Category Archives: Intermediate (1350-1750)

Going Back to the Basics (2)

“Everything in life goes back to the basics”
Kron Gracie

Last week I wrote about material balance in response to a call for help from my online student C:
“Recently I’ve been noticing that when I’m in a game, sometimes I don’t find an attack, or a really good move right away, and I start to focus on dumb, and pointless things in the game like taking a side pawn, and I forget about what is happening around me. This is mainly why I blunder and then lose. If you could give me some advice before the tournament I would appreciate it.”

The second aspect one should always keep an eye on is the kings’ position at all times. If you think about it, this makes perfect sense; capturing either king ends the game on the spot. We should all strive to keep our king out of danger, while attacking the other one whenever the opportunity arises. Beginners in general face a real challenge to follow this. The number of pieces on the board at the beginning is overwhelming and the number of possible moves is plain and simple scary. Who has time to look at the king when we know it is not useful? Another challenge comes from the rules in place for castling. I have seen countless times total confusion when club players stumbled over castling, wanted to do it and did not know how. It starts as simple as to know how many squares the king moves (it happens often to see a Queen side castle with Kb1+Rc1) and it continues quite often with castling through check or castling while in check and getting away with it (the opponent accepts it!).

I can hear you saying “I can castle. I am not a beginner anymore”. Moving on to more entertaining situations, I wonder how many times do you really watch the kings’ position? Do you do it constantly throughout the game? If you do, it is highly unlikely to be in the same shoes as C. Their position gives you most of the times enough information to figure out what to do. Of course this is not enough; you also need to find the right idea and put together the most appropriate plan to use to your advantage the kings’ position. That requires more advanced positional and tactical knowledge, as well as a lot of practice. C has offered me the perfect opportunity to expand on it based on one of his games from that tournament. Here is the position in question, the way he played it and the way he should have played it:

The good (White):

  • he realized he should attack the opposing king
  • his pieces were positioned almost perfectly (this ties into the third aspect) and beginning the attack was the right thing to do
  • eventually he clued in to bring Rf1 into the attack

The bad (White):

  • he could not make up his mind what to do with Bc4
  • trying to create a battery with 19. Qf5 and 20. Bd3 was an unfortunate waste of time
  • he got scared of a potential one move threat Rg8-g5

The ugly (White):

  • he should have realized from the beginning Qe2 and Bc4 were already in attacking positions, so the correct way to play would have been 18. Rf3 to bring another attacker
  • the fact there were semi-open files on g- and h-, an isolated h6-pawn and no piece outside Qe7 defending the king, should have pointed to the need to bring a rook into the action

Conclusion: the play was dictated exclusively by the weakened position in front of the Black king. The first needed step was to recognize it and that meant White was on the right track. It did not mean he reached the destination yet and he also had to choose the most appropriate plan to attack it. It is striking how Black could survive and save a draw when his position was completely lost at move 18. Do not allow such anomalies to happen in your games!

Valer Eugen Demian

Going Back to the Basics (1)

“Everything in life goes back to the basics”
Kron Gracie

One of my online students (let’s name him C) sent me his latest analysed games and the following message as he was preparing for a local tournament:
“Recently I’ve been noticing that when I’m in a game, sometimes I don’t find an attack, or a really good move right away, and I start to focus on dumb, and pointless things in the game like taking a side pawn, and I forget about what is happening around me. This is mainly why I blunder and then lose. If you could give me some advice before the tournament I would appreciate it.”

