INTRODUCTION The goal of this very practical book is to show you how to play the middlegame correctly. We do this by acquainting you with the basis of chess strategy, and by demonstrating the laws of positional play with both classical and modern examples. Whether you prefer “quiet” positions or wild, tactical melees, the methods you’ll learn from this book can become the very foundation of your future success in chess. Importantly, the strategy examined and explained in this book is applicable to all phases of chess—opening, middle game, and endgame. (Given today’s emphasis on “specialty” books of all kinds, we could claim to give you “three books in one”!) Regardless of the fashions of opening sequences or the transient evaluations of specific, “hot” positions, the knowledge in this book can successfully guide your play for a lifetime. It distills centuries of the most important and practical strategic chess knowledge into twelve chapters. The basis of modern positional, or strategic, play is the theory of the first World Chess Champion, Wilhelm Steinitz. His ideas have been further developed by Tarrasch, Nimzovich, Capablanca, Alekhine, Euwe, Botvinnik, Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov, and many others. Before going any further, let’s define a few terms. These definitions aren’t absolutely rigid—but they’re useful generalizations, and by themselves introduce important strategic concepts. All operations should be undertaken with a certain goal, the object of attack, in mind. To swim without a goal is strategic confusion. — Grandmaster Aron Nimzovich A plan is a visualized series of steps that make it possible to achieve a goal. Learning to plan is absolutely essential for every player who wishes to improve. Indeed, one of the attractions of chess is the way in which it teaches foresight and planning. Strategy is the art of forming an overall plan. Frequently the fact that correct strategic planning dictates the choice of objectives is understated. Strategy is the “grand scheme” for a game. In a sense, strategy is the opposite of tactics, which are the application of a short series of forced moves to achieve an immediate improvement. The words positional and strategic are frequently used interchangeably. The very first step in composing an appropriate strategy is to evaluate the position correctly. All of us at first see the challenge of such a comprehensive evaluation as daunting and confusing. This book is planned, however, to take the mystery out of Page 1 such positional analysis. Here we are lucky to have the benefit of the great masters to show us how to evaluate positions logically and methodically. The method for evaluating a position was initially developed by Steinitz in the 19th century. He first divided the position into elements. Next he compared the elements of White’s and Black’s positions, and only then formed an opinion, determined a plan, and, finally, looked for a specific move. Based on the accomplishments of his predecessors and contemporaries, as well as his own experience, Steinitz formulated the following positional elements: 1. Development 2. Mobility 3. Control of the center 4. The positions of the kings 5. Weak and strong squares in both camps 6. Pawn structure 7. Queenside pawn majority 8. Open files 9. Two bishops against bishop and knight or against two knights The above elements still form the strategic basis for tournament players. Understanding these elements will enrich and broaden your strategic ideas, and will provide a foundation for a deeper understanding of the laws and principles of chess. Based on these elements, a chess player can evaluate a position and develop a strategic plan. The evaluation must be confirmed by a concrete calculation of variations, the range of which depends on the character of the position. The merits and demerits of one side can be balanced by pluses and minuses of the opposite side, and in such a case we might say that the game is equal. But if a player’s position does not have enough pluses to compensate, for example, for the opponent’s control of an open file, then we would conclude that his opponent stands better. When a player has enough broad concepts at his fingertips and understands their relative importance, he can correctly evaluate the position and create a strategic plan. We hope to persuade our readers that the true “picture” of the position is determined by the pawns, that their location can suggest a plan of action, that moves are often made not just to create or banish a threat, but also to strengthen the position. Our study of strategy is divided into 12 chapters, covering most of Steinitz’s original elements, albeit in a different order. We do not discuss “development” and “the positions of the kings.” These subjects were covered in volume 4 of our Comprehensive Chess Course series, The King In Jeopardy. Steinitz’s Four Rules of Strategy Page 2 1. The right to attack belongs to the side that has a positional advantage, and that side not only has the right to attack but also the obligation to do so, or else his advantage may evaporate. The attack should be concentrated on the weakest square in the opponent’s position. 