Positional Chess Handbook: 495 Instructive Positions from Grandmaster Games

Gelfer

1    Introduction

The evaluation of a given position fails under two headings: quantitative and qualitative. The former involves the simple counting of pieces and pawns and, as such, is fairly straightforward and objective. The latter is concerned with more abstract concepts like mobility, control of space, colour complexes, key squares, open lines, co-ordination and the like. It involves the judgement and weighting of several elements.

What are weaknesses? How are they provoked? How are they avoided? What is an ideal square for a piece in a given situation? How does one go about capturing, or controlling, squares, diagonals, files? In what positions is it desirable to seek exchanges? In what positions is it best to eschew them? How can you ensure the proper co-ordination between pieces? All these, and others, are the sort of positional questions that will occupy us in this book.

Before acquainting ourselves with those themes that recur over and again, let us look, by way of a general introduction, at a few random positions where general positional considerations manifest themselves clearly.

Nudelman–Justo

Women’s Olympiad, Malta, 1980

Barring a pair of knights, no pieces have yet been exchanged; neither side appears to have glaring weaknesses; and it looks as though a long fight lies ahead. Black’s last move, 21 … d5, seizing the initiative in the centre and opening the way to either … e4 or … d4, seems natural enough. It turns out to be a decisive positional mistake.

The game continued: 22 fxe5 xe5 23 xe5 xe5 24 d4! fixing the pawn on d5 and curtailing the scope of the black bishop. 24 … c7 25 cxb5 axb5 26 dxc5 clearing d4 for the knight. 26 … xc5. We have reached the next diagram.

The material equilibrium has been preserved but, in the course of the last four moves, White has acquired a winning positional advantage: her knight will occupy the central square d4, her bishop is more active than its counterpart and the c-file will be controlled by her rooks. This is what positional chess is about.

27 d4 b4 28 bc1 a5 29 c2 c8 30 fc1 xc2 31 xc2 a8 32 f4 b6 33 e5 a7 34 h3 f7 35 h2 g8 36 h4 f7 37 f3 and Black’s position soon collapsed.

Fuster–Fischer

Portoroz, 1958

Bobby Fischer, just under 16 at the time, found himself in this unpromising situation, playing with the black pieces, in his first Interzonal tournament.

xa7?, forfeiting all his advantage. An additional error on White’s part a few moves later enabled Fischer to trap the stray knight and win the game. A lucky escape.

Nimzowitsch–Capablanca

St. Petersburg, 1914

In the diagram, White is a pawn up and his passed pawn is a force to be reckoned with. One or two inaccuracies on his part, and Black’s pieces assume dominating posts. Soon White is compelled to make material concessions.

15 d3? c4! prevents Black’s next move and conserves White’s advantage.

15 … e6! 16 f3 d7! 17 d2 e5 18 e2 c4 19 ab1 a8 eb8. 20 a4 xd2! The hallmark of a great player: he knows when to exchange an active piece for a passive one (see also Fischer–Petrosian, diagrams 280 and 281). 21 xd2 c4 22 fd1 eb8 23 e3 b4 24 g5 d4+ 25 h1 ab8

Here, in order to stave off immediate disaster, Nimzowitsch tried 26 xd4, but after 26 … xd4 Capablanca won without much difficulty.

Keres

White, a queen up, faces the unpleasant … b2+. The only way to bring home his advantage is: 1 a2+ ! bxa2 2 c6! d4–b3(c2) mate.

Kremer

White mates in five moves. This composition, and the next one, illustrate how one piece can overcome numerically superior—but misplaced—adverse forces.

1 c8 xc8 2 c2! xc2c8 and mates. 3 e2!! xe2+ 4 h1 and mates next move.

Vikovich

White takes advantage of the unfavourable disposition of the black pieces and wins after 1 f7+ h8 2 h6! g8 3 xg7+!! xg7 4 e8+ taking all Black’s pieces with a check!

Gusev–Awerbakh

USSR, 1946

The awkward placing of Black’s king’s rook and king invites the spectacular queen-sacrifice: 24 xe5! fxe5 25 f1! after which, despite his enormous material advantage, Black is completely tied up.

25 … c8 c4 leads to mate. 26 d1 c4 27 b3 b5 28 xc4 bxc4 29 b3 Creating a passed pawn, against which Black is helpless, his queen being paralysed by the threat of mate. 29 … a5 30 bxc4 e7 31 g2 a3 32 f2 e7 33 f1 g5 34 f5 g4 35 c5 and wins.