Week after week we repeat the same process while going over his games. It is interesting to see how he struggles to make connection between our analysis and his thought process during the games. I have seen it too many times: the student believes after the lessons taught and puzzles solved, we are done and they do not have use for them anymore. During my earlier years as a coach I would not even think about it (too obvious, right?) and could become frustrated; one such moment was about 10 years ago during the national final of a team competition when I was coaching team British Columbia. Our province is a perennial 3rd in the country with Ontario and Quebec being in a league of their own. There are a number of reasons why this is the reality, but they are not important for the purpose of this article. Anyway the matches versus Ontario and Quebec are always a measuring stick of how we are doing; any wins or draws versus them are important. Our player in question was an up and coming junior at the time and he happened to be my student as well. Do not remember exactly what was the situation he missed in the endgame after a long battle in the match versus Ontario; it might have been going for a draw in the side pawn and bishop of wrong corner color (our app level 3, lesson 24). The point was that coincidentally we covered that situation right before the tournament (one would assume to be fresh on his mind) and I could not believe he failed to remember it.

Coming back to today I just reminded C of our process. One hears a lot in sports “go back to the basics” when things are not going well. It is easy to dismiss it as a cliche and to believe it does not apply to you when in reality it does very much. The first step in going back to the basics is to mind at all times the material balance or in simpler terms to know how many pieces you have versus what the opponent has. Do you mind this at all times in your games? Is it just as simple as counting the pieces and their value, subtract it from what the opponent has and see what you got? Do you count the pieces left on the board or the ones already captured? I see some of my level 2 students counting the pieces captured because they are fewer. This is not very good practice. Do you know why? There are a couple of obvious reasons for it:

  • The captured pieces cannot influence what is going on in the game anymore
  • Some captured pieces could be misplaced (example: falling under the table) or the opponent might hold one or more in their hand

Get into the habit of counting the pieces on the board and watch the balance between you pieces and the opposing ones. It is a basic aspect of the game you can use from the simplest “I am up by a point”, to the most sophisticated ones such as “I am going for an imbalanced material situation”. I am not going to spend time on “I am up by a point” C was alluding to when he mentioned taking a side pawn; however I am going to show a very interesting position where the imbalanced material situation was the answer. Here it is from one of our unfinished team voting games:

We had a long discussion about what to do here and some of the ideas were as follows (in chronological order):

  • “19. c5 gives us a passed pawn but it’ll be very difficult to defend; 19. Rfd1 is also a good idea since b5 is such a slow move”
  • “I like 19. Qb2 to move the queen away from the Black rook”
  • “Going back to 19. c5 it could be interesting to look at: 19. c5 Na5 20. Rbc1”
  • “19. c5 Na5 20. Rbc1 Nb7 21. c6 Bxc6 (21… Rxc6 same line) 22. Qxc6 Rxc6 23. Rxc6 and Black loses at least one queen side pawn”
    This was the seed of looking for an imbalanced material situation!
  • “19. a4 bxa4 20. Qxa4 Nd4 21. Qd1 Nxe2 To me this doesn’t seem great as I’d think their bishop is a bit better than our knight in such an open position, and both …Be6 and …Bg4 look like good moves for them”
  • “At the moment, the blunder 19. cxb5?? is in the lead, so we’re going to have to unite around a move. How about 19.Qb2 … ? It doesn’t seem to have any immediate downsides, and it gets us out of the pin”
  • “One quick note; 19. cxb5 is not a “blunder” per se. 19… Nd4 20. Qd2 Nxe2+ 21. Qxe2 Bxb5 22. Rxb5 axb5 23. Qxb5 with two pawns and a knight for a rook. Not the best, but not a total disaster”
  • “19. Qb2 is a safe option, but the resulting position (19. Qb2 b4) is probably not too much better for us than the a4 line”
  • “19. Qb2 b4 20. Rfc1 a5 21. Rc2 Rc7 22. Rbc1 Rfc8 23. Qb3 a4 doesn’t seem very good for White”
  • “I am not convinced that 19. cxb5 is all that horrible. I also wonder about 19. a4 having an issue with 19…b4 19. Qb2 looks interesting but the variations I see so far look defensive. So, let us look at 19. cxb5 in a little more depth. Tell why it is bad”
  • “19. cxb5 Nd4 20. Nxd4 Rxc2 21. Nxc2 Bxb5 22. Bxb5 axb5 23. Rxb5”
  • “In that line it is not clear to me how Black wins just with the queen, rook and 3 versus 4 pawns after they capture the a2-pawn (worst case scenario). White defends the f2-pawn with one rook and holds (for example) the 4th row with the other rook and knight. It feels easier to play than suffering in the 19. Qb2 line”
  • “I don’t like a4 b4 now (thanks to eric for finding that!). I am skeptical of cxb5; we’ll hold, but it won’t be easy, and we won’t have winning chances. The lines with Qb2 and Nd4 looks pretty good for us. Therefore, my vote goes to Qb2 (though I would be really unhappy if cxb5 won out)”

