Showing posts with label Reinfeld. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reinfeld. Show all posts

05 June 2023

Ten Books to Achieve 1800+

Having seen many lists of top ten chess books recommended for players at different levels, I thought it time to reflect on how books contributed to my rise from C Class to A Class. My first non-provisional rating was 1425 when I was in my mid-30s. I played chess competitively many years earlier, but no events were rated. In the late-1970s, I had a USCF correspondence rating. But when I returned to active play after graduate school, the USCF had lost the records of my postal chess.

I rejoined the Spokane Chess Club in late 1995 and played in my first rated OTB event in March 1996. In October, I played my sixth event and no longer had a provisional rating. By the end of the year, my rating had risen to 1495, but would not rise above that point until 2002. I remained in C Class until fall 2006. While on this plateau, I was gaining both knowledge and skills, but rating progress was slow. Too much online blitz may have held me back.

My journey from wholly ignorant beginner in the late-1960s, to competitive high school player in the late-1970s, to active C Class club member in the mid-1990s involved a lot of book study. Further progress from C Class in my 30s to high A Class in my early 50s included many books, active play, private lessons, chess videos, and I also started coaching elementary students in 2000.

It is no easy matter to choose ten books. By the time I reached A Class, I owned close to 300 chess books and there are very few I had not spent some time reading. At the same time, there are also very few that I read wholly. Some books, or my manner of reading them, may have held me back (just as hundreds of three minute blitz games every month may not have helped me).

The Ten
In November 1996, I played in the Washington Class in Federal Way. There was a book seller set up in one of the rooms near the playing hall. I spent a bit of time there talking with David Weinstock, owner of ChessMate. In our discussions, he recommended a book to me. I was skeptical. The title sounded more basic than my own self-assessment of my needs. Nonetheless, when I found the book at Auntie’s Bookstore when I was back in Spokane, I bought it and started to read it. It was transformative.

Consider my list of ten, pictured above and described below, as a provisional suggestion rooted in experience. What worked for me may or may not work for you. Read all recommendations with skepticism, but also with openness to trying something that might help. There are no magic books guaranteed to improve your chess, but only a few will fail to teach you something of value.

1) Georges Renaud, and Victor Kahn, The Art of the Checkmate (1953) was the book David suggested, and is my first recommendation. Having spent many hours in the 1970s learning the basic checkmates with heavy pieces and even two bishops, and having delivered many fine checkmates in many games, it was hard to believe there was much I could learn from such a book. Reading it, however, exposed me to new checkmate patterns, including some that I had seen, but not absorbed, from a book I studied in 1975: Irving Chernev, The 1000 Best Short Games of Chess (1955). Renaud and Kahn not only taught me new patterns, but they gave me a framework for thinking about checkmate and checkmate threats.

As David Weinstock had, I began to recommend The Art of the Checkmate to any and all who would listen, and also to many who ignore what I say. I still do. This book helped me, and it can help you. But there are other books that could substitute, and might be even better. Victor Henkin, 1000 Checkmate Combinations (2011) takes a slightly different approach. It also teaches an abundance of vital checkmate patterns and greatly exceeds Renaud and Kahn in the amount of study material. Antonio Gude, Fundamental Checkmates (2016) is another option. It is comprehensive and to an extent combines the approaches of Henkin with that of Renaud and Kahn. One can find dozens of other books on checkmate patterns, but these three stand above the others. Get one of them, or even all three.
Vital
2) For a year or longer, Lev Alburt, Chess Training Pocket Book: 300 Most Important Positions and Ideas, 2nd ed. (2000) was my bedside reading. I read it cover-to-cover twice. Alburt’s book was the only tactics book I finished prior to early 2023 when I finished all 1320 exercises in Sergey Ivashchenko, The Manual of Chess Combinations (1999). It is not an ordinary tactics book for practicing basic ideas, but rather, a small set of carefully chosen positions with tactical and positional concepts. It also has a small number of vital endgame positions.

Many grandiose claims have been made by different authors about the legendary 300 positions, but there should be no doubt that careful and deliberate study of a small number of carefully selected positions will take your game up a notch. Alburt’s book helped me. A few years after completing it, I began study of another book focused on 300 carefully selected positions: Rashid Ziyatdinev, GM-RAM: Essential Grandmaster Knowledge (2000). More recently, Thomas Engqvist has gained my attention, now with a trilogy of books containing 300 in the title.
An Idea Worth Considering

3) Quantity matters, too, when it comes to tactics training. A classic that has lifted the skills of generations of chess players has also been part of my training. Fred Reinfeld, 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations (1955) deserves a place in every chess player’s library. In 2008, I spent quite a bit of time playing these positions against the computer. Often I could find the tactic, achieve a clearly superior position, and yet still fail to defeat HIARCS (see "Where the Rubber Meets the Road"). Reinfeld organizes the chapters by themes—forks, pins, double attacks, and so on. I set my database containing these positions to open randomly so I did not know which theme to look for. But I also use the book, either solving from the diagrams or sometimes setting up the positions on a board.

Endgames have been vital to my success. In 2007-2008, I invested a lot of time teaching some elementary rook endings to my top student, the strongest third grader in my city. That summer, in the Spokane City Championship, I played two rook endings against FM David Sprenkle, drawing one game.

Currently, I’m on a collector’s quest to have 64 endgame texts in my personal library. The quest stems from my enjoyment studying positions with few pieces, my conviction that endgame knowledge is vital for all skill levels, and my involvement in an online community of book lovers, Chess Book Collectors on Facebook. During my rise from the 1500s in 2002 to high-1900s in 2012, much time was invested in endgame study.

4) The endgame book that did the most for me was Mark Dvoretsky, Dvoretsky’s Endgame Manual (2003). As one of ten books to recommend to class players, Dvoretsky is a controversial choice. Many players find it too difficult for anyone below master. Poppycock! Chess books are not novels. One does not read every word. Read the part that makes sense and push through a bit that stretches and challenges you. I have read the long chapter on pawn endings in Dvoretsky’s Endgame Manual several times and have flash cards containing the 48 blue diagrams that I use for review, study, and teaching (see "Pawn Endings Flash Cards"). I’ve struggled through perhaps half of the chapter on rook endings and made flash cards for the first 24 blue diagrams. Other chapters I have dipped into from time-to-time.

