Black’s queenside, and both d4-d5, f2-f3
being valuable breakthrough options, White’s advantage is close to acquiring decisive proportions
here. I would really be surprised if Black has some way to improve on these lines as his position in
the diagram above looks pretty depressing.

15...Re8

301
16.Na5?

This move already illustrates that Kramnik was not concentrated on that day. It relaxes Whte’s grip
on the squares d6, b6, giving Black a chance to organise himself better. I’m tempted to describe this
move as inflexible and pushing to finish the game quickly. It considerably decreases White’s
possibilities.
16.d4! was begging to be played. After 16...e4 17.Nfd2 f5 18.f3! it will be impossible in the long run
to resist White’s pressure. For example, 18...exf3 19.Nxf3 Nf6 20.Nb6 Be6 21.Qb2 Ra7

22.d5!! Bxd5
Or 22...Nxd5 23.Bd4+–.

302
23.Nxd5 cxd5 24.Bd4±, and White’s powerful centralisation, aided by Black’s multiple weak points,
should carry the day.

16...Re7!²

A multipurpose move, preparing ...Qd8-e8 if required. The rook will also be able to defend the
weakness on b7 now.

17.d4 e4 18.Nd2 f5 19.d5?

A terrible move. Kramnik’s previous actions were all designed to prepare f2-f3 and suddenly he
changes his mind, for no apparent reason. White’s choice literally blunders away control of the e5-
square into Black’s hands, turning the position into a more pleasant one for the second player.

19.Nac4 Nf6 20.Nb6 Be6 21.Qc2 Rb8 22.Bf4 Nd5 23.Nxd5 Bxd5 24.Bxb8 Qxb8 25.f3!² had to be
tried at all costs although it is clear that White’s advantage isn’t that serious anymore. The main idea
is that 25...e3?! , intending to follow up with ...f5-f4, is answered strongly with 26.f4! e2 27.Rf2 Bxd4
28.Bxd5 cxd5 29.Qd3 Bxf2+ 30.Kxf2±, and White will recover his pawn with a better position.

What follows from now on is a tussle full of errors where Black’s advantage varies from being small
to almost decisive, until near the time control Shankland returns the favour and grants Kramnik a
small edge.

19...cxd5 20.Qxd5 Qe8 21.c6 Nf6 22.Qc5?! bxc6 23.Ndc4 Be6 24.Rc1 Bd5µ 25.Bd4 Rb8?! 26.a4?
Re6 27.Nb6 Bf8 28.Qc3 Kg8 29.Nac4 Nd7 30.a5 Nd6?

30...Bxc4 31.Qxc4 Nde5 32.Qxa6 Bxb4µ.

31.Nxd6 Bxd6 32.Rfd1 Nxb6 33.axb6 Be5 34.Bxe5 Rxe5 35.Qe3 Qf7 36.Ra1 Qb7 37.Qd4 Re7
38.b5

303
38...cxb5?

A very strange decision.

After 38...Qxb6 39.Qxb6 Rxb6 40.bxa6 Ra7 41.Bf1 Kf7 42.Be2 Ke6 43.Kf1 Kd6³ only Black can
have winning chances. White’s passed pawn is well blocked and Black can prepare an advance of the
kingside mass at his leisure, having good chances to make something out of his extra pawn.
Looking at the game over and over again, I started to get the impression that both players were keen
on pleasantly surprising each other upon every turn till one finally accepted the gift offered and
turned it into a full point!

39.Qxd5+ Qxd5 40.Rxd5 Rxb6

304
41.Rd8+?!

Another very strange decision, this time by Vladimir. Under normal circumstances I would have
expected him to follow with 41.Bf1², immobilising Black’s pawns, followed up perhaps by Bf1-e2,
h2-h4 and some long squeeze that could have offered him some chances to win. Instead, quite
uncharacteristically, he rushes to win a pawn, allowing Black dynamic counterplay:

41...Kf7 42.Ra8 Ree6 43.Ra7+?! (43.f3!?) 43...Kf6 44.Rxh7 b4 45.Rc7?! b3 46.Bf1 Rec6?!

The comedy of errors continues. 46...a5!³/µ would have once again improved Black’s winning
chances.

47.Rxc6+ Rxc6 48.Rb1 Rb6 49.Bc4 b2

We have finally reached the point where the two contestants would be expected to sign a peace
agreement, but this was not meant to be:

50.Ba2?

I vividly recall that while watching the game on the Chess24 server I almost fell from my chair here.
Okay, I can understand one’s desire to win, but I cannot see any fun in destructing oneself in this way
against a 2700 player. To be honest, I would hardly consider playing like this even against a 1500
player nowadays, although in the past I have done worse.

The trivial 50.Bxa6 Rxa6 51.Rxb2 would have led to an immediate draw, but Kramnik ignored it. I
don’t know if this was a result of frustration for failing to capitalise on a huge opening advantage
earlier on, but I do know that such a decision doesn’t have any rational basis for a player of this

305
calibre. In my view, at this stage he was not even gambling, because in a gamble you have some
slight chances to emerge the winner. Here there isn’t one in a million chance for White to win after
the black pawn reaches a3, and there is no way to stop the pawn reaching that square:

50...a5 51.Kf1?–+

A trivial move sealing White’s doom.

51.f3! would have given White a few survival chances by trying to break up the enemy pawn chain
and exchange some material. But White is “playing for a win”, so he cannot exchange any material...

51...a4 52.Ke2 a3 53.Kd2 Rc6 54.h4 Ke5 55.Re1 Kd4 56.Bb1 Rc3 57.Rh1 Rd3+!? 58.Kc2 Rc3+
59.Kd2 Rf3 60.Ke2

60...Rd3!

