CHESS
Teach-in
Raymond Keene
SOME CHESS experts excel through play- ing results while others shine by their writ- ings and general ability to teach. It is a happy coincidence when these gifts align in one and the same person. For example, Paul Morphy left no writings about his games of any note, while modern champi- ons such as Petrosian and, indeed, Fischer (with the notable exception of his Book of Memorable Games) were quite recalcitrant about setting down their thoughts on paper. In the opposite school are those one might call philosopher-champions, Alekh- ine, Botvinnik and Kasparov, who have been only too ready to publish their best games with detailed commentary.
One player who never quite succeeded in climbing the absolute pinnacle of chess accomplishment in over-the-board play, yet who made an indelible mark with his com- mentaries and explanation, was Aron Nimzowitsch, the supreme chess theorist of the 1920s and early 1930s. Although he advanced to probably the number two or three slot in the world, there was always a Capablanca or an Alekhine who, at their best, could over-match him. Nevertheless, his book, My System, has become the bible for chess strategy and its message is still valid seven decades later.
This week's game is a fine example by Nimzowitsch of chess strategic thinking, played after his great book was published. He sets out the thought behind his moves so clearly that it was easy for following gen- erations to absorb his message and adhere to his clear attacking line. The following notes are based on those of Nimzowitsch.
Nimzowitsch—Rubinstein: Berlin 1928; Nimzowitsch Attack.
1 NI3 d5 2 b3 Bf5 3 Bb2 e6 4 g3 66 In order to avoid the exchange of the bishop after Nf3-h4 etc. 5 Bg2 Nd7 6 0-0 Ngf6 7 d3 Be7 8 e3 Obviously the natural preparation for e2-e4 con- sisted in the moves 8 Nbd2 and 9 Rel. But this preparation would have led to a vulnerable point in White's position, for a reason which appears from the note to White's 11th move. 8 ...0-0 9 Qe2 c6 10 Kill! White waits to develop the knight, because in some variations he counts on its development to c3. For example, now in case 10 ... a5 comes, then 11 a4, and if 11 ... b5, then 12 axb5 cxb5 and now 13 Nc3! 10 ...a5 11 a4! `So it is made clear'! Let us now consider, that instead of e2-e3 and Qe2 the moves Nbd2 and Rel had been made. In this case Black could have played 11 Bb4 and White would not have had anything better than 12 c3. But that would have meant a weakening of the whole anatomy of the pawn formation. Now, on the other hand, 11 Bb4 would be ineffectual. 11 Nc5 12 Nd4 Bh7 13 f4 The white pawn forma- tion makes a very reliable impression. Think, on the other hand, how weak it would have been if White had been tempted into c2-c4, e.g. on the 7th move. It is often just as important to know which pawn move one should forgo as to find out which pawn should go forward. 13 ...Nfd7 14 Nd2 After White has given the knight the sum total of the opportunities that it could be given (he held the choice between Nd2 and Nc3 open between moves 6-8), he can now with a good conscience let the horse make a decision. 14 ... Qc7! Not 14 ... e5, e.g. 15 fxe5 Nxe5 16 Nf5 Bxf5 17 Rxf5 Ng6 18 Rafl and White has good chances. 15 e4 (Diagram) The advance is carried out without it being possible to see a shadow of weakness in White's position. Now, by the way, the meaning of 10 Khl! becomes clear: the diag- onal b6-gl was 'safeguarded'. 15 ... dxe4 16 Nxe4 Nxe4 17 dxe4 e5 18 N13! Not 18 Nf5? because of 18 ... Bxf5 19 exf5 Bf6 with a solid strongpoint in the centre at e5. 18 ... ex14 19 0'4 Rfe8 20 e5 White's 'compactness' depends now on how the square f5 fares: if Black is in a position to make f5 into a blockading base, from there to get con- trol of the neighbouring white squares, then the 'compactness' is about to go amiss. But if White should be able to wrest f5 from the enemy's hands, then the compactness stays unaffected. White has in the meantime rightly seen that the latter is the case. 20 ... Nc5 21 Nd4 Ne6 22 Radl Nxd4 23 Bxd4 Bf5 24 Be4 Bxe4+ 25 Qxe4 Rad8 26 e6 Very good was 26 Rgl, e.g. 26 ... c5 27 Bc3 Rxdl 28 Rxdl Rd8 29 Rd5! (centralisation) 29 Rxd5 30 Qxd5 Qd8 31 Qxd8+ Bxd8 32 Kg2. Or 26 ...Bf8 27 Rdfl Qd7? 28 Bb6 Qd5 29 Qxd5 Rxd5 30 Rdl with clear advantage for White. 26 Bf8 27 Be5 Although this bishop move leads to a beautiful finish I am no longer convinced of its excellence: with the best defence Black could actually have avoided the 'finish'. 27 f5 c5 28 Bc3! fxe6 29 fxe6 b6 and now follows 30 Rdel — the pawn at e6 looks to be both capable of sur- vival and dangerous. The diagnosis is therefore 'good for White'. 27 ... Qc8? Hitherto Rubin- stein has defended his game in an entirely capi- tal manner, but now he commits a mistake which enables a quick decision. The correct move was 27 ... Qe7, e.g. 28 Rxd8! Qxd8 (bad is 28 Rxd8 because of 29 f5 fxe6 30 f6 Qf7 31 Rgl etc.) 29 exf7+ Kxf7 30 c4 and White's advantage (centralisation) is only slight. Now, on the other hand, follows an elegant catastrophe! 28 f5! fxe6 29 f6 Rxdl 30 17+ 1018 31 Rxdl Rd8 32 Qg6!! Black resigns After 32 ...Rxdl + 33 Kg2 Rd2+ 34 Kh3 the threat of mate on h6 cannot be par- ried.
Next week, to show the impact of Nimzo- witsch's teachings, I will publish two games modelled on the above.
Previous page
