A Lesson from Botvinnik

This game is highly instructive & teaches a very important lesson in terms of flexible strategy. First Mikhail Botvinnik prevented Black from freeing his game by blocking the c5 lever. White’s idea relied on attacking the weak pawn on the half open file and on top up of that Black’s light squarebishop was just a big pawn. Later we see a change in strategy when Botvinnik gives his bishop by capturing the knight on d5, which allows Black to eliminate his weakness on c6. Botvinnik did this because he wanted to use the c-file for his rooks and play a position where the knight is clearly superior to his opponent’s bishop. Very soon white grabbed a pawn due to bank-rank trick and won quite convincingly.

Many people say that you can’t win without a mistake by your opponent. Here too Botvinnik didn’t win without his opponent making a mistake but he created such pressure that a mistake became more likely.

Here is the game with brief analysis.

Ashvin Chauhan


Summer Chess League

As you saw last week, traditional chess leagues such as the London League, are still surviving with a reasonable amount of success, although works-based leagues such as the London Commercial League are dying. At the same time, new leagues are starting up which take a very different approach to club chess.

Take, for instance, the Summer Chess League. There are two clubs in West London, Hammersmith and their neighbours south of the Thames, Battersea, who are doing a great job in moving away from the traditional concept of what a chess club should be, using Twitter, promoting social chess and taking the game into the community. Both clubs have sponsorship, Battersea from a local removals company, Bishops Move, who use a chess logo, and Hammersmith from the London Chess Centre. Compare, for example, my club, Richmond, just a few miles away. Most of our committee members have no idea about what these clubs are doing. When I suggested making more use of social media at last year’s AGM I was interrupted by a colleague (who has now joined another club) telling me that this was no use: instead we should be putting posters in libraries. Facepalm, as the young folks say.

Battersea have a venue with a large hall which can seat more than a hundred players. Last year they started a summer chess league there, in a small way. This year, the league has really taken off.

There are three divisions, with teams consisting of four players. Division 1 has attracted 8 teams, Division 2, for teams with an average grade of 150 or below, has 12 teams, and Division 3, for teams with an average grade of 120 or below, again has 8 teams. The tine limit is 60 minutes on the clock, with an increment of 30 seconds per move. The leagues are run on the Swiss System, with four rounds, and there are social evenings to start and end the season.

The pairings are published several days in advance, so that you can prepare for your opponent, and all games are published online as soon as they become available: a great service for both players and fans.

The league’s tagline is ‘London’s Lighter League’, and the social side of chess is very much to the fore. Teams are encouraged to design colourful logos and give themselves catchy names. Players are encouraged to buy drinks at the bar.

Players in the first round included a grandmaster, Keith Arkell, and two international masters and former Richmond Junior Chess Club members, who faced off against each other in this top board encounter from the match between the Battersea Horses and the Lords of Hackney.

Gavin Wall, representing the Horses, decided to depart from his normal opening repertoire against Hackney Lord Richard Bates.

A highly entertaining, if inaccurate encounter. Gavin missed 33. Qg5+ followed by Na4, 34. Qh6+ was still winning. Richard in turn missed a win with 47.. Qe3.

The game on board 3 from the same match produced some even more entertaining chess. Another former Richmond Junior, Mike Healey, was the White Horse against current Richmond Juniors coach Bob Eames, the Dark Lord.

Bob could have drawn by playing 52.. Kf5, but if you’re on 30 second increments in a wild position with queens flying round the board and exposed kings, these things happen.

These games must have been great fun for the spectators. Watching creative players who aren’t afraid to take risks at a relatively fast time control is very different from watching your typical elite GM tournament. I guess this is what the Summer Chess League is all about.

Will you catch me taking part? Certainly not. As an antisocial person who prefers boring, risk averse chess this league isn’t for me. It’s great that it’s happening and proving so successful, though. Congratulations are due to the Battersea players and their colleagues from Hammersmith other London chess clubs for setting it up. I wish them all the best for the future.

Richard James


Man Up Boys, Things are Going to Get Worse

From years of coaching young chess players, I’ve learned that honesty wins out over getting one’s hopes up. One of the phrases I’ve often said to my chess teams when faced with an opposition team that’s much stronger is “man up boys, things are going to get worse.” Reading this, you might think this an awful thing to say to a group of young players faced with tough opponents. You might think I didn’t care about my players. You’re wrong. I love those guys and gals as if they were my own children. However, there’s one golden rule I have, don’t get your players hopes up. Here’s why.