With his king cut off White cannot prevent ...♔d4-c3-b3, so it’s game over. He is essentially
zugzwanged, as moving the rook along the first rank will deprive him of his only chance of
counterplay, namely h4-h5.
This advance is the reason Black avoided the inaccurate 60...Kc3 at this point because after 61.h5
gxh5 62.Rxh5 Kd4 63.Rh1 White gets some activity, which complicates the winning process.

61.h5 gxh5 62.Ke1

62.Rxh5 Rc3! (here we see the point of not “filling” the c3 square immediately with the king) 63.Rh1
(63.Rxf5 Rc1 64.Ba2 Ra1–+) 63...Rc1 64.Rd1+ Kc3 65.Ba2 Ra1–+ is curtains.

62...Rc3 63.Kd2 f4! 64.Ba2

306
64.gxf4 Rc1 65.Rxc1 bxc1=Q+ 66.Kxc1 h4–+ sees the h-pawn queening.

64...e3+ 65.fxe3+ fxe3+ 66.Ke2 Rc2+ 0-1

At this point Vladimir resigned rather than allow the conclusion 67.Kf3 Rf2#.

I think the lesson to be learnt from this incident is basically the following:
It is important that we enter the chess game without thinking too much of the result. To do that, we
need to be physically and mentally well-prepared, two factors which will prevent us from being
biased against draws. In this way overpressing will be avoided in our games, especially in positions
that don’t hold the slightest chance of winning. And remember, if by chance it works one time, it’s
actually bad luck rather than good luck for us because we will be tempted to do it again. And believe
me, it’s not worth repeating.

307
 Mamedyarov – Ding

FIDE Candidates, Berlin 2018

In the example that follows we see again two world class players crossing swords, this time in what
can be perceived as the strongest tournament in the world, a Candidate’s Tournament. In such
competition players who are in contention are often in dire need of a crucial win at the final stages,
obviously because the stakes are too high and this win could secure for them realisation of the
ultimate dream in a chess player’s life, a match for the world champion’s crown. Special situations
demand special measures they say, so I think these are perhaps the only cases where one can be
justified in overpressing, provided there is of course a minimum of decent fight still left in the
position and perhaps some slight asymmetry which could be used to create chances even if the
position is simplified.

In my view, there are two main methods of overpressing: the method of dragging things out (even if
that involves some concessions) and the method of using a violent chance that could shake the quiet
character of the game and perhaps at the same time the opponent’s confidence. Sometimes only one
of these two methods will be available. In case a choice exists, the method of overpressing should be
chosen mostly according to the weaknesses of our opponent. They could vary from temporary to
permanent, or from psychological to a weak point in one’s knowledge or ability to focus. Scrutinising
the above sentence, we are bound to discover a main thing about overpressing, which can be used as a
guiding principle for such situations:

We cannot carry out a successful overpressing operation without analysing first our opponent’s
strengths, weaknesses and overall personality.

Since overpressing is by nature associated with not so objective considerations, an assessment of the
above features will surely help. In the rare case real weaknesses cannot be detected in our opponent’s
profile, we should strictly base our play on the moment’s intuition or our own relative strengths,
putting it well into our mind that when we enter such a situation failure is an option. However, it is
not an irresponsible ploy which doesn’t stand any chance of success, but a calculated risk.

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 c5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e4 Nxc3 7.bxc3 cxd4 8.cxd4 Bb4+ 9.Bd2
Bxd2+ 10.Qxd2 0-0 11.Bc4 Nd7 12.0-0 b6 13.Rad1 Bb7 14.Rfe1 Rc8 15.Bb3 Re8 16.h3 Nf6
17.Qf4 Nh5 18.Qh2 h6 19.Ne5 Nf6 20.Qf4 b5 21.Re3 Rc7 22.Nd3 Rc3 23.Nc5 Rxe3 24.Qxe3 Bc6
25.Rc1 Qb6 26.f3 Rd8 27.Kf2 a5

308
We join the game after Black’s 27th move in the crucial game of the 12th round, at a stage where
Shakriyar Mamedyarov was the only of the two players with realistic prospects to win the event. Ding
Liren had already produced a long string of draws, winning none and losing none, a fact which had
basically deprived him of a chance to be Magnus Carlsen’s next challenger. So the pressure was all
on Shakhriyar to achieve something out of the diagram position which I will do my best to evaluate
below:

• Looking first of all at the kings, we can state without any doubt that they are both safe enough.
There are not many pieces left for either side to justify a realistic attack, but we can notice that if
an ending arises, the white king will probably be the more active of the two.
• Material equality reigns on the board. As regards to the mobility of the pieces we notice that White
has the more impressively placed knight, but it can always be challenged by its counterpart, so we
cannot consider this as a permanent asset. In addition, both bishops bite on granite, but Black
should worry little about the state of his own as it isn’t his duty to attack. He can always pull it
back to e8 where it would stand well, supporting the queenside pawns.
• The pawn structures are asymmetrical. Black has made some progress on the queenside by
advancing his majority there, while the same cannot be said for White as he hasn’t managed to
launch a kingside attack nor has he obtained a passed d-pawn, a typical object to pursue in the
Semi-Tarrasch Variation.
• White has a slight advantage in space, but should at the same time be careful so that his d-pawn
doesn’t become a weakness.

Overall, this appears to be a plain plan equality where Black has perhaps the more pleasant game as a
result of his queenside pawn majority. His main plan, arising from the nature of the position, is to
push his queenside pawns, but a valuable supplement is the idea of exchanging knights, as that not
only weakens d4, but also considerably facilitates the intended advance.

309
White’s task, on the other hand, is much more difficult and complicated due to the fact his ideas in
the given position require more energy. He shouldn’t be in any danger if he adopts a restrictive
strategy involving the move a2-a3, but that would only be good enough for a draw as it would invite
liquidations.
His main problem is that advancing his kingside pawns in order to attack would leave space gaps
behind, difficult enough to manage considering that there are not many pieces left on the board. If we
add to that the need to avoid trading pieces and at the same time contain Black’s queenside majority,
then we realise the full extent of the problem and that he has to walk a very narrow path trying to
balance between logic and ambition.