It is very interesting to go over the above and follow the train of thoughts. In the end 19. cxb5 won by one vote (10 votes) over 19. Qb2 (9 votes). Which move would have you chosen if you could be white in this position? Looking back here we were at the crossroads and going for 19. cxb5 made all the difference. My guess is it also surprised the opposing team and the resulting material imbalance influenced them into playing from bad to worst; now we are in an endgame where winning is just around the corner. Before showing you how the game went on for a few more moves, please remember to watch the material balance at all times until your subconscious will take over and do that for you.

Valer Eugen Demian

Stalemate Tuesday

“Any problem that features a pawn moving from its starting square to promotion in the course of the solution is now said to demonstrate the Excelsior theme.”
Excelsior by Sam Lloyd

Chess offers many more opportunities to enjoy it than what we get from the original position and normal play. There are several chess variants to choose from, as well as trying your hand at reaching the most unusual positions one can think of. Stalemate is very hard to reach given its main condition: no pieces can move and the King is not in check. It is logical to look for such positions in the endgame where we have few pieces left. Has it ever crossed your mind though to look for stalemate in the opening? Some have done it already. You can try to do better either by yourself or with your friends at the club. Why would you even consider doing that? I always regarded such unusual exercises as a way of being inventive; way too many times we blitz our moves without thinking in long opening lines, most of the times with no understanding why those moves are played in that order.

Here is an example of juniors who discovered a beauty composed by Sam Lloyd (shortest stalemate possible) and played it on the national stage. It did not go very well with the organizers and both got “0” at the end of it. If you want to play a pre-arranged draw, choose something “normal” to avoid the spotlight. I remember doing it once back in the University Championship. We chose a game with some spectacular sacrifices ending in perpetual; in hindsight it was a bit too spectacular and a number of players came over to watch it live, plus at the end of it a lively analysis erupted. There was no internet at the time and the likelyhood of someone knowing the game was not very high. Today if you want to do something similar, be careful what you choose; google is always watching… Below is what those juniors did. That is asking for trouble or being as inventive as one can be, depending on your perspective:

You can pick up the challenge and see if you can beat Sam Lloyd by finding a shorter stalemate. A couple of players from Germany chose to add a nice wrinkle to it and created a stalemate on move 12 with all the pieces on the board! The position might look familiar since Wheeler (Sunny South 1887) and Sam Lloyd (him again) composed similar positions some 100 years prior; still reaching it requires some work and from this point of view it is as good of a chess workout as anything. Enjoy!

Valer Eugen Demian

Short and Sweet (1)

When Mike Fox and I were writing our Addicts’ Corner column in CHESS one of our regular features was ‘Short and Sweet’, in which we invited readers to submit their own very short wins (or losses).

Every week I download the latest TWIC and search for mini-miniatures. This week’s TWIC offers a bumper 7872 games, many of them played in the World Rapid and World Blitz Championships, but also much else from Christmas/New Year tournaments around the world. The World Rapid and Blitz Championships, held, controversially, in Saudi Arabia, featured some less experienced local players who were easy prey for the visiting GMs.

Let’s look at some of last week’s quicker decisive games.

Cho Fai Heng (1476) – Benjamin Yao Teng Oh (1855)
Jolimark HK Open 24 Dec 2017

1. e4 c5
2. Ne2 Nc6
3. Nbc3

The Closed Variation is a nice system to play against the Sicilian. You can close your eyes and play the first eight moves without thinking. Or can you?