Kupferstisch–Andreasen

Denmark, 1953

d7 enables Black to put up stiff resistance. White’s next move, sacrificing a rook, exploits the precarious state of Black’s king and ties a noose around his neck.

21 xc7!! xh1 22 xf7 e7+ Black’s king may escape. 22 … d5 23 xd6+ f8 24 g5 g5+ etc. is quicker. 24 … h8 25 h6+ g8 26 g7+ f8 27 c7+ g8 28 c8 f3 29 g7+ f8 30 xb7+ g8 31 g7+ f8 32 xa7+ g8 33 xa8 xa8 34 d6! 1–0

Hort–Kagan

Siegen, 1970

White, with two bishops and an advantage in space, aims at opening lines, but Black defends with sangfroid: 49 … xb5 50 cxb5 a5!! Thwarting a4–a5. 51 f3 fh6 52 e2 8a7 53 c8 f5 54 a6 5xa6 55 bxa6 fxe4 56 b3 xa6 57 a5 xa5! 58 xa5 bxa5 f5 Black is better. White is content to take a draw: 59 fxe5 xe5 60 e3 hg4+ 61 f4 f6 62 b7+ h6

Bondarevsky–Smyslov

Moscow, 1946

An instructive position. As the game unfolds, Black’s pieces occupy dominating outposts whereas White’s are gradually driven back.

12 … f5 13 e5 g5 is preferable. The text creates a passed pawn whose prospects are bleak. 13 … e6 14 d2 g5! 15 e2 c5 16 c3 b5 17 b3 b7 Developing his pieces, Black methodically limits the scope of his opponent’s pieces. 18 g3 g4 19 d2 e7 20 h5 f7 21 f1 g6 22 f6 The knight occupies a seemingly strong outpost. In fact, it is out of action. 22 … ad8 23 ad1 xd1 24 xd1 d8 25 xd8 xd8 26 e3 f4! 27 d1 A forced retreat since capturing on g4 costs a piece. 27 … xf6 28 exf6 e4 29 b2 An attempt to improve the knight’s mobility, which Black forthwith nips in the bud. 29... b4! 30 f3 xc2 31 f2 gxf3 32 gxf3 b1 and Black’s material advantage assured him victory.

Saidy–Fischer

USA, 1965

At times it is possible to attain positional ends by sharp, tactical means. Thus, in the example above, the continuation chosen by Fischer, 15 … xe5!, which undermines White’s centre and leads to a winning ending for Black, necessitates close examination of several variations. After the best moves for both sides, 16 xd8 xc4+! 17 xe8+ xe8+ 18 d1 xd2 19 xd2 e2+ 20 c1 xf2, Fischer had foreseen that though an exchange up, White’s position was hopeless. The game proceeded 21 g3 b7! 22 e1 e4 and Black won fairly easily.

Kushnir–Gaprindashvili

Riga, 1972

When the stronger side’s pieces are well-placed and well-coordinated, tactical possibilities abound. At times, such possibilities are not immediately available, but sooner or later they surface.

In the above example, White’s pieces and pawns are so dominant that a quick decision cannot be far away. Indeed, 45 b5! is conclusive: 45 … axb5 xc6 etc.) 46 c6! bxc6 47 a3 a7 compels Black to oppose White’s rook. 47 … a8 48 xa8 xa8 49 d8 1–0

Larsen–Torre

Brussels, 1987

This is an excellent example of how the relative value of pieces is determined by the outposts they occupy.

b1), leaving the black knight without a move. Whether this leads to victory or not is another matter.

Larsen played 37 g6? f6 sealing the position. Instead, he played 37 … d7? relieving the knight from protecting d6 but leaving its mighty counterpart unmolested on f5.

38 f1 g8 39 a4 h5 Idea: to post the knight on g4. 40 f2 f6 41 e3 f8 42 a5 d8 43 d3 d7 44 a6 b6 45 g1! g3, capturing h5. 45 … g4 46 xg4!! A pure positional exchange-sacrifice. While White’s knight ties up Black’s rook, his king mops up on the right wing. To use Larsen’s words: ‘In this [closed] position, a knight is not inferior to a rook.’