Contrary to popular belief, disappointment can really embed itself in the young mind. While kids tend to quickly forget about little things that once made them cry, when they work really hard at something and then fail, it can be crushing. Teenagers are like angst ridden philosophers in that one crushing blow sends them into the downward spiral of existentialist depression. Treating a child or teenager like a “special snowflake” only makes matters worse. Life is going to tough for all of them as they enter adulthood. Being honest with them now prepares them for life in the real world. Therefore, I tell them the truth about any given situation. I have to be honest with them. Of course, I have an ulterior motive.

If you say to your players,“you guys and gals are a strong team so you should have no problems winning,” there’s a chance your players aren’t going to work as hard. Sure they’ll respond, move-wise, the way they’ve been trained. However, they’ll only find the good moves not the great moves. To find the best moves you not only have to develop your chess skills, you have to be hungry and a little frightened. By frightened, I mean you have to think that your opponent is going to give you a tough game. You need to be in a frame of mind that makes you work harder than you ever have before.

Often my teams are faced with better players on the opposing team. I tell my players the truth regarding their opponent’s. I don’t give the old football coach speech, “you have to win this and you will win this because everyone remembers the losing team because they’re the losers.” I tell them the truth.

By telling them the truth, they work harder if for no other reason then to prove me wrong (I give bonuses for proving me wrong). They become hungry! Do they overcome the stronger team? Sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t However, their playing improves when facing off against stronger players and if they lose, they know they gave it there best effort and won’t make the same mistakes (after our postmortem).

We seem to live in a day and age in which parents are over protective of their children. Of course, the world is more dangerous now than it was when I was young. However, it’s that “everyone gets a trophy because everyone’s special and everyone’s a winner” attitude that creates problems. Competition drives civilization. Yes, your children are the most important person in the world to you, but sheltering them from reality will blindside them when they go out into the real world. One thing I like about chess tournaments is the idea that you have to compete for a trophy because there’s a finite number of trophies to be won. It’s a simple equation. Those who work hardest win tournaments. When a child enters their first tournament, unless they’re unbelievably gifted, their going to rank very low in the results. There’s nothing wrong with this because it’s a learning experience. Sadly many parents make up excuses why their son or daughter lost, such as “the other kids were much older than you” or “you just had a bad day.” Be honest. Tell them going in that this is their first tournament and their goal should be to play the best chess they can and not to worry about winning or losing.

Surprisingly, the girl’s teams I coach loves the phrase “man up boys, it’s going to get worse.” It’s become their motto. I’ve had parents tell me it’s a sexist comment but they-re the same parents that force their children to eat raw Kale for a snack, something I consider border line child abuse (just kidding, sort of). While I try to explain to them it’s a phrase from an old movie and the kids like it, the parents still look at me as if I’m some sort of knuckle dragging caveman. Still, the girls all say it in unison, standing in a classic football huddle, just before the tournament starts. Parents put up with me and my often politically incorrect slogans because their kids aren’t crying at the end of the tournament because they didn’t get a trophy. They’re not crying because they knew what they were getting into thanks to a bit of honesty. Here’s a game to enjoy until next week. Time for me to crawl back into my cave!

Hugh Patterson


Pawn Imbalances – What Capablanca Would Aim For

Time is short for most of us. So when I go through my games with Nigel one key thing in my mind is to get clear on where I first go wrong.

It won’t usually be a blunder but rather an error in the opening or early middlegame that I can improve on next time.

In this game played in the Yorkshire Woodhouse Cup it was move 8 (8…a6 rather than 8…c5).

c5 is the most common pawn lever in the French and I should have played it. However, I was worried about White playing Bb5 and simplifications. I asked Nigel to give me a sample variation to understand how the game might unfold. He did this in the variation starting 8…c5 and talked about what Capablanca would be interested in. I have got out Chess Fundamentals and found it very good. I have played the resulting position against an engine.

The game is an good illustration of my lack of positional understanding and I should have grabbed White’s hand when he offered me a draw on move 32!

Dan Staples


Anatoly Karpov

A player my Dad admires a lot is Anatoly Karpov. He was the World Champion after Bobby Fischer and held the title for 10 years before losing to Garry Kasparov.

Karpov is really good at endgames and grinding away in better positions. Here is an example from this year:

Sam Davies


London League

Although the London Commercial League has finally turned over its king and stopped the clock, the London League itself is still going strong, just has it has been since the 1888-89 season.

There are currently four open divisions (top three played over 10 boards – top division reduced from 12 a year ago, Division 4 over 8 boards) plus two grade restricted divisions (4 boards each).

For the last 16 years, the league champions have been Wood Green, a team ostensibly representing a rather nondescript North London suburb. In fact the team has little or nothing to do with Wood Green, except by historical accident. The team is heavily sponsored and most of the players, including the likes of Luke McShane and Jon Speelman, are paid to take part. This season, as usual, they won all their matches, by an average score of 9-1. Members of other clubs have mixed feelings about this: some consider it unfair, and that the league loses some of its interest because everyone knows in advance who the winners will be. Others, though, are pleased to get the chance of taking on a famous grandmaster once a season.