3… Nd4

Not optimal, but hoping for a Christmas present. White duly obliges.

4. g3 Nf3#

Of course it’s easy to fall for this if you’re, like White in this game, a low graded and perhaps inexperienced player.

Strong players would never make that sort of mistake. Or would they?

Six days later, this happened.

Gulnar Mammadova (2357) – Sarah Hoolt (2405)
World Blitz Women 2017, Riyahd R17 30 Dec 17

1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 e6
3. b3 b6
4. c4 Bb7
5. Nc3 Nc6
6. Bb2 e5
7. Nd5 d6
8. g3 Nge7
9. Bh3

White’s not threatening anything so Black decides to prepare a fianchetto.

9… g6
10. Nf6#

It’s blitz so you move fast. These things happen. But if you stop to ask yourself the MAGIC QUESTION ‘If I play that move what will my opponent do next?’ it really shouldn’t happen. It’s also a pattern which you should recognize. Pattern recognition is an important part of chess and will save time in analysis. It doesn’t mean you don’t have to analyse at all, though.

Now here’s something strange. Perhaps the most frequent opening tactic of all is Qa4+ (Qa5+ for Black) picking up a loose minor piece. It’s a pattern you have to remember. Like this.

Inga Charkhalashvili (2337) – Bedor Al Shelash (-)
World Rapid Women 2017, Riyahd R2 26 Dec 17

1. d4 e6
2. c4 d5
3. Nc3 Nf6
4. Bg5 Bb4
5. Qa4+ 1-0

Except that it isn’t. Black could have defended with Nc6. Perhaps she didn’t notice, or perhaps her mobile phone went off. Who knows?

I’d have been tempted to wait a move, playing something like 5. Nf3 hoping for 5… b6 in reply.

In rapid and blitz games mistakes like this will inevitably happen. But a grandmaster playing in a slowplay event would never hang a piece on move 5.

Wong Meng Kong (2252) – Denis Molofej (2081)
Jolimark HK Open 25 Dec 17

1. Nf3 d5
2. c4 dxc4
3. Qa4+ Qd7
4. Qxc4 Qc6

Trading queens on move 5 would be pretty boring so White prefers…

5. Qb3 Qxc1+ 0-1

Until I came across these games I was planning to write about a particular book and author this week. The book included an analogous position to this:

Mohammed Alanazy (1850) – Ahmed M Al Ghamdi (2159)
World Blitz 2017, Riyahd R15 30 Dec 17

1. e4 c5
2. d4 cxd4
3. c3 d3
4. Nf3 d6
5. e5 dxe5
6. Nxe5 Qc7
7. Qh5

White defends his threatened knight while at the same time threatening mate in 2. What could be more natural? Sadly, the blitz time limit didn’t allow him to ask himself the MAGIC QUESTION.

7… g6

Black defends his threatened king while at the same time threatening the queen which is defending the knight. If 8. Qg5 he can choose between Bh6 and f6, both winning a piece.

8. Qf3 Qxe5+ 0-1

My last offering for now highlights another recurring tactical pattern in the opening. Again, an idea all competitive players need to know.

Johan-Sebastian Christiansen (2495) – Hassan M Al Bargi (1579)
World Rapid 2017, Riyahd R2 26 Dec 17

1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Qxd5
3. Nc3 Qd8
4. d4 Nf6
5. Nf3 c6
6. Bc4 Bg4

Allowing a familiar combination. At least it should be familiar. My database has 28 examples of White’s next move, with two of the victims being rated over 2200. The earliest example is Albin – Lee New York 1893, a tournament which also featured William Henry Krause Pollock.

7. Bxf7+ Kxf7
8. Ne5+ Kg8
9. Nxg4 Nbd7
10. Qe2 Nxg4
11. Qe6#

Which is why an early section of Chess Openings for Heroes covers these tactical patterns which happen over and over again. You won’t find this, as far as I know, in any other elementary openings book.