During the years spent studying Dvoretsky’s Endgame Manual, other books have also supplemented my work. These include, Bruce Pandolfini, Pandolfini’s Endgame Course (1988); Jeremy Silman, Silman’s Complete Endgame Course (2007); Karsten Müller and Frank Lamprecht, Fundamental Chess Endings (2001); and several others. My top recommendation for those looking to begin endgame study is Yury Averbakh, Chess Endings: Essential Knowledge (1993). There are many choices. Choose that one that you like, but do not neglect the endgame. Make endgame study a priority if you want to play better chess.
Splurge
5) Jacob Aagard, Excelling at Technical Chess (2004) also concerns the endgame. However, it is distinct from the endgame manuals listed above. The core of the book focuses on “seven technical tools”—schematic thinking, weaknesses, domination, do not hurry, passed pawns, how to arrange your pawns, and freaky aspects. Aagaard develops each of these ideas with compelling prose and detailed game analysis. As he states in the beginning, this book follows an approach that has made Mikhail Shereshevsky, Endgame Strategy so highly regarded. The technical tools are worthy of detailed attention, and I hope to find time to explore them in more detail. I blazed through this book is a couple of days, reading all the prose and glancing superficially at the game analysis. However, this superficial reading was enough to transform my game. My endgame play became more resilient. Formerly, I would often offer or accept a draw in seemingly equal positions. After reading the book, I play out most positions to the end, often lone kings. If there is any reason to play on—an imbalance, a weakness of any sort in my opponent’s position, even a better king position—a draw is anathema unless it secures a tournament victory.

Annotated games have always been a regular part of my chess study. In my youth, I spent many hours playing through games from three GM tournaments that resulted in books that I purchased: San Antonio, 1972; Leningrad, 1973 (the 42nd Soviet Championship); and Wijk aan Zee, 1975. In addition, I bought and still have two books by David Levy that were collections of games by specific players: Karpov’s Collected Games: All 530 Available Encounters, 1961-1974 (1975); and Gligoric’s Best Games, 1945-1970 (1972). All these books influenced my play as a teenager as I sought to imitate the play of the world’s elite.

6) In my 40s, I had many more chess books to choose from and studied annotated games from many of them. One source of such games that I returned to frequently is Garry Kasparov, My Great Predecessors, 5 vols. (2003-2006). Kasparov culls some of the best insights from many years of chess literature and presents many of the most important games of every world champion before him, as well as many contenders for that title who fell short. Chess history offers a reliable foundation for the development of chess skill. Although Kasparov does a poor job of documenting his sources (see my Patriots and Peoples blog for examples of sourcing problems in the writing of US history), the series remains an important practical overview of chess history.

7) Paul Morphy’s games are particularly useful to chess players who want to play well. Perhaps one day I will be able to report that I have played through every one of his available games. So far, I have been through at least one-third of them, some of them many times. His eighteen tournament games have been imposed by me on some two dozen students, who have been through all of them. I’ve shown the Opera game to students at least one hundred times and of course know it fully. For insights into Morphy’s play, few books are in league with Valeri Beim, Paul Morphy: A Modern Perspective (2005). This book has enriched my study.

8) Chess Informant was long the indispensable source for current master games from before I took up the game in the 1960s into the twenty-first century. Now, of course, these games are readily available from many sources. In 1996, as I was coming back to chess with some seriousness of purpose, I was curious about Informant, which I had seen only in the USCF sales catalog. At the Washington Class, however, David Weinstock had some on the table. He allowed me to look at them and we talked about how they were organized. A month or so later, I included Informant 64 in an order of books from USCF sales. It aided my correspondence play in a concrete way (see "Playing by the Book"). More importantly, learning the Informant system of codes changed my thought processes during play. There are so many things that one contemplates during a chess game while looking for the right moves or the correct plan. Sometimes these thoughts are noise that interferes with clear focus on what matters. To an extent, the limited analytical possibilities in the Informant codes distills chess down to things that really matter in the quest for advantage.

As I grew as a player, Chess Informant was a useful tool. Today’s Informants are changing with the information explosion and are oriented more towards the needs of class players than they were in the past. Give them a try.
A Growing Collection
Of course, I did not rise from C Class to strong A Class without studying the works of Jeremy Silman. His endgame book is already listed above, although it was less useful to me than Dvoretsky. In fact, the day I bought it, I read everything through the section on B Class, finding very little that I did not know. Silman’s endgame book has done more for my teaching than for my own progress as a player. That’s plenty! His writing is compelling and many of his metaphors and personal anecdotes are unforgettable.

I bought and read (partly, of course) How to Reassess Your Chess, 3rd. ed. (1993); The Reassess Your Chess Workbook: How to Master Chess Imbalances (2001); The Amateur’s Mind: Turning Chess Misconceptions into Chess Mastery, 2nd ed. (1999); and The Complete Book of Strategy: Grandmaster Techniques from A to Z (1998). When it finally came out, I added How to Reassess Your Chess: Chess Mastery through Chess Imbalances, 4th ed. (2010), but my rating had risen above 1800 before then.

9) Of these books, Reassess Your Chess and the companion workbook were most useful in helping centralize imbalances in my thinking. When I need to win a tournament game, seeking imbalances from the very first move often proves vital.

The Complete Book of Strategy did nothing for my game and very little for my teaching. Its usefulness has been so slight that I struggle to show proper supportive enthusiasm when a young student has shown me that they just acquired it. I must remind myself that there is a difference between this book’s presence in a chess library of more than 400 volumes that includes several dictionaries and encyclopedias, and a chess library for which this book is the first book acquired. It is a good book, even though it does not meet my needs.

What about the Opening?