28.g4

A plausible enough continuation, considering the tournament situation. “Shak” was undoubtedly
aware at this point that he was burning some bridges by proceeding in this way against the cautious
Ding. On the other hand, circumstances required some extra bravery which this move exhibits.
The move almost any GM would reject in such a situation is the solid yet meek 28.a3:
After 28...a4! 29.Bd1 b4! 30.axb4 Qxb4 31.Nxe6 fxe6 32.Rxc6 Rxd4 33.Be2 e5= it’s more or less
clear that White, albeit not in danger, cannot try to win anymore. Black’s pieces are active enough to
keep the status quo, and the reduced material is an extra factor that denies White’s hope.

Another possibility was 28.Nxe6!?:

This sacrifice complies nicely with the logic of further unbalancing the play, and has unsettling value
as well. Its disadvantage is that a lot of material goes off the board and that some forced moves will
be made quickly. The main question to ask oneself before cutting the Gordian Knot like this is: “Are
there any real chances for my opponent to go wrong here?”

310
To answer this question we undoubtedly need to switch to calculations before making the sacrifice. I
am sure that Mamedyarov did it and realised that at the end of the forced line 28...fxe6 29.Bxe6+ Kf8
30.d5 Qxe3+ 31.Kxe3 Bd7 32.Bxd7 his chances would be meagre to beat a player like Ding. In fact
the draw is rather trivial after either recapture:
32...Nxd7! I presume this is what most people would play, preparing to manoeuvre to knight to better
squares.
Black should also draw after 32...Rxd7!? 33.Kd4 Ke7 34.Rc6 Nh5! 35.Re6+ Kf7 36.Rb6 b4
37.Ra6 Nf4 38.Rxa5 Nxg2 39.e5 Nf4 40.Ke4 g5 41.e6+ Nxe6 42.dxe6+ Kxe6 43.Ra6+ Ke7
44.Rxh6 Rd2°.
33.Rc7 Ke8 34.Kd4

This is definitely a position where only a much weaker player could lose his cool and commit
mistakes, so in my view Shakhriyar was right in avoiding it against the solid Ding. Black simply
draws by distracting the white rook from the c-file:
34...a4! 35.Rb7
After 35.e5 even 35...Nf8= is enough, but of course 35...b4 36.d6 b3= is the most direct.
35...Rc8 36.Rxb5 Rc2 37.e5 Rd2+ 38.Ke3 Rxg2 39.e6 Rxa2 40.exd7+ Kxd7=.

28...a4!

The exclamation mark isn’t because the move is difficult, but merely because it is incisive. It
accomplishes the following tasks:
• Advances the majority.
• Tries to create a momentum.
• Last but not least, poses White a dilemma.

311
29.Bc2?!

Which White fails to solve. Well, if you check with a computer the text move and the alternative
29.Bd1!, it will probably rate them as of equal value, but by human standards the latter was the best
possibility because it would have given Black more options to go wrong. The point is that when the
bishop retreats to d1 the c-file is kept clear for the rook, so 29...Nd7 30.Nd3! Bb7
30...Nf6? 31.d5+– makes clear the reason for keeping the c-file open.
31.Be2 would have produced a position where at least there are some traps for Black to avoid and
where White is ensured of a relatively prolonged fight:

31...b4!. This move is already not trivial, and it is quite likely Black would have been tempted to

312
make a more solid, yet inferior choice:
31...Nf6 is, for example, okay for White because he can follow up with 32.Rb1!² with some
slight pressure, arising from the fact he has arranged his pieces optimally by directing their fire
against b5. This is really a position complicated enough for the opponent to make a mistake.
31...Rc8?! is actually even worse due to 32.Rxc8+ Bxc8 33.Nb4! Qd6 34.Qc3! Nf8 35.e5²/±
and White dominates in the ending.
Returning to 31...b4!, after 32.Rb1 Black has 32...b3! 33.axb3 Ba6 (33...Rc8!? 34.d5 Qc7!= should
also be equal.) 34.Nc5 Bxe2 35.Nxa4 Qc7! 36.Qxe2 Qh2+ 37.Ke3 Qxh3„, when he should be able
to secure a draw by perpetual sooner or later as the white king is out in the open.

29...Nd7!

This move emphasizes the fact that White’s 29.Bc2?! was listless. When overpressing becomes a
necessity, the player who is the pressing side becomes an acrobat walking a tight rope and each of his
actions must (regardless of being right or wrong) at least give some reasons for the crowd to stay
breathless. This apparently isn’t the case here, and Black hurries to exploit White’s inexactitude by
expelling the annoying intruder.

30.Bd3?

An error that crosses the drawing zone. But what really annoys me is that Shak resorts to it without
any logical justification as it is evident that Black will get the upper hand after the exchange of
knights in a position where it is practically impossible for him to make mistakes.
30.Nd3! was imperative, keeping things under control. It is widely known that the side with a space
advantage should avoid exchanges, and this case is no exception. After 30...Bb7!
30...Nf8 31.d5 Qxe3+ 32.Kxe3 exd5 33.Bxa4= or 30...Nf6 31.d5 Qxe3+ 32.Kxe3 exd5 33.e5
d4+ 34.Kf2 Nd5 35.Bxa4 Nc3 36.Bb3∞ arise positions where there is still some play.

313
31.Bb1 Rc8!
31...b4!? 32.Rc4 b3 33.axb3 a3∞ deserves consideration.
32.Rxc8+ Bxc8³/=. White cannot bolster b4 by 33.a3? due to 33...Qd6!, but any other reasonable
33rd move such as 33.h4 or 33.d5 maintains good drawing chances in a position which didn’t hold
anymore promise for something better.