Richard James

The Power of the Two Bishops

One important strategic element is the two bishops. A player has the two bishops when you have both bishops on the board and your opponent only has one (or none). Of course, understanding when and how the two bishops can be an benefit depends on the specific position.

The bishop pair thrives in the following types of positions:

  1. In open positions, where there are either few central pawns or they are not locked.
  2. When there are pawns on both sides of the board.
  3. When the bishops have targets – typically in the form of pawns.

The two bishops struggle in the following types of positions:

  1. In closed positions, where the central pawns are locked.
  2. When the opposing knight has strong central outposts, where the main strength of the bishop over the knight – its range – is negated.
  3. When pawns are on one side of the board, where an opposing knight may be able to protect them.

Why are the two bishops often an positional advantage?

  1. The bishops can often dominate an opposing knight, particularly a misplaced one – “knights on the rim are dim.”
  2. The unopposed bishop (the one for which doesn’t have an opposite number) can attack squares and targets that cannot be easily defended since the opponent doesn’t have a bishop of the same color.
  3. The bishops can coordinate and cover large zones of squares on both sides of the board. This is particularly true in the endgame, where there are fewer pieces and pawns on the board.

The following video is a game that I commented on where Black – Greek GM Efstratios Grivas – expertly handles the two bishops.

Bryan Castro

“What say you?” The 1 minute challenge (8)

“A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer”
Bruce Lee

A quick reminder about how to do it:

  • Have a look at the position for 1 minute (watch the clock)
  • Think about the choices in front of you and pick the one you feel it is right
  • Verify it in your mind the best you can
  • Compare it with the solution

Are you ready? Here it is: black is a pawn up and looking for the best plan to get the win. What should Black do?

This was an interesting team voting game because of what followed. We had a very passionate discussion at this point about those options listed. It continued the following 3 moves and I just gathered the most important thoughts shared, all in one place. It does not make much of a difference for the purpose of this article. Anyhow, here is the thought process behind each idea as expressed on our side. Go over each one of them and see which one matches your thoughts the best.
Preventing any counterplay on the king side
It would stop Kf2 from coming down.
Since we own the d-file their king would be trapped to the upper left quadrant, thus making a race of kings to the center a mute point. This would give us time to move our K/R/pawns where we like.

Bringing the king in the game
It is the most logical move centralizing our king and slowly and calmly improving our position.
We need to centralize the king and prevent counter-play. 26… Ke7 is clearly the only way to achieve both.
If our rook alone can cause trouble, just imagine if we get both our king and our rook working together.
Endgames are a matter of style. My preference is for eliminating any counterplay the opposition might have. Why take chances when we are ahead?
Moving the king to the queen side is to seek attacking those isolated a- and c- pawns. Think about it this way: if our king forces their rook to defend those pawns, our rook can easily outplay their king. Yes, a centralized king is needed in the endgame; however IMO supporting our pawns and targeting their weak pawns is more appropriate in this position.

Going after the weak queen side pawns
I thought 26… Rd1 was the way to go to get the rook behind the pawns.
Right now, I like 26… Rd1 because I think that we can get either their h3 or a3 pawn. There is no risk with this maneuver. We can always centralize our king later.
I agree that 26… Ke7 is also good and will win eventually. I just think 26… Rd1 is a bit more accurate.
I should say that I know 26… Ke7 is the obvious positional move, and unless 26… Rd1 outright wins material we should centralize the king.
In the lines I’m seeing, 26… Rd1 does win a pawn and keeps their king close to their h-pawn as a bonus.

Using the 5th rank to swing the rook on either side as needed
I would firstly like to be able to swing the rook over and the fifth rank is where this can happen. Secondly, I believe our king must seek the maximum of central activity and that there is no reason to bury him on the queen side, where our two pawns are never ever going to break through alone whereas after trading the h-pawn, our sound three connect pawns will give us a lot of opportunities against their weak king side pawns.
I prefer 26… Rd5 and rather than bringing the Black king to the queen side, I was hoping for it to play a more central role.