In high school, I spent many hours studying lines in I. A. Horowitz, Chess Openings: Theory and Practice (1964). In the 1990s, Walter Korn, and Nick DeFirmian, eds. Modern Chess Openings, 13th ed. (1990) took its place. Even more time was spent on opening monographs, including several on two related variations of the Sicilian Defense that feature an early e5 push by Black. There is some evidence this study hurt my game, or at least retarded my improvement. I tried to memorize lines and often faltered when my opponents deviated from the lines that I knew.
Use at Your Own Risk

In 2003, I began to switch from the Sicilian to the French as my primary defense against 1.e4. The French Defense is not superior to the Sicilian. It might even be a worse choice, but for me it marked a shift in how I approached opening study. Rather than grinding through lines in a book, I sought understanding of the principles, of basic concepts, such as one finds articulated clearly in José Capablanca, Chess Fundamentals (1921), of the ideas behind the moves. Unquestionably, I learned many lines, but when my opponents deviated from these, I was prepared. My play improved.

Detailed opening study and learning concrete lines has aided my preparation for specific opponents in several cases. At a crucial moment while still a B Class player, I won the Spokane Contender’s tournament, earning a shot at the title of Spokane City Champion. Expectations of victory were nearly non-existent. No one expected a B Class player rated in the 1730s to prevail over FM David Sprenkle, rated in the 2250s, down considerably from his peak. As preparation, I spent close to 40 hours on two semi-obscure variations: the Raphael variation against the Dutch Defense for when I had the White pieces, and a seemingly risky Nh6 idea for Black in the French Advance. It took Sprenkle 72 moves to compel my resignation in the French, and I drew my second game with White. It was a very good day.

Most of the time in tournament play, however, such extensive opening preparation is more of a crap shoot. Unless an opponent walks into your pet line, where is the benefit? Tactics win and lose games. Endgames keep chances alive as players grow weary or hungry.

10) Hence, my tenth recommended book is one that I’ve read very little, but that exemplifies how I have come to believe opening study should be pursued. Reuben Fine, The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings (1943) is out of date in terms of the line presented, as should be expected. But, players of the French Defense well-know that White’s pawn on d4 is always a target. The Sicilian Defense is always grounded in creating pawn imbalances and active piece play in the quest for equality and even winning chances.

Other Books

Many other books helped me in my successful quest to reach A Class, and remain there for fourteen years so far, as well as my quest to rise into Expert Class, falling just short and less a goal in my 60s than it was in my mid-50s. Learning drives me. My knowledge continues to grow even as my performance in competition is less consistent.


15 May 2014

Pinning

Lesson of the Week

Pinning is the first unit in the classic text, 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations (1955) by Fred Reinfeld. This week's lesson was chosen at random from that unit. I played the position against Stockfish DD prior to putting the position in front of students.

White to move

The position is number 63 in Reinfeld. He does not give the source.

15 May 2013

Misleading Review

Flaws in a Review of Chess Quest

Chess Quest has been among my principal sources for tactics training through the past three months. I have solved nearly half of its 1200 problems, including all of levels 1 and 2, and slightly more than half of level 3. The problems have ranged from simple thematic checkmates that build pattern recognition to clever defensive resources that maintain drawing possibilities in slightly worse positions. The problem selection includes a reasonable number of essential endgame positions, while maintaining a focus on tactical ideas in middlegame positions.

Not everyone who has tested Chess Quest shares my enthusiasm for the iPad/iPhone app. C. K. Sample III, for example, identifies "flaws" in some of the problems. Of the twenty-four problems he solved in the basic level before writing his review, he found two where "no checkmate was achieved and [he] can see multiple moves that can be taken by the other player to effectively recoup the game" ("Review: Chess Quest," Sample the Web, 12 September 2009). He offers screenshots of problem 24 to illustrate this "flaw". Problem 17 appears to be the other that he has in mind (see screenshot). Sample concludes that he cannot recommend the app because of these two problems with incorrect solutions, and notes: "If it keeps that 1 in 12 ratio, that means that rather than 1200 puzzles for $2.99,* you’re only really getting 1100 puzzles and 100 duds."
Problem 17, Basic Level

Had he continued solving in levels above basic, Sample would have found a far higher ratio of problems that do not end in checkmate. This ratio should not come as a surprise for Sample's "flaw" is the norm in tactics training. A significant percentage of the problems in Fred Reinfeld's classic 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations (1955) do not end in checkmate. That proportion is even greater in the modern Anthology of Chess Combinations, 3rd edition (2005). Sample reveals not so much problems with the Chess Quest app, as his own qualifications for assessing tactics training resources. His review resembles in one aspect the many five star reviews of the Social Chess app by users whose only point of comparison is Chess with Friends (see "Social Chess iPad/iPhone App: Review"). Such reviews are misleading and offer disservice to readers.


Beginning Tactics: Instruction

C. K. Sample's criticism reveals that there is a market for developers of iPad/iPhone apps aimed at beginning chess players. While collections of carefully selected instructive tactics positions serve those serious about tactics training, elementary instruction is needed, too. Chessimo is one such app (see "Chess Tactics Training on the iPad"). Most Chessimo problems end in checkmate, at least among the 3000+ that I have solved. Nonetheless, that feature alone does not satisfy the need of explaining what constitutes a decisive advantage.

As chess players grow in strength, they learn an abundance of patterns and techniques. They begin to recognize an advantage. They develop the skills to convert an advantage into victory. It was clear to me that winning the bishop was a sufficient solution in problem 24 in the basic level of Chess Quest. But, Sample needs more explanation. This need prompted him to give Chess Quest a misleading negative review.

Sample correctly identifies one element that could be incorporated into tactics training apps: a chess engine. In order to demonstrate that problem 24 in Chess Quest's basic level is not flawed, I played the position against HIARCS on my iPad.

Checkmating the engine took me 42 moves from the problem position. Along the way, there were several positions where learned themes from prior training rendered my moves nearly automatic. The entire battle required less than ten minutes. A stronger player could have concluded the battle more rapidly, and in fewer moves.

White to move

James Stripes -- HIARCS
14.05.2013

1.Qb8

Chess Quest ends the problem after this move has been found. Pinning the bishop wins it.

1...Qa5

Black avoids exchanging queens, and makes two threats. The vulnerable a-pawn is attacked, and the queen threatens to fork White's bishop and king with 2...Qe1+.

2.Qxb7+ Kf6 3.Qc6 Qxa3 4.Qc3+ Kf7 5.Qc7+

Black to move

5...Qe7

It seems to me that Black could protract the struggle with 5...Kf6. Nonetheless, the engine considers its move best unless it thinks longer that was permitted in a five-minute game.