46 … hxg4 47 e3 d8 48 f2 g8 49 g3 d7 50 xg4 f8 51 g5 g8 52 h5 h8 53 h6 gxh6+ 54 xh6 g7 55 f5+ f8 56 f6 1–0

Thus, by not sacrificing his rook for White’s knight, Black missed an opportunity to draw; whereas White, by a well-timed sacrifice of his rook for Black’s knight, forced a neat victory.

Strong and Weak Pieces

Introduction to Chapters 2–9

A bishop or a knight, we are taught, are worth three pawns (units) each; a rook, five pawns; a queen, nine to ten pawns; and so on. Beyond such rough approximations, the value of a piece corresponds above all to the influence it exerts in a particular position. Clearly, a pawn on the seventh rank, about to queen, may be worth more than a minor piece or rook. Likewise, in some positions a bishop may be superior to a knight while in others the reverse is true. Needless to say, in a given position, a white rook and a black rook need not be equal to each other merely by virtue of both being rooks. In some circumstances, a well-posted knight or bishop may outweigh a rook or even a queen.

This is where positional understanding comes into play and where the ability to assess the pros and cons of a position dispassionately can come to our aid in determining the choice of a plan.

2     A Good Bishop versus a Bad Knight

Grigoriev

1926

Black has no apparent weakness, bus his knight lacks space and White’s bishop is all-powerful.

1 d2 d8 2 d3 b6 3 f5 c5 b7 4 b4 a5 is answered by 5 a3. 4 c8 a5 Now the square b5 is available to the white king. 5 g4 f7 6 f5 e7 7 c3 b7 8 c8 d8 9 b3 f7 10 e6 h8 11 f5 Of course, this move would be out of place with the black knight on f7. 11 … d8 12 a4 c7 13 b5 b7 14 a4 and Black is without a move.

Grigoriev

1931

In the above ending, White is able to exploit the superior mobility of his bishop over the black knight by attacking Black’s kingside pawns from the rear.

1 f3 a6 2 a4 c7 3 g4 f8 4 a5 inducing an additional weakness. 4 ... c6 5 axb6 xb6 6 d1 d7 7 a4 b8 8 e8 c6 9 f7 d8 10 g8 c6 11 xe6 and wins.

Spassky–Fischer

Santa Monica, 1966

Another case underlining the superiority of the bishop over the knight in an open position, despite the dearth of material.

35 h4 c4 36 e2 e5 37 e3 f6 38 f4 f7 39 e3 d5 is better. 39 … g5 40 h5 Black has rid himself of the weakness at g6 but his knight is restricted to watching the passed h-pawn. 40 … h6 41 d3 e5 42 a8 d6 43 c4 g4 44 a4 g8 45 a5 h6 46 e4 g3 47 b5 g8 48 b1 h6 49 a6 c6 50 a2 1–0

Stoltz–Kashdan

The Hague, 1928

A celebrated ending where the existence of pawns on both wings on an open board emphasizes the bishop’s superiority over the knight.

1 … f8 2 f1 e7 3 e2 d6 4 d3 d5 5 h4 c8 Black’s bishop helps push the white king backwards, enhancing the scope of his own king.

6 f3 a6+ 7 c3 h6 8 d4 g6 9 c2 e4 10 e3 f5 11 d2 f4 12 g4 h5 13 f6+ f5 14 d7 c8 15 f8 g5 16 g3 gxh4 17 gxh4 g4 18 g6 f5 19 e7 e6 20 b4 xh4 and the passed h-pawn carried the day.

Chekhover–Lasker

Moscow, 1935

Here too, in an open position with pawns on both wings, the knight is no match for the bishop.

20 … c7 21 f1 b5! A prelude to his next move. 22 e1 b2 23 a4 bxa4 24 bxa4 c6! b6–a5 allows the white king to reach b3, via d1 and c2. 25 d2 c5 26 c3 b4 27 b5 a5 28 d6 xa4 29 c2 e5 30 xf7 xh2 31 d8 e5 32 c6 g1 33 f3 c5 34 b8 b5 35 g4 e7 36 g5 Despair in a hopeless position. 36 … fxg5 37 d7 d6 38 f6 c4 0–1 e7 traps the knight.

Uhlmann–Fischer

Leipzig, 1960

Here again the presence of pawns on both wings in an open position gives Black a pronounced advantage.