Each of the above have merits more or less. It is a matter of style and endgame knowledge which one to choose and play. Probably all of them lead Black to winning, so which one seems the most attractive to you? In the end our team chose to bring the King in the game and used it to win a second pawn on the queen side; once that happened, our passer on the queen side became a decoy and enabled our king to penetrate on the king side. It is interesting to note how we used the rook to hold the fort and that eliminated any possible counter play. White had no chance to create trouble with our 7th rank protected. Yes, the endgame continued for 18 moves and some might find that too long. We simply believe (and there’s more of us after such games) it is a pleasure to play won positions on the winning side for as long as it takes. What do you believe?

Valer Eugen Demian

Boxing Day Challenge

“A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing”
Emo Philips

One day I stumbled over this doozy and it kept me hooked for a while. You have to admit the position is intriguing and it is hard to let go once you see it. In a way it is kind of like a Boxing Day deal; you get your eyes on it and you have to have it. Let’s see if you can get this deal done: White to move and draw!

It starts easy, doesn’t it? Those 2 pawns must take care of themselves with their king poorly placed near the a8-corner. Of course losing one of them (the e5-pawn is under attack) leads to losing both and then the game is over. One idea could be to bring the king over and that can’t be done right away because the pawns drop (see line A). Hmm, a logical follow up is to have the pawns take care of themselves for a little while and once that is accomplished, white can try bringing the king over. After 1. f7 Rf8 2. e6 … those little buggers can hurt in a hurry; Black’s reply 2… b6 is forced and now we have achieved what we wanted: the White pawns stay on the board longer.

Bringing the White king over looks now like a must. The White pawns are in a Mexican standoff with Rf8 and the king has only one move to play 3. Kb7 … Black of course does the same 3… Kc5 and here is the turning point. I got stuck with the idea of bringing the king over all the way and realized the b6-pawn would win the game for Black after the rook sacrifices itself for those 2 White pawns (see line B). That was one nasty dilemma. The moves seemed all good so far with no alternatives. I left it alone for a number of days. It is always a good idea to reset when you get stuck, leave the challenge on the side and clear your mind. You can come back to it after a few minutes of doing something else or thinking of something different. The challenge still lingers in the back of your mind, but you can return to it fresh and flexible to approach it from a different angle.

What else can White think about using to save the draw after 3… Kc5? The pawns can’t move and bringing the king over loses. Can you think of anything useful here? If you can’t, have a beer or coffee or simply look out the window for a bit. Now get back to it from a fresh angle. The seventh rank is the one helping the rook capture those pawns. You can think about vacating it with your king and could not do it before; now you can. It seems completely counter intuitive and losing since now the Black king is closer and after 4. Ka6 Kd6 (see line C) Black wins those pawns and the game. So much for a fresh angle, eh? If you resist the temptation to turn on the engine and show what you have missed or can’t see, I commend you! You will be rewarded. The solution is right there in front of you and you have all that you need to figure it out. Give it another shot and do not scroll down to see the solution. How can you use all that we have figured out so far?

  • The 2 White pawns are barely hanging in there before being lost
  • The White king can’t come closer to help them out
  • The seventh rank must be vacated by the White king

So, did you figure it out? White reaches a forced draw because the alternative would be to win the game. Enjoy the solution!

Valer Eugen Demian

Two Rooks on the Seventh

Nimzowitsch was one of the first ones to highlight the power of two rooks on the seventh rank in his famous book “My System” published in 1925. Many a player are reminded of it time and time again or are happy to have it as a resource to draw or win their games. This month I got a first hand reminder during one of my online games. It is not that I have forgotten about it, but I simply overlooked it and lost half a point in the process. Lesson 24, level 4 of our app will get a new addition to the existing collection of puzzles on this subject. Let’s see the game together:

Do not dismiss the potential of two rooks on the seventh. Contrary to the popular belief the purpose for such rooks is not to checkmate the opponent or even win the game on the spot. Their purpose is to use their dominance and gain material advantage one can further use to win the game; in our case their purpose was to save half a point for white after a dubious opening and some poor play. Next time I will be far more reluctant to find exceptions (are there any?…) where those rooks on the seventh won’t help.