6.Qxe7+ Kxe7 7.Kg1

Black will have a passed pawn on the a-file that must be stopped in addition to the isolated and passed e-pawn. The bishop cannot stop both. As the most powerful piece left on the board, White's king must become active.

7...Kd6 8.Kf2

8.b4 is better, fixing the a-pawn.

8...a5 9.Ke3 Kc5 10.Kd3 a4 11.bxa4 bxa4

White to move

At the heart of this position is an elementary idea that Jeremy Silman calls "the fox in the chicken coop."

12.Kc3 

12.Bg6 would have reduced Black's counterplay.

12...g5 13.Kb2 Kd4 14.Bf3 e5 15.Ka3 Kc3 16.Be4 Kd4 17.Bd3 e4

After a few suboptimal moves, I found myself in a position where only one move maintains the win. Fortunately, this one move had been central to my plan leading up to this position. I meant to sacrifice my bishop to eliminate Black's last viable threat.

White to move

18.Bxe4! 18...Kxe4 19.Kxa4

Material equality had been restored for one-half move, but the pawn ending is an elementary win for White. If Black goes after the c-pawn, the White king will get Black's remaining pawns. The alternative, chosen by HIARCS, is to temporarily go a pawn ahead but let the c-pawn promote.

19...Ke5 20.Kb4

20.c4! is better.

20...h5 21.Kc4 Kf4 22.Kd4 Kg3

White to move

Once again, White has only one winning move, but it is the move that has been prepared. This pawn race has been carefully calculated.

23.c4 Kxg2 24.c5 Kxh3 25.c6 h4 26.c7 Kg3 27.c8Q h3 28.Ke3 h2

White to move

29.Qc1

29.Qf5 is objectively superior, but White opts for a standard technique to prevent promotion of the h-pawn. It is worth noting that Chess Quest or Chessimo (perhaps both) offer positions solved with the technique evident in the continuation 29.Qf5 h1Q 30.Qxg5+ Kh3 31.Qh5+ Kg2 32.Qg4+ Kh2 33.Kf2!

29...Kg2 30.Qd2+ Kh3 31.Qe1 Kg4

White to move

32.Qh1

32.Ke4 is much better, leading to checkmate in three fewer moves.

32...Kf5 33.Qxh2 Kf6 34.Ke4 Ke6 35.Qh5 g4 36.Qxg4+ Kd6

White to move

One hopes that Sample would not consider a problem flawed if it ended here. And yet, beginners need problems that begin here.

37.Qc8

37.Kd4 is the other optimal move. I teach young players to place the queen a knight's throw from the defending king and deliver no check until checkmate. Hence, I exercise that technique here.

37...Ke7 38.Ke5 Kf7 39.Kf5 Kg7 40.Qe8 Kh7 41.Kf6 Kh6 42.Qh8# 1–0


*The current price is $4.99 "on sale for a limited time."

19 March 2012

My First Chess Book

Lesson of the Week: Value of Books

There is a story that I like to tell, an autobiographical story that explains the source of my chess skill. My intent is to motivate aspiring chess students (and their parents) to delve into the world of chess books. This world becomes harder to promote as electronic substitutes grow in quality, diversity, and availability. But it remains a world of value.

My story concerns how my little sister taught me the moves of chess after learning the game from the neighbors. I was in second grade; she was in first. For the next several years, chess was one of the games that we played like Parcheesi or Monopoly. None of us were skilled. Being the oldest, I won more than my share and was able to maintain the self-deception that I understood the game. Then, in Junior High (they call it Middle School now), I was visiting a friend and saw that he had a chess book: Chess in 30 Minutes. "Wow," I told him, "You have a book about chess, you must be pretty good." We determined through the course of a game or two that he was no worse than me, and maybe a little better.

This event took place the year that Bobby Fischer was laying out more and more demands concerning his upcoming World Chess Championship defense against challenger Anatoly Karpov. They never reached agreement and Fischer forfeited his title. The drama kept chess in the news for several months. We did not understand all the details of Fischer's demands, nor was our knowledge of World Championship matches more than superficial. We did understand that there was some appeal to a long match of more than twenty games between the same two players. That was enough comprehension of world events to inspire action. We commenced a match of twenty-one games or so that took place over the next few weeks or months. Alan also introduced me to golf, which occupied most of our time together.

As I recall, Alan and I were about equally matched when the games began. During my next trip to the Cannon Air Force Base Library, I found the chess books. I checked out an armful, or perhaps one or two. The book that I remember reading was Irving Chernev, The 1000 Best Short Games of Chess (1955). From this text I learned to coordinate pieces in attack. I learned to attack the king. As I usually tell the story, I learned to read chess notation from the explanation in the front of this book. This past week I acquired a paperback copy of this now relatively rare Chernev text from Brused Books in Pullman, Washington. To my surprise, the text does not contain an explanation of how to read chess notation!

What else in my story proceeds from faulty memory? I am certain that Chernev's text was one of those I found at the Cannon library, and have only a vague memory of others. Perhaps I read something by Fred Reinfeld. Likely, I remember Chernev's classic because I spent more time with it than the others. It also influenced both the style of my play, and my skill level. By the end of our match, I was better than Alan. Developing my ability to attack carried me a long way, even into USCF C Class. Moving up from there, however, required more of a positional style. But that gets decades ahead of the story.

Back in 1975 a new friend moved in next door--people were constantly moving into and out of the neighborhood as is typical of military life. We were comparable in our chess skill. We started a match. I kept reading chess books. My skill development outpaced his. I became better at chess than my friends.

Then I played my Dad.

After my mother and siblings had gone to bed, my father and I faced one another across the dining room table. We were there late into the night drinking tall glasses of orange juice and maneuvering our armies. He taught me how to play slower, to think about every move. I managed to win both games, each of which was played on a separate evening.

Then I joined the chess club at Yucca Junior High. That meant taking the early bus to school one day per week. It was dark at the bus stop and cold outside the school while we waited for the janitor to open the door.

I have been an avid chess player since 1975, although I played very little from 1980 to 1989. My first computer and Chessmaster 2100 brought me back to the game. I returned to the Spokane Chess Club in 1995, the year after I finished graduate school. I've lost count of how many chess books that I own.