26 … b6 27 a4?! In general, such committal pawn moves are best avoided. Preferable is 27 a3. 27 … e6 28 c5 bxc5 29 bxc5 e7 30 g3 The only way to seek counterplay. 30 … d7 31 h4 c6 32 g5 e4 33 g4 White wishes to eliminate as many pawns as possible. 33 … fxg4 34 xe4 a5! Fixing the a-pawn. 35 f4 b3 36 e3 xa4 37 d2 h6 38 f6 xc5 39 xg4 h5 40 e3 d4 The centralised king, together with the powerful bishop, ensure Black a comfortable victory, notwithstanding the paucity of pawns. 41 f1 e5 42 e3 b3 0–1

Reti–Rubinstein

Gothenburg, 1920

The need to defend White’s pawn on c2 compels the retreat of his knight, which facilitates the infiltration of Black’s king into White’s camp.

29 e1 e7 30 e3 e6 31 g4 f5 and … h5–h4. 31 … d6 32 h3 g6 33 d2 d7 The bishop is to shine on another front.

34 f3 e7 h4. 35 e3 h5! 36 h2 d6 37 e2 d4! Depriving the white king of the square e3 and fixing White’s pawns on the queen’s flank. The accumulation of small advantages is typical of positional play. 38 cxd4 cxd4 39 d2 hxg4 40 hxg4 c6! g2! and White is in zugzwang. 41 e2 d5 42 a3 b5 43 f1 a5 44 d2 a4! The threat … b4 looms. 45 e4d1 g5! penetrating. 45 … xe4 46 dxe4 b4 47 d2 bxa3 48 c1 g5 0–1 Vintage Rubinstein.

Smyslov–Tal

Moscow, 1964

In the following fragment, Tal, who is renowned for attacking ability and tactical wizardry, displays his mastery in a purely technical ending.

38 … f6 39 b3 g6 40 a3 h5 41 h3 g4, but on h3 the pawn is none too safe. 41... g6 42 b3 g7 43 a3 f6 44 b3 e8 45 g2 d1). 45 … h5 46 c2 e2 47 e1 f1 48 f3 48 h4 is defeated by the king’s entry to g4, preceded by the transfer of the bishop to the long diagonal.

48 … xh3 49 g5 g2 50 xh7+ g7 51 g5 g6 52 d2 c6 53 c1 g2 f3–e5. 54 d2 h5 55 e6 g4 are no better. 55 … g4 56 c7 c6 57 d5 xg3 58 e7 d7 59 d5 xa4 60 xb6 e8 60 … c6 is faster. 61 d5 f3 62 c7 c6 63 e6 a4 64 xc5 a3 65 b3 a2 66 c1 xf4 and wins.

Rubinstein–Johner

Carlsbad, 1929

Rubinstein played 1 b4 Here, instead of keeping the position blocked with 1 … a4 (answering 2 b5 with c5!), Black erred with 1 ... axb4 + ? presenting White with an outside passed pawn and facilitating the penetration of his king.

The game continued: 2 xb4 c7 3 a4 d7 4 a5 h6 5 d3 b7 6 c2 b8 7 d3 d7 8 g4 c7 9 h4 f8 10 f1 d7 g6 11 h5 transposes. 11 h3 f8 12 h5 A rare situation where placing pawns on squares of the same colour as the bishop, although contrary to accepted wisdom, is actually desirable. 12 … f6 g4–h5–f7–g8. The text weakens the e6 pawn. 13 f1 d7 14 c4 f8 15 b3 h7 16 c5! g5. White’s coming moves are designed to pave the way for the decisive entry of his king. 16 … f8 17 a2 d7+ 18 b4 f8 19 a6! b6 20 a7 xa7 21 c5 b7 22 d6 b6 23 e7 h7 24 xe6 c7 25 c4 f7–g6. 25 … g5 26 xf6 d6 27 g6 1–0

Bogatirchuk–Rabinovich

Leningrad, 1923

c7, to which White replied 1 e4 xe4. What he overlooked was 1 … e5! which turns the tables.

2 fxe5 fxe5 3 dxe5 d7 4 b3 e6 5 exd5+ xd5 6 f3 c5! c6 a5 9 c4. Depriving White’s knight and king of good squares is more important than immediate material gains.

7 d2 e4 8 e2 h6 9 d2+ The advanced pawn was doomed in any case. 9 … xe5 10 e3 White has gained some space but his king is soon pushed back.