I’m pleased to report that this season, my club, Richmond & Twickenham, finished second. I hasten to add that this is nothing at all to do with me: the last time I played in the London League was in the 2000-01 season. Instead credit is due to our captain Gavin Wall for his ability to recruit strong players and inspire them to play their best. After the 1963-64 US Championship, in which Fischer famously scored 100%, Hans Kmoch congratulated Bobby on winning the exhibition, and Larry Evans, who finished, second, on winning the tournament. Wood Green win the exhibition every year, and, at least as far as we’re concerned, this year Richmond won the league. We don’t get our name on the trophy, though.

We have actually won the league twice in our history: in 1975-76 and 1987-88. Recently, some of our longer serving members, who joined the club 40 years or so ago, were reminiscing about who might have played in those teams. As it happens, I was club secretary for a few years in the mid 70s and kept detailed records of our results, which I still have. So I tabulated the results, posted them on Facebook, and also sent them to my clubmates. If you remove Wood Green from the equation, the teams were roughly comparable in strength to those 42 years on. The average age, though, was a lot lower.

Our squad was headed by Michael Stean, team captain Andrew Law and future IM David Goodman, with former international Michael Franklin a board or two below them, and other young players such as Jon Benjamin, Peter Sowray and Julian Hodgson on the lower boards. I was already a Richmond veteran at that point, in my tenth season with the club. No one else who represented Richmond that season still plays for us, although several current members joined the club shortly afterwards. Peter Sowray, who is still involved with junior chess in the Richmond area, remarked that he didn’t remember his game from the match against Athenaeum, but he still remembered Jon Benjamin’s win against Tim Harding. As it happened, Jon annotated the game for RAT, the club magazine, which I was editing at the time, so it was interesting to compare his notes with what his team mate Michael Stean would, the following year, refer to as the ‘bloody iron monster’. Today’s engines, of course, are far more monstrous than when Michael made that remark.

1. e4 d6
2. d4 g6
3. f4 Bg7
4. Nc3 Nf6
5. Nf3 O-O
6. Bd3 Nbd7

This was first played in a game between Cochrane and Bannerjee (whom I wrote about a few months ago) in 1850. By the time of this game it was generally considered inferior to what was then the main line, Nc6. More recently, 6.. Na6 has become popular.

7. e5

The strongest reply, played by Max Weiss against Louis Paulsen in 1883.

7.. Ne8
8. h4

Going for a crude attack. Ne4 is the main line here, while Ng5 and Qe2 are also strong.

8.. c5
9. e6 fxe6
10. h5 cxd4
11. hxg6

The three games on my database reaching this position all continued 11. Ne4 with White scoring 100%. The engines are happy to play black, but of course it’s not so easy for humans to defend this type of position. Jon prefers a typically creative piece sacrifice.

11.. dxc3
12. b4

This was Jon’s brilliant idea, preventing Qa5 when the black queen defends along her 4th rank. Neither this nor Tim’s reply impress the engines, which think Black’s winning after h6, hxg6 followed by Rf6, or the immediate Rf6 among other moves.

12.. Qb6
13. Qe2

My computer tells me Jon should have preferred 13. gxh7+ Kh8 14. Nh4 Rf6 15. Qh5, when Tim should sacrifice a knight and both rooks for a perpetual: 15.. Nf8 16. Qxe8 e5 17. Ng6+ Rxg6 18. Bxg6 Bh3 19. Qxa8 Bxg2 20. Rf1 Bxf1 21. Kxf1 Qc6.

13.. Rf6
14. g4 Nf8

Instead, 14…hxg6 15.g5 Rf7 16.Bxg6 Nf8 17.Bxf7+ Kxf7 and White has nothing to show for his material deficit.

15. gxh7+ Kh8
16. g5 Rf7
17. g6 Rf6
18. Ng5 Bd7
19. Be3 Qxb4
20. Rg1 Nc7

The losing move, overlooking White’s threat. He had to play 20.. e5 21. Nf7+ Rxf7 22. gxf7 Nf6, with, apparently, a slight edge for Black.

21. Nf7+ Rxf7
22. gxf7 e5
23. Rxg7 Ng6

Falling on the sword, but after 23.. Kxg7 humans play Qg2+ and promote on h8, while computers play Qh5, announcing mate in 9.