The Lesson

Chernev's book was my first encounter with the famous checkmate trap attributed to Legall de Kermeur, and with which I became reacquainted through a book that I read twenty-five years later (The Art of the Checkmate [1953] by Georges Renaud and Victor Kahn). It is game 10 in Chernev (5).

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bc4 Bg4 4.Nc3 g6 5.Nxe5 Bxd1

White to move

How did the game finish?

Game 15 in Chernev's text is a game between Joseph Henry Blake and William Hook, played in London 1891.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bc4 f5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nc3 exd4 6.Qxd4 Bd7 7.Ng5 Nc6

White to move

According to Chernev, "White now announced a mate in five moves" (7). Chernev gives the moves, but you can work find them for yourself.

The young chessplayers will be challenged to work out the solutions. They may work together using chess boards.


14 February 2012

Lesson of the Week

Removing the Guard is an important tactic. Attack the piece that defends another one that you would like to attack, and often you can win one of the two. This position is number 475 in Fred Reinfeld, 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations. This book is readily available for about $10 at many bookstores, but in order to read the solutions, you need to understand descriptive notation. Reinfeld explains descriptive notation in the front of the book. Many chess masters started with this book as their first text for tactics training. Computers dominate most players' training regimen today, but even Reinfeld's book has not outlived its usefulness. See "Where the Rubber Meets the Road" for a suggestion of how this book is useful in computer training.

White to move

15 December 2011

Lesson of the Week

A holiday concert displaces one school chess club this week. Holiday distractions disrupt others. Last week's lesson on pins proved impossibly difficult for most of the young players in my clubs. Some were offered an easier lesson on pins last week: "While Looking at Pins." Another club saw the position from "While Looking at Pins" this week. Other groups this week are seeing the position below.

White to move


This position is problem number 1 is Fred Reinfeld, 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations (1955). This text is generally available for approximately $10. My copy is beginning to fall apart, and I may replace it. The principal difficulty young students would have in learning from it stems from descriptive notation. Algebraic is far simpler to master for the nine year old student, and is the notation system universally taught. Descriptive notation is worth learning because it provides access to many older texts, such as the exceptional checkmate manual, Georges Renaud and Victor Kahn, The Art of the Checkmate (1953). Reinfeld's text offers a one page explanation of descriptive notation in the front matter.

Reinfeld's text contains errors, but far fewer than will be evident in every book written by Bruce Pandolfini or by Eric Schiller. Reinfeld worked in an era before computers, checked his work carefully, and made a few errors in assessment. Pandolfini's work appears rushed into print without proper editing. Even so, I find that Pandolfini's Endgame Course (1988) is a highly instructive text for scholastic players. If I could give every child this text after his or her first tournament, and they could be induced to spend one hour per week studying it, skills would improve rapidly. Reinfeld's text is less elementary, focuses on middlegame tactics, rather than basic checkmates, and should be listed in every state qualifier's letter to Santa.

Reinfeld does not present his sources, but the position comes from Yanofsky -- Aitken, Hastings 1946. Yanofsky made the correct move and Aitken resigned.

07 November 2011

Tactics Training: Shredder iPad App

Back in January, my initial review of iPad chess applications highlighted Shredder as an exceptional playing program. I noted then that it also comes with one thousand tactics exercises. Although these exercises are not technically difficult, they must be solved quickly to get full credit. Many of the problems are on par with the vast majority found in Fred Reinfeld, 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations (1955). Some are much simpler, requiring the solver to notice a piece that is en prise.

Problem Number 703
Mike Klein, "Comparing Apps to Apps," Chess Life (October 2011) also recommends Shredder, although his comments might carry more weight if he had tested tChess Pro, which has far better database features than found in the two apps that he recommended for that purpose.

In Shredder, each training problem must be solved before moving on to the next. As time is expended, the number of possible points earned diminishes. Wrong answers diminish the score more rapidly. After too much time, or a couple of wrong answers, the score will be zero. Even then, the problem remains before the solver until a solution is found. In the upper left-hand corner is a question mark. Touching this image causes the piece to be moved to flash. Trial and error, if it comes to that, will eventually reveal the correct move.

Playing and Puzzle Ratings
Some problems require six moves or more. Many are one or two moves deep. Shredder tracks progress: total score and percentage of possible points. These data is provided for both the whole set, and for the past ten problems. This data can be reset to the beginning.

The Shredder app is not my only resource for tactics training, and so I do not use it every day. I have completed just over seven hundred of the thousand.

Capturing the screenshot and solving the problem above took me less than half a minute. That was long enough to lose one point. After playing Bxc5, a message appears: "You have solved this puzzle and get 9 points!" The message offers two options: stop, which ends the session, and next puzzle, which brings up the next exercise. If it is Black to move, the board will flip. The opponent's previous move is always shown, which eliminates ambiguity concerning whether an en passant capture would be possible. I vaguely recall that such a capture was the correct first move in at least one of the problems.

I plan to complete all one thousand problems, and then begin anew, going through the set a second time with more discipline and consistency. My principal objective the second time through will be to improve my scoring percentage.

13 January 2009

Minor Piece Domination

Black's knight has no squares, so White will enter a king and pawn endgame two pawns ahead--an easy technical win.

Black to move +-


This position came about after an inaccuracy from this position.

White to move +-


5.f3 appears best, but I played 5.Nc6 forcing Black's bishop off the board. The bishop's domination of the knight came about as Black gained back some of the material. 5...Bxc6 6.Bxc6 Nc4 7.Bc1 b3 8.Kf1 b2 9.Bxb2 Nxb2 10.Ke2 Ke7 11.Bb5

The process started from Reinfeld's WCSAC #0669

White to move +-


1.Qxb4!

This move is reminiscent of the key in Robert Pearson's "A Nice Tactic (Redux)," although not nearly as rich. Even so, it occurred to me in a matter of seconds partly because I'd been looking at Pearson's blog the day prior.

1...axb4 2.Rxa8+ Qe8 3.Rxe8+ Bxe8 4.Bxd5+ Kf8 and we reach the position at the top.