30...Nxc5 31.Rxc5 b4µ

The situation has drastically changed. The trade of knights has acted like a magic wand, highlighting
Black’s strengths and exposing all of White’s weaknesses. I will not comment on the remaining
moves as they are not important from our topic’s point of view, but it has to be said that Ding
converts with admirable accuracy:

32.Bc4 Bd7 33.g5? hxg5 34.Qxg5 Be8 35.Qe7 b3! 36.axb3 a3–+ 37.b4 Ra8 38.d5 a2 39.dxe6 a1Q
40.exf7+ Bxf7 41.Bxf7+ Kh7 42.Qh4+ Qh6 43.Rh5 Qa7+! 0-1

At the end of this example there isn’t much else to conclude apart from the obvious fact that even
overpressing has its own rules. Two most important ones we have witnessed under this game are:

A. Avoid exchanges when you are over-extended.

B. Keep the opponent plagued with alternatives, as many as possible. That will often be achieved by
making flexible, multipurpose moves such as the one Mamedyarov missed on his 29th turn here.

314
 Ding – Radjabov

Wijk aan Zee 2019

The next game I want to show you started with the quite Catalan Opening sequence
1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.0-0 Be7 5.d4 0-0 6.c4 dxc4 7.Qc2 a6 8.Qxc4 b5 9.Qc2 Bb7 10.Bd2
Be4 11.Qc1 Bb7 12.Rd1 Qc8 13.Ba5 c5 14.dxc5
which has already been tested a few times in the course of chess history. Black’s next is a natural
novelty, wishing to improve on the previously played 14...Qxc5:

14...Bxc5

This is one of those much debated structures where White seems to have nothing, but there is always
a little bit of pressure on the queenside as Black is potentially weak on c6, c5 and b5, so he needs to
display reasonable caution. Let us see how attack and defence balanced each other:

15.Nbd2 Nbd7 16.Nb3 Ba7 17.Qf4

White starts to gain space. The idea is to eye c7 and centralise the Ra1. Meanwhile the queen gets
closer to the diagonal h1-a8 where it will be needed later, to dispute the c6-square.

315
17...Nb6!?

17...Bd5 was possible, but Black wants to play concretely, without moving the same piece again.
Now the knight eyes important squares, so White feels obliged to swap it.

18.Bxb6 Bxb6 19.Rac1 Qe8 20.Ne5 Bxg2 21.Kxg2

Stage 1 has been completed. The c6-square has been weakened, and White is focusing on it with three
units – rook, knight and queen. Still, that is not much as the b6-bishop is restricting the b3-knight. To
win in chess you require quite often more than merely one nice square.

21...Rd8!?

21...Rc8 was also not bad. In that case after 22.Qf3 there is an instructive follow up:
22...Rxc1 23.Rxc1 Qb8! 24.Nc6 Qd6. White looks better, but he does not have anything special as
his knights are kept under surveillance.

22.Rxd8 Qxd8 23.Qf3!?

White wants to direct his knights to c5, apparently being convinced that 23.Nc6 Qd7 24.Qf3 Qd6
(reaching the same position as mentioned after 21...Rc8 above) offers him nothing.

23...Qd6 24.Nd3 Nd5

This shields the pressure to c6 and challenges White to weaken his position with e2-e4. Black seems
to have equalised, but practically remains the slightly weaker side as an exchange of the d5-knight

316
would accentuate the weaknesses in his camp.

25.Nbc5

25.Nf4!? Ne7! guards everything. As mentioned immediately above, in general Black wants to keep
the knight as it is a good piece for covering weaknesses. It’s important that Black is not afraid of the
“ghost” penetration 26.Qb7 here as then 26...a5 27.Nd3 Rb8 pushes White back and keeps the
equilibrium, e.g. 28.Qe4 h6=. To discard such superficial attempts, one has to be in full move by
move mode.

25...a5! 26.Ne4 Qb8 27.h4

A principled move, gaining space. I like the direct 27.Nc3!? trying to exchange the best black
defensive piece for reasons outlined above. But Black had probably assessed that 27...Rd8! keeps the
gates to his camp closed and even gives some counterplay on f2 after 28.Nxd5 Rxd5=.
Weaker alternatives are:
a) 27...Ne7 28.Nxb5 Bxf2 29.Qxf2 Qxb5 30.Qc5 Qb7+ 31.Kf2²;
b) 27...Nxc3 28.Rxc3 Bd4! (28...Rc8?! 29.Ne5! with initiative) 29.Rc6 Rc8 30.h4²/=.

27...h6

317
28.b3!?

A useful move, defending the b-pawn and passing the onus on the opponent. White of course saw that
this move weakened his own c3-square, but realised there is no other way to make progress, so he
embarked on the double-edged game method of disputing the queenside light squares. For that he had
of course to evaluate that he would at least be not worse. I repeat, in such situations one has to be in
full move by move mode or he can easily drift.

28...b4!

Definitely not easy! Another pawn is put to the square of the bishop. But Black plays in move by
move mode too, taking concrete decisions. He undoubtedly envisaged the possibility of a subsequent
...f7-f5 here, gaining c3 for his knight.

29.Rc4!

Preventing the isolation of this rook – 29.Nb2 Bd4 30.Nc4 f5!= is not a problem for Black.

29...Rd8

318
30.g4!?

Once again, this is sound pressing! Space is the key, remember? However, in conquering it one has to
make sure that the problems it entails are not exploitable by the opponent, and the text surely
demanded deep calculation. Playing this way White weakens both the h4- and f4-squares, so he
needed a solution to:

30...Ne7! 31.g5! Ng6 32.Qg3!

Signalling the end of Stage 2. Now that the black knight has been dragged away from the queenside,
White is ready to trade queens and exploit whatever chances he has there.

32...Qxg3+ 33.fxg3 Ne7!