24. Rg8+ 1-0

Athenaeum’s team was headed by the legendary Bob Wade, with Correspondence GM Keith Richardson on board 2. Several of their other players were involved with Bob in writing projects. Tim Harding himself is now a respected chess historian: I’ve just bought his most recent book, to which I might refer in a future post. Hilary Thomas, on board 10, wrote some books on Tal, edited a short-lived magazine – and then changed his name to Richard Pentreath. I won’t provide a link. Jon Benjamin sadly died in 2000 at the age of only 41. A highly creative and imaginative player, who played for the sheer enjoyment of the game rather than to reach the heights his talents deserved, he is still much missed by his many chess playing friends.

Richard James

Editor’s Note: Richard has had a number of books on chess published that can be found at Amazon:


Getting the Most Out of Studying a Game

On of the key factors in improvement is studying the games of master level players. We study those games because they allow us to see the many principled ideas we learn in action. While applying the game’s principles to our own play helps with self improvement, seeing those principles applied by the world’s best players, both past and present, increases our understanding of specific principled ideas. There is no substitute for studying the game of others. Yet, beginners often have a difficult time getting the most out of the games they study. Here are some ideas to help the beginner and even more advanced player, get the most out of learning from the games they study.

When first playing through a game, most beginners try to take in all the variations and alternative moves being made. Doing this can confuse the beginner from the start. Therefore, I urge you to not look at anything but the primary moves made in the game. Don’t worry about lines of play based on computer analysis. In fact, acquire a piece of light cardboard or paper and use it to cover up any analysis or variations. If you don’t know what these are, they’re the game moves that are printed in a lighter or smaller font under the actual moves made in the game. Sometimes you’ll see the words “better yet” before the analysis or variation line. They can also appear inside of brakets. Ignore those for now. Why ignore them?

To understand any variations or analysis lines, you need to first understand the moves that were made when the game was played. If you don’t understand those moves, the alternative moves will make no sense. Start by playing through only the game.

Starting with move one, note what principle was used by both players. The opening phase of the game being studied should be relatively easy to understand in terms of principles. Both players will develop a pawn or two towards the board’s center, develop their minor pieces towards the center, castle and possible connect their Rooks. However, some openings tend to be more obvious in terms of opening principles than others, especially to the beginner. Take the Ruy Lopez or Spanish Opening. With an opening like the Giucco Piano or Italian Opening, the King-side Bishop moves to c4 on move three where it attacks the board’s center. With the Ruy Lopez, the King-side Bishop moves to b5 on move three. Beginners have a hard time determining how this move helps to control the center. After 3…a6, White has the choice of moving the Bishop to a4 or exchanging it for the Knight on c6. In the exchange variation, after 4. Bxc6…dxc6, the Black e5 pawn no longer has protection and could be captured by White’s f3 Knight. 3. Bb5 indirectly effects the center. Study the game, move by move. Don’t proceed further into the game until you know why a specific move was made.

Work your way through the entire game one move at a time, not going forward until you know why that move was made. This requires work but your knowledge of principled play will greatly increase. If you speed through the game and skip over a move you don’t understand, the remaining moves will make little sense. Did I mention you need to play through the game five times before considering looking at the variations? You need to know the game well before considering and understanding the computer analysis lines. When you come to the fifth run through, grab a pen and a piece of paper. You’ll need these items because on this last run through, you’re going to see if you can come up with any of your own alternative moves.

Often, you’ll make the move played in the game and ask yourself, “why didn’t White or Black make this move instead?” When you have such a thought, write down the move and see if you can come up with a good response from the other player. After coming up with a response to your initial move idea, see if you can find a good move to answer that response. This requires a great deal of work but will help you with your calculation skills. Now we’re going to look at the analysis lines that are either generated from a computer program or take from similar positions in other games.

With the piece of paper you wrote down your own alternative moves by your side, play through the game again. When you get to a variation based on computer analysis or actual recorded games, compare what you thought was a good move to the analysis. You might have chosen a move the analysis chose. If this happens, you’re making real progress. Don’t worry if your ideas don’t appear in the game’s text. You don’t have the analytical capabilities of a computer engine! Play through the analysis one move at a time. Go through the analysis lines five times.

Lastly, as you play through the games, take notes regarding what you liked and what you didn’t understand for future examination. I know this seems like a mountain of work but think of a good chess game as a piece of art. When you to a museum and look at a painting for five minutes, you might think. “this is simply amazing” and move on to the next painting. The art expect might spend six months closely examining that same painting to unlock the real mystery behind it’s beauty. When the art expert says “this is simply amazing,” he or she knows why it’s amazing because they’ve studied it in detail. Studying chess games is the same way. Here’s a game to enjoy until next week.

Hugh Patterson


Not to be Repeated

This was a game I deserved to lose. I went wrong at move 4 and is a lesson in playing the opening stages with more care. It wasn’t a mistake leading to loss of material but it restricted possibilities. I made that mistake on move 10. I gave up the centre and was on the brink on getting crushed. White allowed me to unravel and escape.

Dan Staples