Resolutions Update

I publicized three chess oriented New Year's resolutions.

1. Reduce blitz

I've played four blitz games in 2009; all yesterday. I won a lost game on time, lost a won game against the same opponent due to inaccuracies when hurrying. I won two other games against a weak opponent on another site--almost a waste of time.

2. Intensify endgame training

I wrote on my Facebook page on January 4 that I was building a database of pawn endgames. I did some endgame training each day of 2009 up to then, but none since.

3. Demand consistency in Tactics Training Plus

I've done half of my planned regimen.

Why have I failed? Most of my chess time has been devoted to two activities: my correspondence game load, and the forums at some of these sites. The chess has been productive, but the political discussions have been almost stupid. Better management of idle time will lead to better results in my personal goals.

I did complete nine turn-based games, which reduced my load by seven. I accepted a rematch from one opponent, and accepted a challenge from one of this blog's readers. In these nine completed games, I won seven. The other two were drawn: one draw was a comeback from a technically lost position. In the other, I failed to hang on to an extra pawn, and started to think that I was slightly worse in the queen and pawn endgame. We repeated the position and I claimed the draw.

Saturday is the first round of the Corus Tournament at Wijk aan Zee. I likely will do some live blogging of selected games, but not on opening day as I am running a scholastic tournament. This live blogging will detract from my training regimen, but will have other benefits.

01 January 2009

Take Backs

In casual play with friends, it seems sometimes that every game is a training game. My opponent will hang a knight and I'll say, "you don't want to do that, try something else instead." Of course, I get as many take backs as I give.

Playing against the computer in the privacy of my office, no one knows how often this happens, but it does. Indeed, the coaching feature of Fritz offers many take backs after certain inaccuracies.

I spent forty minutes on this morning's "Tactics Training Plus," getting a good start on resolution #3. Problem 364 from Reinfeld, 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations required less than five minutes to elicit a resignation from the Silicon Beast, so I moved on to Problem 365. The tactic was easy to spot.

White to move


1.Rh8+ Kxh8 2.e6+ Qg7 3.Bxg7+ Kxg7 and that's where Reinfeld's solution ends. He notes that Black has only two pieces for the queen.

I then continued:
4.Qxd5 Nh7 5.Qd7+ Kh6

White to move


I won with 6.e4 Ng5 7.exf5 gxf5 8Rxf5 Rc1+ 9.Kg2 Ne4 10.Rf6+! Nxf6 Qd2+ and Fritz 9 gave up.

But that sequence was after a take back.

I first tried 6.Qxa7 Bb5

White to move


From here, I erred more. After a couple of tries, I went back to the position after 5...Kh6 and played 6.e4.

After winning that I returned to this position, which is still winning as long as White avoids Black's checkmate threats. I played several lines. In the end I reached a drawn rook vs. bishop endgame and called it a day.

The play of rook vs. bishop with pawns still on the board is worthy of further study and practice in its own right. From the next diagram position, for example, White seems to be winning. But, how does a human win this against the computer?

White to move


Developing the skill to win such positions against any level of competition is a benefit of computer training with take backs. Today, I failed to win from this position, so I will try again.

26 December 2008

Reinfeld Tactic

Black to move


Black wins material with a double attack, but not quite as much as claimed by Fred Reinfeld in 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations. I've listed this problem among my partial busts because Reinfeld's solution is flawed. Nevertheless, after the tactic, Black does get a winning advantage. At least my engine thinks so. Several moves into the position, however, I lost my way and my engine, playing White, built up a significant advantage.

For more on the training regimen that brought up this problem this morning, see "Where the Rubber Meets the Road," "Back to the Mines," and "Ninety Minutes."

19 November 2008

Another Failure: More Useful Practice

This position came about through play from Fred Reinfeld's Winning Chess Combinations and Sacrifices #340.

Black to move


Can Black give up the bishop?

I thought so and played 10...h5

After 11.axb6 cxb6 12.c4 Rxf3
This was my second effort. I tried 12...h4 on the first go, and after the engine and I each queened a pawn, White forced a draw by repetition.

13.c5 bxc5 14.b5 Ra3 15.Kb2 Ra5 16.Nc7

Black to move


It seemed to me that I had to take the pawn, so 16...Rxb5

The engine was able to stop all my pawns with the two knights. How can I improve on my play?

09 November 2008

Where the Rubber Meets the Road

My training against my engines starts with tactical problems from Fred Reinfeld's 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations. I have the positions from this book in a database that I've set up to open to a random position in ChessBase 8. I keep the book near my desk for consulting the solutions after I've played the game against the engine. Finding these solutions is the easy part. Most often I can find the tactical idea Reinfeld had in mind within a few minutes. However, once I've reached a technically won position, at least what Reinfeld states is winning, the work begins.

The Software

Once I've opened a random position in CB 8, one click closes the database software and opens Hiarcs 10 or Fritz 9--the two engines share the same interface. Then I can play against the engine. I have Hiarcs 12, but it lacks compatibilty with ChessBase 8. Hiarcs 12, Fritz 11, and other recent engines work well with ChessBase 10, but older engines cooperate with older database software. I could buy the latest version (CB 10), but that requires a new computer, and I'd like Microsoft to get more of the bugs out of Vista before taking that plunge.

Today's Exercises

When I opened my Reinfeld Sacrifices and Combinations database this morning, it opened to WCASC #142, which I managed to solve in less than five minutes. Hiarcs used ten minutes (I set the game at G/15) to choose its first move, and resigned after my fifth move. As this one took little time, I went ahead with WCASC #143.

White to move


1.Qxg6 fxg6 2.Nf7+ Kg7 3.Nxd8 Rxd8 and that's where Reinfeld's solution ends, but the work begins. White is ahead an exchange, but Black has an extra pawn for the exchange. The doubled c-pawns could become a vulnerable weakness if Black's knights move forward to better posts.

A Winning Advantage?

One of my college roommates was fond of the expression "where the rubber meets the road" when talk must give way to action. Such is the case here. Reinfeld states that White wins with the advantage of the exchange. Finding such wins is my focus in this engine training.