Of course the knight quickly returns. A long endgame now ensues where the fight goes on unabated:

34.g4 hxg5 35.Nxg5 Nd5 36.Kf3

36.Rc6!? was slightly more interesting at this point. However, Black has an excellent idea which I am
sure he would have found: 36...Rd7!. Preparing to trade rooks via c7. This practically draws, e.g.
37.Kf3 Rc7 38.Rd6 Kf8 39.e4 Ke7 40.Nxf7 Rc3 41.exd5 Rxd3+ 42.Ke2 (42.Ke4 Rxd5 43.Rxb6
Kxf7=) 42...Rxd5 43.Rxd5 exd5 44.Ne5 Ke6 45.Nf3 Ba7 46.Kd3 Bc5

319
47.h5
47.Nd4+ Ke5 48.Nf5 g6 49.Ne3 Kf4 50.h5 gxh5 51.gxh5 Bxe3 52.h6 Bc1 53.Kc2 Be3= is a
funny line.
47...Kf6 48.g5+ Kf5 49.h6
49.g6 Bb6=, intending 50.Ne5? Kg5µ.
49...gxh6 50.gxh6 Kg6 51.Ng5 Kxh6 52.Ne6 Bb6 53.Nf4 Kg5 54.Nxd5 Bd8 55.Kc4 Kf5 56.Kb5
Ke4 57.Nb6 Kd4 58.Nc4 Kc3 59.Nxa5 Kb2 60.Kxb4 Be7+=.

36...Be3 37.Ne4

37...g6!

320
Once again, a fearless decision based on a move by move approach. Black wants to improve his king
and make White’s h-pawn weak, so he spurns considerations as “oh, ...g7-g6 weakens my f6-square,
so let’s look at something else”. That said, his last move was probably visualised well in advance as
other moves would leave him worse.
38.Nf6+
38.g5 Kg7 39.Ne5 Bb6 40.Nc5 (40.Rc6 Bd4=) 40...Rh8 41.e4 Bxc5 42.Rxc5 Nc3 43.Rxa5 Rxh4
44.Ra7 Nxe4 45.Rxf7+ Kg8 46.Rb7 Nxg5+ 47.Kg3 Re4 48.Nc6 Re2 49.Nxb4 Nf7 50.Rd7 Kg7
51.Rd3 Re5 52.a4 Rc5= was no better.
38...Nxf6 39.Kxe3 Nd5+ 40.Kf3 Kg7 41.g5 Rh8 42.e3 Nb6 43.Rd4 Nd5 44.Ne5 f6!
Exchanging pawns shakes White’s space advantage and brings the game closer to the draw.

45.Nc4 fxg5 46.hxg5 Rf8+ 47.Kg4 Rf2 48.e4 Nc3 49.Rd7+ Rf7 50.Rxf7+ Kxf7 51.Nxa5 Nxa2
52.Kf4 Nc1! 53.Ke3 e5 54.Kd2 Na2 55.Kd3 Ke6
Each side has three weaknesses, mobility is about the same. White tried for 20 more moves, but Black
did not give him a chance:

56.Nb7 Nc3 57.Nd8+ Kd6 58.Nf7+ Ke6 59.Nd8+ Kd6 60.Nf7+ Ke6 61.Nh8

321
61...Nd1! 62.Ke2 Nc3+ 63.Kd3 Nd1 64.Nxg6 Nf2+ 65.Ke3 Nh3 66.Nf8+ Ke7 67.Nh7 Kf7
68.Kf3 Kg6 69.Nf8+ Kf7 70.Nd7 Nxg5+ 71.Ke3 Ke6 72.Nb6

72.Nc5+ Kd6 73.Na6 Ne6=.

72...Kd6 73.Nc4+ Ke6 74.Nb2 Kd6 75.Nc4+ ½–½.

Stage 3 completed, the players accepted the inevitable, having exhausted all possibilities.

I’m sure this game would pass unnoticed by many if I didn’t bring it to public attention by briefly
analysing it here. Now, what do we learn from this game? We all know that “repetition is the mother
of knowledge”, and I was happy to see that this example confirmed all we knew about play in dry
positions of a symmetrical nature. It was a plain-plan situation where the correct rules were
implemented perfectly by both players who excelled at:

• Conquering space;
• Pursuing right exchanges;
• Concrete move by move calculation at critical moments;
• Using luring technique;
• Not believing the opponent;
• Avoiding ghost visions.

When all the above was done, the original evaluation of equality was confirmed. White DID PRESS
as expected, because he had slightly the more pleasant position at the beginning, but was unable to
break through. Appearances should not deceive us here: The fact that the game was drawn does not
lead to the conclusion that Ding’s strategy and overall play were a failure, as he would have

322
succeeded against many other strong players.
And the game is a creative jewel, something that both players can be proud of.

323
 Psakhis – Semkov

Sochi 1982

The previous game was a fine lesson of how to fight for a win in an equal position without
overpressing. Now we are going to see a negative example. The two heroes of the present game are
Lev Psakhis and Semko Semkov. At this time Lev was in the peak of his career, a two-time Soviet
champion, while Semkov was a young international master. The position that attracted my attention
arose after:

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 c5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e3 Nc6 7.Bd3 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.a3 cxd4 10.exd4
Bf6 11.Re1 g6 12.Be4 Nce7 13.Qb3 b6 14.Bh6 Bg7 15.Bg5 f6 16.Bd2 Rf7 17.Bd3 Bb7 18.Rxe6
Nxc3 19.bxc3 Bd5 20.Bc4 Rc8 21.Bxd5 Qxd5 22.Rb1 Bf8 23.Kf1 Qxb3 24.Rxb3 Nd5 25.Ke2
Rfc7 26.Kd3 a6 27.Re1 b5 28.Ra1