Valer Eugen Demian

Wanna be an English Trapper?

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”
George Santayana

Funny how the past becomes important as we grow older. Some moments we remember immediately, others pop up at the right moment or even when we least expect it. Chessplayers have a good memory and that is an important ingredient in getting better. Another important thing is studying “traps and zaps”, expression used by Bruce Pandolfini in his popular book “Chess Openings: Traps and Zaps” from 1989. If you do not have it, you can always create your own from past games you played or have studied. Here is one of mine from the time I was in grade 7:

The English Opening is again popular these days, but was not so much at that time. I liked it because it allowed me to surprise my opponents expecting mostly 1. e4 or 1. d4. I have won many a game because of this. Do you think this trap is too simple or easy to see? You could be right now that you saw it. Hopefully you will not have it done to you from now on; it is not a nice feeling to lose that fast. All I can say is the trap functions today as efficient as it did back then. Quite a few of my students are using it too. It is also only one of more the position offers against unaware opponents. Here is another one played by one of my students a few years back:

Lessons 8 and 9, level 4 of our app have a few more useful traps and zaps in the English. The beauty of it is having the opportunity to add more examples as more unsuspecting victims fall for them. One of my former students managed to finish top 10 in boys U8 at the World Youth Chess Championship in Vietnam 2008 by playing the English exclusively with the White pieces; while he could not collect pieces with his traps at that level, he got pawns and superior positions he converted into invaluable points later on in those games. What more do you need? I will end this teaser article with one of my latest uses of a trap from a game I played online a couple of weeks ago. It was the game inspiring me to write this article. Hope you enjoyed it!

Valer Eugen Demian

The Wrong Rook (2)

“We are our choices”
Jean-Paul Sartre

More than a year ago I wrote an article on the same subject. You can review it here and that could help you figure out the solution to this puzzle as well.

You could say “But this one has 2 extra pawns in it”, so let’s look into why those pawns are on the board. The position has equal material. Re3, Re2 and Rb3 are in a standoff, all being under attack one way or another. An exchange leads to a simple draw since both pawns can either do damage or be captured as shown. In the same time Black’s rook battery along the 3rd rank protects its king from being checkmated and keeps an eye on the f6-pawn.

You might get the feeling in the beginning those pawns are important. Both of them are passed and on the 6th rank. The White king is not in the a3-pawn square, while the Black king is in the f6-pawn square (please review lesson 26, level 3 of our app). The a3-pawn cannot advance at the moment; the f6-pawn can and Black could catch it by moving either the rook or its king. If Black wants to catch it with its rook (1. f7 Rf3), it has to consider Rb3 is under attack and would be lost. That means the only move it really has is 1. f7 Kg7 Next we should look at what White can do about its pawn. Defending it 1. f7 Kg7 2. Rf2 Kf8 leads nowhere fast, so what about promoting it?

Now we have reached a similar situation with the other puzzle. White has sacrificed its pawn and all it has left is to attack the king. Should it do it with 1. Rf2+ …, 1. Rf1+ … or it does not matter? If the king goes toward the h8-corner, White wins no matter what because like in the other puzzle Black loses a rook. We also see in the process why the a3-pawn is needed, as the White king uses it to hide from checks (see line A). Now we look at what happens if the Black king goes in the center and we could observe quickly the difference between having a rook on e2 or not (see line B). Going back to the main line, we conclude it matters which rook is used to check with; one move leads to a draw and the other one to a win. Hope you have enjoyed it.

Valer Eugen Demian