White to move


The rooks must coordinate their efforts and White must find some work for the bishop.

a) 4.Rb1
b) 4.Ra2
c) 4.Re1
d) 4.Bg5

I looked at 4.Rb1, but after 4...b6, have I made progress? I didn't think so. I then considered 4.Ra2 and 4.Bg5. I failed to examine 4.Re1.

After the game, I loaded the game in Hiarcs 12 and turned on infinite analysis. The engine's top two choices were 4.Rb1 and 4.Re1, but when I executed 4.Ra2, its evaluation went up dramatically. Then, backing up to the diagram position Hiarcs favors this move by a substantial margin and 4.Bg5 becomes its second choice. It is gratifying to learn that the engine favors the move I tried first.

My first effort went thus:

4.Ra2 Ne4 5.Re2 N8f6 6.Rfe1 Re8 7.Kg2, but I couldn't find something useful for the bishop. After many moves, my position became worse and Black gained a slight advantage. I backed the game up and tried again.

My second effort went thus:

4.Bg5 h6 5.Bxf6 Nxf6 6.Rae1 Rd7 7.Re6 Nh7


White to move


I tried 8.h4 Nf8 9.Re8 Nh7 10.Rfe1 Kf7 and Hiarcs 12 likes all my moves, as well as those of its older version.

White still has a theoretically decisive advantage, but the best I was able to achieve was a draw. I suspect that a few daft moves might put Black in zugzwang, but could not find these moves.

I tried 11.Rh8, but after 11...Nf7 could not find a way to improve. Hiarcs 12 prefers 11.R1e6, but I didn't examine this move while playing. I could start again from there, but that must wait for another day.

08 November 2008

Simplify

During my engine training this morning, I had another opportunity to employ the practical technique of simplification. Beginning from Reinfeld's Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations problem #332, I reached this position with Black and the move.

Black to move: think simplification


Rexe3+ forced the white rook off the board, eliminating all counterplay and creating an elementary king and pawn endgame. Black gives up a rook for a pawn, but leaves White with no remaining hope.

Inasmuch as I spend a lot of time teaching and coaching beginners, I often see players struggle longer than necessary. Being a rook ahead makes it possible to trade down to a simpler position. It is worthwhile to spend effort playing elementary king and pawn endgames until a one pawn advantage in most cases is a technical win that one can blitz through in a matter of seconds. In this case, Black's outside passed pawn renders the game elementary.

The Source

WCSAC #332 is in the section "Discovered Attack," but discovery becomes possible only if White plays the moves given by Reinfeld in his solution. Reinfeld's solution presents the continuation played in the source game: Burger - Evans, New York 1954.

Black to move


My chess engine chose a continuation different than Karl Burger's choice after I executed the key played by Larry M. Evans. There was no discovery, but the win still was relatively easy.

03 November 2008

Failure and Success

Success often follows in the wake of failure. This morning I played two positions from Fred Reinfeld's 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations. I found the intended tactic easily in both, but in the first I failed to convert the advantage. Moreover, the longer I played the worse my position became. My advantage slipped away, and then Hiarcs 10 was winning.

Both problems called for a rook sacrifice that was easy to find.

WCSAC #62 Pinning: White to move


1.Rxe7 sets up a pin on the knight, and piling on the knight follows. 1...Qxe7 2.Qf3 Bg4 Reinfeld's line differs here 3.Qxg4 Nxg4 4.Bxe7 and White is winning.

A few moves later, I traded my bishop for Black's knight. Eventually a pair of rooks came off the board. My two knights appeared better than Black's rook until pawns started coming off the board.

Having failed on the first effort, I backed the game up a couple of times to a point where I could try a different plan, such as keeping my bishop. I lost these too. I spent about forty-five minutes struggling through this exercise.

Success!

WCSAC #145 White to move


1.Rxf7 Bxf7 2.Qf3 Be6 I expected 2...Bxd5 and wasn't certain if I would capture the bishop first or try 3.Qf8+ and 4.Qg7+. With the way Hiarcs 10 played, I was able to make moves I planned to examine more closely, but without the complications.

3.Qf8+ Ke7 4.Qg7+ Kc6 5.Ne7+ and Hiarcs 10 gave up on move 14, offering a bribe not to tell anyone.

The first problem gave me practice in imbalances of two minor pieces against a rook, but no success. In the second problem, I quickly had a queen and rook against two rooks and a bishop, and I had better pawns and a less vulnerable king. Success took ninety seconds off my clock, while the computer suffered through ten minutes of thinking time.

31 October 2008

Back to the Mines

Tactics Training Plus

In June I set forth a training regimen designed to strengthen my tactical skill in the usual way by solving a specific set of tactical problems. This regimen also had a second purpose: developing my technique at carrying out an attack to completion. I quickly realized that this regimen could help every aspect of my games except developing my opening repertoire.

The plan was thus: spend ninety minutes per week playing set positions against the computer. These set positions are from Fred Reinfeld, 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations (1955). It is not difficult to find the tactic, especially as they are organized by motif. But the resulting position is not always a clear win. In many of the problems, the player on move wins the exchange, which in theory confers a winning advantage. But there are many busts--Reinfeld's solutions often overlook a key defense that changes the evaluation of the position. In other cases, the winning advantage is so slight that nursing it to victory requires expert play.

I have failed. For the first several weeks, indeed through most of the summer, I was diligent. Since then, other interests and responsibilities, my online blitz obsession, and other factors have interfered with my performance of a clear and specific plan for improving my chess skills. Weeks have passed during which I did not solve a single problem from Reinfeld's book. I solved one problem the first day of October, but did not attempt another this month until today.

Since beginning my efforts, I have played to completion seventy problems. Seventy problems over eighteen weeks is less than four per week. Given an average of fifteen minutes per problem, that puts me more than thirty minutes per week behind schedule.

It is time to "get back to the mines," that is, to renew the necessary labor that will yield the riches of chess expertise.

Results

In sixteen of the seventy, Black moves first. In these, White won two, and there were five draws. One of the draws was my second effort on a problem attempted before I began this program. This draw was an improvement, but not yet the success I seek. One of the losses is a bust. My play was competent; Reinfeld's solution was suboptimal. White has a superior position despite the tactice. In the fifty-four problems I've played from the White side, Black has won twelve and drawn fifteen. Four of these are busts, one wins a pawn, and one is the familiar opening trap called Legall's Pseudo-Sacrifice, which Hiarcs, Fritz, or any other engine able to see five plies into the position will never fall into.