As my editor Semkov recalls, he was quite happy with his position. And why shouldn’t he be? Black
has just completed the blockade of the queenside with ...a7-a6 and ...b6-b5, he is hitting White’s
weaknesses on a3 and c3, and on top of this, all his pieces are superior than their counterparts. These
factors give Black sufficient compensation for the pawn. But here a natural enough question arises:
Okay, Black has the more pleasant position, but are there any realistic means of increasing the
pressure? If yes, where do they lie? This is the moment where Black had to switch to a concrete move
by move analysis. Instead Black got “hypnotised” by the visual triumph of his light square strategy,
and played on “general considerations”:

28...Rc4

324
A wrong evaluation, which entails a wrong conception. As Semko mentioned to me, he only
considered “active” moves at this point, convinced that one of the pawns at c3 and a3 should fall “by
itself”. But the truth is slightly different – White’s pieces are placed well for defensive purposes.
Look for example at the energetic Kd3 and in particular, the Rb3, which by standing on the b-file
prevents the idea ...a6-a5, ...b5-b4. The fact that this idea is not possible should have rung a bell for
Black and made him more conservative with the handling of this rook.

What would I have done? To be honest, I don’t know exactly, but it is of course imperative to prevent
a3-a4. Transferring the rook to a4, as Semko himself remarked, isolates it from the rest of the pieces,
so ...Nd5-b6 looks better. Then Black would have a choice between:

vacillating with his rooks on the c- and d-files to harass the White king with the idea of ...Nb6-a4-
c5+ and secure a draw, or
trying to gain space on the kingside with his pawns.

However, the latter has to be carefully thought out, because with the knight standing on b6, it is
perhaps not so easy for Black to fortify the space gained on the other wing, and White could try to
open a front there to his benefit.

So, coming to the more clean first solution, the variation 28...Nb6 29.Ne1 Na4 30.Nc2 Rd7 31.Ke2
Rdc7 32.Nb4 Nxc3+ 33.Bxc3 Rxc3 34.Rxc3 Rxc3 35.Nxa6 Bxa3 36.Nc7 Rxc7 37.Rxa3= is a
plausible one, with a clearly drawish outcome.

If Black on the other hand wants to play for a win at all costs, then 28...Nb6 29.Ne1 Na4 30.Nc2 Rd7
31.Ke2 Re8+!? 32.Ne3 f5!? 33.g3 Kf7∞ is a way forwards I am tempted to recommend, although, as
I said, I cannot be sure about its effectiveness as the knight on a4 is far from the battle. Black dreams
of a further advance on the kingside, but White can untangle his pieces with Ra1-e1, Ke2-d1, making
it a very double-edged affair.

29.Ne1 Ra4

325
30.Nc2

Not the most accurate. Lev fails to appreciate the importance of space.
Or perhaps he was also under the spell of Black’s light square dominance and preferred to avoid
weaknesses.
30.g4! would have given White a tiny edge. The point here is that neither player can achieve much on
the queenside, so both should seek a way to improve their chances on the other wing. Gaining space
in the recommended manner would have been a first, very good such step for White.

30...Nb6 31.Ne3 Nc4 32.Bc1 Kf7

32...h5!? was a strong candidate for the best move here, again grabbing space. It would have led to a
situation without a clear plan for either side, were playing in move by move mode would be very
essential for creating chances. This is a position where winning requires squeezing blood from stone,
so every detail should be used. However, both sides are avoiding committal pawn moves.

326
33.h3

33.Rbb1 would have been more forcing. But apparently Psakhis didn’t want to take on c4 as he felt
there were no winning chances after it. For example, 33...h5 (After 33...Nb6 34.g4!? White starts to
have ambition.) 34.Nxc4 Rcxc4 35.Bb2 Bd6 36.Re1 Rc8 37.Re2 Bf8 38.g3 Bd6=. Black can sit and
wait, and there is not much to be done about it. This comment makes it clear to us that in view of the
wrong transfer of the rook on a4 we have already on the board a situation where it is not only Black
who dreams of pressing for a whole point. Undoubtedly Psakhis had his own secret hopes of winning
at this point, but obviously he was reluctant to use the g2-g4 idea yet.

33...Bd6 34.Rbb1 Nb6 35.Ra2

327
35...f5

Normally this should have been a good move, but Black would have been much happier to make it
with the Ra4 placed on a central file instead. As things stand, in spite of the impressive appearance of
Black’s game White is not at all worse and is perhaps on the verge of obtaining a slight advantage.

36.g3

Psakhis relies on a subtle reply. By this moment he had undoubtedly realised that if Black attacked on
the kingside with pawns, this could have easily rebounded on him as the Ra4 lacks contact with that
sector, so he made a move to tempt Black advance. This is essentially both a luring strategy as well as
a flexible method of giving the opponent more options to choose from, what we chess players call, “a
passing move”.
Instead, 36.Rba1!? with the idea Ne3-d1-b2 could have led to similar positions as in the 33.Rbb1 line
above, but with the pawn on f5 instead of f6. I don’t see a big difference in White’s favour. A
possible continuation is 36...h5 37.Bd2 Be7 38.Nd1 Nc4 39.Nb2 Nxb2+ 40.Rxb2 Rc6 41.Rb3 Rcc4
42.Be3 Rc8 43.Bc1 Rcc4 44.g3 (intending f2-f3, g3-g4) 44...h4!?∞, and the position remains
balanced in the absence of knights.

36...Ke6 37.h4!

328
37...Bf8?

This amounts to overpressing, even if it’s a retreat. Black stubbornly refuses to seal the kingside with
37...h5!, stopping White’s intended h4-h5 or g4. Then 38.Ng2= does not lead to anything special for
either side, and the most logical outcome is a draw. However, Black does not adhere to a concrete
move by move mode, but plays “flexible” moves, giving White “opportunities” to err. Ironically, this
approach could have been rewarded during the game, on move 44 and 55, but White had his chances
first. We cannot speak of calculated risk here since Psakhis was the better player and Black should
not have challenged him to prove it!