2. If in an inferior position, the defender should be ready to defend and make compromises, or take other measures, such as a desperate counterattack. 3. In an equal position, the opponents should maneuver, trying to achieve a position in which they have an advantage. If both sides play correctly, an equal position will remain equal. 4. The advantage may be a big, indivisible one (for example, a rook on the seventh rank), or it may be a whole series of small advantages. The goal of the stronger side is to store up the advantages, and to convert temporary advantages into permanent ones. Page 3 — CHAPTER 1 — Good and Bad Bishops The activity of the bishop greatly depends on the location of the pawns. A bishop that is not blocked by its own pawns is called a good bishop, while a bad bishop is one whose mobility is limited by its own pawns (and sometimes the opponent’s pawns too). The following principle of interaction between the pawns and the bishop was formulated by former World Champion Jose Raul Capablanca: When your opponent has a bishop, you should place your pawns on the same color squares as the bishop. However, if you have a bishop yourself, then you should try to keep the pawns on different colored squares than your bishop, no matter if your opponent has a bishop or not. Of course, the general correctness of these principles does not mean that we should follow them dogmatically. We will demonstrate later how these principles are malleable, depending on the need of the position. Game 1 Alatortsev — Levenfish Leningrad, 1937 Diagram 1 Black to move In Diagram 1, all but one of the Black pawns are located on dark squares, while most of the White pawns and the bishops of both sides are located on light squares. There is a noticeable difference in the activity of the bishops: the Black bishop on d7 is definitely a good bishop. Its movement is not obstructed by its own pawns and it protects the light squares from enemy invaders. This bishop and its own pawns complement each other in controlling both light and dark squares. In particular, Black controls e5, an important central square that cannot be attacked Page 1 by a White bishop or pawn. The bishop on g2 can be condemned as a bad bishop because its movement is greatly restricted by its own pawns. White’s position contains weak dark squares because neither his pawns nor his bishop are able to protect them. Based on these factors we can conclude that Black’s position is strategically better. Thus Black should be able to develop a plan that realizes the advantages inherent in the position. 1. ... Kf6 2. Ke2 Rh5! The rook finds an even more active position. 3. Rh1 Ke5! Centralization of the king in the endgame is usually very useful. 4. Kd3 h6 Diagram 2 Position after 4. ... h6 Now all Black’s pawns are on dark squares. 5. h3? Rg5! 6. Rh2 Rg3 7. h4 Rg8 8. Ke2 g5 9. hxg5 hxg5 Page 2 10. Kf2 g4! 11. Rh5+ Kd4 Diagram 3 Position after 11. ... Kd4 12. Rd1+? With this move, White only accelerates his own demise, but other moves are bad too. For example, after 12. Rh7 gxf3 13. Bxf3 Bg4 14. Bxg4 R8xg4 15. Rxc7 Rh4!, Black wins. 12. ... Kc3 13. Rh7 gxf3 14. Bf1 Or 14. Bxf3? Rxf3+ 15. Kxf3 Bg4+ 16. Kxf4 Bxd1, with a winning advantage for Black. 14. ... Kc2! 15. Rd3 Or 15. Ra1 Bg4 16. Rxc7 Rh8, with a decisive attack. 15. ... Bh3!? Black can also win with 15. ... Bg4 16. Rxc7 Rg2+ 17. Bxg2 (17. Ke1 f2 mate) 17. ... fxg2. 16. Rxf3 Rxf3+ 17. Kxf3 Bxf1 Page 3 18. Rxc7 Rf8 Diagram 4 Position after 18. ... Rf8 With an extra bishop and a strong passed pawn, Black wins easily. 19. Rd7 Kd3 20. Rxd6 Be2+ 21. Kf2 f3 22. Rh6 Rg8 23. Rh2 Kxe4 24. Rh4+ Kd3 25. Rh2 Rg6 26. b4 axb4, White resigns. Black’s dominance of the dark squares allowed him to bring his king deep into White’s position, with decisive effect. ********** Game 2 Taylor — Alekhine Hastings, 1936/37 Diagram 5 Position after White’s 20th move If only White is given the opportunity to play e3-e4, his bishop on d2 will be able to exert its force over a greater number of squares. Black takes immediate steps Page 4 to restrict this bishop, and in so doing he turns a temporarily passive bishop into a permanently bad bishop. 20. ... Qd7 21. Bc1 Black wins a piece after 21. Qc2 Rc8 22. Qd1 Rd8, while 21. Rd1 Rd8 leads to a decisive pin. 21. ... a4 22. Qc2 The endgame after 22. Qd1 Qxd1 23. Rxd1 Rc8 would be very difficult for White because Black’s rook penetrates to the second rank. 22. ... Rc8 23. Qe2 Qd5 Diagram 6 Position after 23. ... Qd5 Forcing the a-pawn to a “wrong” square. 24. a3 b3 Page 5 Position after 24. ... b3 And now the White bishop, forced to remain on c1 to defend the b2-pawn, will forever play the role of the bad bishop. 25. e4 Qc4 26. Qe1 Qc2 27. f4 Bc5+ 28. Kh1 Bd4 Diagram 7 Position after 28. ... Bd4 And b2 is a target for the good bishop. 29. f5 Bxb2 30. Bxb2 Qxb2 White resigns Game 2 showed us Alekhine’s winning strategy. He made his opponent’s bishop “bad.” He fixed White’s queenside pawns on the “wrong” squares. Then he occupied the c-file and the second rank. This accumulation of advantages led to the collapse of White’s position. ********** Game 3 Palatnik — Dandridge Chicago, 1996 Page 6