In time, I hope to complete all 1001 problems, winning all those that can be won, and identifying all the busts.

Resumption of Training

This morning I played from Reinfeld's WSSAC #0329, which is in chapter 4 "Discovered Attack." White moves first.



The tactic starts with a knight fork that drives the rook to a square where it is vulnerable to a discovered attack.

1.Nd6

Reinfeld gives 1...Re7 2.Nxc8 and White wins the exchange.

1...Kg8 Hiarcs 10 considers and rejects Reinfeld's line.

2.Nxe8 I did not even consider 2.f3, which seems superior. My play over the next several move was not the best possible, but I succeeded in improving my pieces.

2...Qxe8 3.c5 Kh8 4.Qc4 Nc7 5.Rb6 Qe7 6.Rfb1 Ra7 7.Be4?! Ne8 8.Qc2 Nf6 9.Bg2 Qe6 10.Rd1 Qe8 11.d4 Be6 12.Bb2



White invites 12...Nd7 13.d5 cxd5 14.Bxd5 Bxd5 15.Rxd5 Nxb6 16.cxb6 Ra8 17.Qc7 when Black has won back the exchange, but the coordination and activity of White's pieces create a decisive advantage.

Hiarcs played 12...h5.

13.Ba1 exd4 14.Bxd4 Qf7 15.Be5 Nd7 16.Bxg7+ Kxg7 17.Qb2+ Qf6 18.Rxb7 Qxb2 19.Rxb2 Rc7 20.Rd6 Kf6 21.Rxc6 Rxc6 22.Bxc6 Nxc5 23.Rb8 h4 24.Ra8 Nb3 25.Kf1 Ke5



White remains up the exchange and has a supported passed pawn.

26.Ke2?

26.Ke1 is much better as will become apparent in a few moves.

26...Kd6 27.Bb5 Bd5 28.Ra6+ Ke5 29.Rg6 Bf7 30.Rxg5+ Kf6 and the rook is trapped. Had the king been on e1 instead of e2, the rook could gobble all that it craves.

31.Rxg4 Bh5 32.Kf3

32.h3 is better

32...Nc5 33.h3 Kf5 34.Kg2 Bxg4 35.hxg4+ Kxg4 36.f3+ Kf5 37.Kh3 Kg5



My play has been far from perfect, but it has been good enough to maintain an advantage that should be decisive. Alas, more inaccuracies follow.

38.Kh2

38.Bc6 is better

38...Kf6 39.f4 Ne4 40.Kh3 Nc3 41.Bc6?

41.Kxh4 Nxb5 42.axb5+-

41...Ke6 42.Kxh4 Kd6

And we reach the last position from which I still could win.



43.Be8??

I played another eighteen moves in time pressure. But from this point the position is a draw.

43.Bf3 wins.

After thirty minutes from the original position, I spent another fifteen finding my critical errors with the aid of engine analysis. Then, I started another exercise beginning from the last diagram. I played 43.Bf3, and Hiarcs resigned fifteen moves later.

Today's forty-five minutes was productive.

04 August 2008

Reinfeld Busts

Many of the solutions to Fred Reinfeld's tactical puzzles hinge upon suboptimal moves. Problem 297 in 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations is slightly atypical.

White to move


The problems in this text are organized by theme, so the solver immediately knows that a discovered attack figures into the solution. In this position, the only conceivable discovery is against the queen, so the bishop must be able to move with check. Thus, 1.Rxe6+! If 1...Bxe6, then 2.Bb5+ wins the queen for a bishop and rook, and Black's pawn structure is compromised. If 1...fxe6, then Bg6+. However, the king can move. To Reinfeld's credit, he gives the lines just mentioned and offers, "Black must move his king, remaining with a decidedly inferior game" (213).

The next problem in the text is more typical of the sort of suboptimal moves that pepper the solutions.

White to move


There is a discovery after Reinfeld's line: 1.Be7 Re8 2.Bb4 threatening both checkmate and the queen. But Black has other options. When I played this position against Hiarcs 10 a few months ago, the engine replied to 1.Be7 with Bxf2+. After 2.Kxf2 Re8 3.Bb4 Qb6+ saves the queen at the cost of a bishop. White still has a winning advantage, but the position is less one-sided than in Reinfeld's solution. Against the engine, I was able to achieve only a draw.

This morning I played the position again, but against a newer version of Hiarcs. Hiarcs 12 played 1...f5. That game continued 2.Ra4 Bxf2+ (still the bishop sacrifice) 3.Kxf2 Qb6+ 4.Kf1 Rf7 and this time I went on to win, showing improvement on may part.

25 June 2008

Ninety Minutes

I resolved last week to spend ninety minutes per week playing against Fritz and/or Hiarcs from positions in Fred Reinfeld's 1001 Winning Chess Combinations and Sacrifices. Finding Reinfeld's idea is merely the first step. In most of the positions in his book, the player to move gains a material advantage but there is still play needed to bring home the point.

I play these positions at game/15. Some are over quickly; others require most of the allotted half an hour. I played nine this week, finding Reinfeld's idea in all of them. I carried six to the win, one was lost no matter what I played (see "Frustration"), and I failed in two.

One of the failures came from Problem 322. A simple discovery wins a knight. After some play I found myself in the following position.

White to move



I played 1.Kc6 and was able only to draw. In post-game analysis Hiarcs 10 suggested 1.Nc4 with the idea of playing the knight to a5. I should have seen that, but was in too much of a hurry to promote the d-pawn. In the original effort, Hiarcs was able to trade the a-pawn for my b-pawn then sac the rook for the d-pawn for a draw. After 1.Nc4 the rook sacrifice must occur with a white pawn still on the board.

I played the position from here and began with 1.Nc4. Hiarcs resigned after the ninth move.

I have completed Reinfeld's problems 320, 321, 322, 75, 76, 1, 2, 3, and 4. Number 3 is a loss despite the tactic. I failed on 322 and 4. I'm still running post-game analysis on 4 to see where I missed a win.