Concrete objective analysis reveals that 37...Rf8 38.Ng2! would have been better for White. For
example, 38...Nd5 39.Nf4+ Bxf4 40.Bxf4 Rc8 41.Re1+ Kf7 42.Bd2 Rac4 43.Rc2 Ra4 44.Re5 Nb6
45.Bc1 Rac4 46.h5 Kf6 47.hxg6 hxg6 48.f3². Once again the opening of the kingside favours him.

Breaking some eggs with 37...f4?! exploits the presence of the bishop on d6, but the resulting
omelette is not going to be tasty. After 38.gxf4 Bxf4 39.h5!² Black’s kingside is bare and the
resulting mutual weaknesses favour White.

A third possibility is 37...Nd5 38.Nxd5 Kxd5, but after the obvious 39.Re2² the black Monarch is cut
from the kingside and h4-h5 is about to come. I prefer White.

38.Re2?

A relatively weak move for a player of Lev’s calibre.

38.h5! was best, not allowing the black king return to safety. After 38...Kf6 39.Bd2! Black faces
serious difficulties:

329
39...Bxa3
39...g5!? 40.Rg1! creates a state of zugzwang where Black must finally take on a3, and after
40...Bxa3 (40...Nc4 41.Bc1 Nb6 42.Re1 Rc7 43.Ra1±) 41.f4! g4 42.Rga1 Bb2 43.Rxa4 bxa4
44.Ra2 a3 45.h6! White’s advantage is beyond doubt.
40.Rba1 Bf8 41.Rxa4 Nxa4 42.g4!² and White gains the initiative.

38...Kf7 39.Nc2

White is hesitant. This is not in itself a bad move, but it was better to rely on open files with the aim
of securing the draw.
After 39.g4! Bxa3!
39...fxg4 40.Nxg4 Bxa3 41.Bd2 Nc4 42.h5²;
39...f4 40.Nd1 Bd6 41.f3².
40.gxf5 (40.Bd2? f4) 40...Bxc1 41.fxg6+ hxg6 42.Rxc1 Ra3 43.Rb2 Na4 44.Rbc2 Rh8 45.Rh1 Rc8= a
draw looks imminent.

39...Nd5 40.Bb2 Bd6

330
With the time control made, Black suddenly looks to have made some progress after mutual
inaccuracies. However the position remains level.

41.Rbe1 Nf6!

The point. The knight heads towards e4, where it cannot be challenged by its white counterpart.

42.Nb4?!

Losing time and space. That said, it was difficult to find the right move:
42.Rb1!, intending to answer 42...a5 with 43.Ba1=. If then 42...Ne4!?, White has 43.Nb4! Rxa3!
44.Nd5 Ra2 45.Ra1 Rxa1 46.Bxa1 a5 47.g4! Ke6 48.Ne3 a4 49.f3 Ng3 50.Re1„, the idea being c3-
c4.

42...a5 43.Nc2 Ne4 44.Rc1

331
44...Bf8?!

The same mistake again! The retreat ...Bd6-f8 proves for a second time to be what the position didn’t
ask for.
44...h5!, as proposed by Semko, would have put White in zuzgwang. After 45.Ra1 Rac4 46.Rxe4
fxe4+ 47.Kxe4 White should hold, but this would have been the first time in the game where Black
would enjoy some real chances.

45.g4!² Rd8 46.gxf5 gxf5 47.Rb1

47.Rce1! Nc5+ 48.Ke3² was more accurate. Now the game becomes equal again.

47...Nc5+ 48.Ke3 Ne4 49.Kf4 Kf6 50.Ne3 Bh6+ 51.Kf3 Bxe3 52.fxe3?

Another error. 52.Kxe3= was simple and sound.

332
52...Rc4

Missing a pen-ultimate chance for a favourable outcome. 52...Rg8! would have forced 53.Rg2 Rxg2
54.Kxg2 Ke6 and the black king is ready to penetrate through the light squares, granting Black the
better chances. Apparently Black was not focused here. As you can see, move by move mode plays
perhaps the greatest role in chess, especially when something in the position changes, as was here the
case with White’s pawn structure, a change that weakened the g3 square.

53.Ba1 Rb8 54.Rb3 Ke6 55.Rg2

55...Rb7?

333
55...Kd5! 56.Rb1 Ra4 57.Bb2 b4³ was the last chance. In the remainder of the game Black loses his
morale and even goes down after 112 moves:

56.Rb1 Rb8 57.h5 a4 58.h6 Rc6 59.Rb4 Rc4 60.Rg7 Rxb4 61.cxb4 Rc8 62.d5+! Kxd5 63.Re7 Rc1
64.Bg7 Rf1+ 65.Kg2 Rf2+ 66.Kg1 Rf3 67.Bd4 Rg3+ 68.Kf1 Rh3 69.Rxh7 f4 70.Rd7+ Ke6 71.Rd8
Ng3+? 72.Kg2 Rxh6 73.exf4 Ne4?! 74.Be3 Rh5 75.Rb8 Rd5 76.Kf3 Kf5? 77.Rf8+ Nf6 78.Bf2!
Ke6 79.Bh4± Nd7 80.Re8+ Kf5 81.Re7 Rd3+ 82.Ke2 Rd5 83.Kf3 Rd3+ 84.Ke2 Rd5 85.Ke3 Nb6
86.Rf7+ Kg4 87.Bf2 Rd8 88.Rg7+ Kf5 89.Rg5+ Kf6 90.Rc5 Rb8 91.Ke4 Nc4 92.Rc6+ Kf7 93.f5
Rb7 94.Rh6 Re7+ 95.Kf4 Nxa3 96.Bc5 Rd7 97.Rh7+ Ke8 98.Rh8+ Kf7 99.Rh7+ Ke8 100.Rh8+
Kf7 101.Rf8+ Kg7 102.f6+ Kg6 103.Ke5 Rc7 104.Rg8+ Kh7 105.Re8 Kg6 106.Rg8+ Kh7 107.Rg1
Nc4+ 108.Ke6 Rc6+ 109.Kf5 Nd6+ 110.Bxd6 Rxd6 111.f7 Rd2 112.Rg8 1-0

At the end of this example I want to reveal something. Kindly submitting to me the analysis of his
own game in order to help me form a better view of the struggle, Semko remarked in his notes to
Black’s 44th move (44...Bf8?!) that at this very point he realised that he could not win any of White’s
weak pawns, and that a “treacherous” thought started crawling through his mind – perhaps it was time
to “concede” a draw? I am not just going to support the word “treacherous”, which I very much agree
with, but I’m also going to expand the reasons for his failure in the game. Having looked at it
carefully I‘ll focus on two points:

A. Black made a wrong evaluation, assessing the position as better for him. As is to be expected for
such cases, he did put some effort, but essentially he was overpressing because he expected from the
position more than it objectively promised.

B. In this case overpressing was done via incomplete micro-plans. This happened because Black
believed the position would play itself. Had Psakhis been more alert at various points, Semko’s
overpressing would have been exposed. As things went, Black got suddenly his chances to become
better, and just at the moment that happened, he was starting to lose faith!

To finish this chapter, I want to summarise the lessons life taught me about overpressing:

1. Overpressing is unsound and arduous. It turns the game into a “disharmony affair”, which will
most often turn badly for the violator of laws of logic.

2. The correct approach is to play out patiently and hope for the best, without violating the principles
of strategy. This is just “pressing” and not only is it sound, but also brings better results.

3. If one decides to play out an equal position aiming to win at all cost, he must be consistent. There
is no room for doubts. If you start hesitating whether to “play for a win” or “for a draw” you’ll fall
into a difficult psychological situation. That would also dim considerably your judgement.
If the position takes a turn for the worse, remain focused, continue to fight as if nothing happened and

334
strive to save the game, without offering a draw. It’s a matter of principle – when you take a risk, you
should be aware you are setting yourself complicated tasks, so the burden is on you to creatively
solve them.

All those examples show that for playing equal/approximately equal positions well you need to invest
a lot of time in your evaluations.

Find a balance between evaluation and move by move mode. Work hard on these components and
you’ll be rewarded!

335
Game Index
Carlsen – Kramnik 6
Wijk aan Zee 2019
Carlsen – Mamedyarov 13
Wijk aan Zee 2019
Carlsen – Grischuk 20
Shamkir 2019 20
Vallejo Pons – Carlsen 27
Karlsruhe 2019
Fridman – Burg 37
Belgium, team championship 2019
Rapport – Giri 42
Wijk aan Zee 2019
Harikrishna – So 46
Olympiad, Batumi 2018
Hjartarson – Urkedal 53
Olympiad, Batumi 2018
Guijarro – Karjakin 57
FIDE Chess.com, Douglas 2019
Balint – Kotronias 68
Budapest 2018
Ding Liren – Ma Qun 79
CHN-chT China, 2018
Lalith – Adams 87
Gibraltar 2020
Caruana – Nakamura 97
Sinquefield Cup, Saint Louis 2018
Ding Liren – Harikrishna 107
Shenzhen 2019
Sanal – Firouzja 114
Nakhchivan 2018
Tomczak – Dragun 124
Warsaw 2019
Topalov – Giri 134
Shamkir 2018
Carlsen – Naiditsch 145
Grenke Chess Classic 2019
So – Fedoseev 154
FIDE World Cup, Tbilisi 2017
Ioannidis – Kotronias 168

336
Patras 2017
Carlsen – Matlakov 177
Wijk aan Zee 2018
Kotronias – Strikovic 185
Zagreb 2019
Kramnik – Shankland 202
Wijk aan Zee 2019
Mamedyarov – Ding 208
FIDE Candidates, Berlin 2018
Ding – Radjabov 213
Wijk aan Zee 2019
Psakhis – Semkov 218
Sochi 1982

337
Table of Contents
Title Page 4
Preface 4 5
Carlsen – Kramnik, Wijk aan Zee 2019 6 6
Carlsen – Mamedyarov, Wijk aan Zee 2019 13 16
Carlsen – Grischuk, Shamkir 2019 20 27
Vallejo Pons – Carlsen, Karlsruhe 2019 27 36
Fridman – Burg, Belgium, team championship 2019 37 52
Rapport – Giri, Wijk aan Zee 2019 42 59
Harikrishna – So, Olympiad, Batumi 2018 46 65
Hjartarson – Urkedal, Olympiad, Batumi 2018 53 72
Guijarro – Karjakin, FIDE Chess.com, Douglas 2019 57 79
Balint – Kotronias, Budapest 2018 68 98
Ding Liren – Ma Qun, CHN-chT China, 2018 79 116
Lalith – Adams, Gibraltar 2020 87 129
Caruana – Nakamura, Sinquefield Cup, Saint Louis 2018 97 141
Ding Liren – Harikrishna, Shenzhen 2019 107 157
Sanal – Firouzja, Nakhchivan 2018 114 167
Tomczak – Dragun, Warsaw 2019 124 182
Topalov – Giri 134, Shamkir 2018 195
Carlsen – Naiditsch, Grenke Chess Classic 2019 145 210
So – Fedoseev, FIDE World Cup, Tbilisi 2017 154 223
Ioannidis – Kotronias, Patras 2017 168 246
Carlsen – Matlakov, Wijk aan Zee 2018 177 260
Kotronias – Strikovic, Zagreb 2019 185 273
Kramnik – Shankland, Wijk aan Zee 2019 202 299
Mamedyarov – Ding, 308
FIDE Candidates, Berlin 2018 208 2
Ding – Radjabov, Wijk aan Zee 2019 213 315
Psakhis – Semkov, Sochi 1982 218 324
Game Index 227 336

338