THE LOST ART OF COMMON SENSE

IN CHESS
Lars Bo Hansen

-------------------------------------------

Master Chess
Lesson 3
Text copyright 2015 Lars Bo Hansen
All Rights Reserved
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface
The loss of common sense and logical thinking in modern chess
Common sense in the opening
Common sense in the middlegame
Common sense in the endgame
Tips for self-improvement
Master another chess topic
Preface
In my experience, logic and common sense can take you a long way in chess.
Chess has an inner logic to it which must be adhered to. The game is
grounded in a range of fundamental principles that together define sound
chess. Neglecting development, accepting a damaged pawn-structure for
nothing in return or initiating a flank attack with just a few pieces and the
center in a flux are typical examples of costly violations of well-known
principles. More broadly, the game starts so most experts agree in
equilibrium. The starting position is equal and it takes inaccuracies or
mistakes by one of the sides to disturb the equilibrium. Contrary to what
some chess players might think, you cannot win chess games by simply
playing well; if the opponent plays well too, the game will end in a draw. The
perfect game of chess is a draw. To win, you have to put your opponent
under pressure, set difficult problems, and hopefully induce mistakes.
The fundamental principles of chess were developed by World Champions
and other chess giants about 100 years ago players like Steinitz, Lasker,
Capablanca, Tarrasch, Nimzowitsch, Reti and others. Break the fundamental
principles and you will pay the price.
At least that is how it used to be. Over the past 20-30 years more and more
of the fundamental principles have been challenged. In modern top chess,
there are plenty of examples of how Grandmasters intentionally and
successfully break long-standing principles. Examples include putting
knights on the rim, leaving the king in the center, accepting doubled pawns,
sacrificing pawns for the initiative, and starting flank attacks early in the
game by g2-g4 (or g7-g5). Conventional wisdom has turned out to be not as
universally valid as was previously thought.
I credit two major developments for this shift. First, the ascent to the top of
the chess world by the probably still best player ever, Garry Kasparov.
Winning the World Championship from Anatoly Karpov in 1985 and
remaining the World No. 1 for almost two decades, Kasparov helped initiate
a new era of chess that I refer to as Creative Concreteness. The series of
World Championship matches between Karpov and Kasparov in the 1980s
was an epic clash between two fundamentally different styles of chess.
Karpov, probably the best proponent of classic positional chess, versus
Kasparovs dynamic and creative style. In the years that followed, Kasparovs
dynamic brand of chess attracted many followers. Creative Concreteness
refers to the propensity of these contemporary dynamic players to on the
one hand be ready to break away from conventional wisdom and search for
creative solutions, and on the other hand adopt a very concrete and specific
approach to each position rather than the more general, strategic approach
that was outlined by the old masters and perfected by positional giants like
Botvinnik, Smyslov, Petrosian and Karpov. In this modern approach,
fundamental principles are merely treated as rules of thumb, nothing more.
The second, and perhaps even more important, development was the
emergence of powerful chess programs that are now stronger than even the
World Champion. These chess programs use brute force and specific
calculations, not general principles, to find the best move. It doesnt matter
to the machine if the move looks weird or breaks with conventional
wisdom. Working with such chess programs has taught contemporary
Grandmasters that many old truths have numerous exceptions or are not
valid at all.
In general, these developments represent a giant leap forward for chess.
Modern chess is much more nuanced than in the old days when the
fundamental principles were first developed. We now know much more
about what works and what doesnt in chess than before. As a result, there
is little doubt that contemporary top players are stronger than previous
generations. That is quite natural; chess is a game in which knowledge is
accumulated and new generations stand on the shoulders of the previous
ones.
The loss of common sense and logical thinking in
modern chess
However, I still feel that it is prudent to hoist a few warning flags here. There
are some drawbacks and risks to these developments as well. The most
important risk is probably that common sense and logical thinking may
slowly be crowded out of chess. Computer programs dont care about
common sense. The more exceptions to the old fundamental principles that
computers help point out and the more positions are treated as one-of-a-
kind and with concrete calculations and computer evaluations trumping
general considerations, the less room there is left in chess for common
sense and logical thinking.
I think that is both unfortunate and counterproductive. I still see chess as a
logical game at the core. Therefore, I always advice my chess students to try
to find a good balance between the general (common sense/logic) and the
specific (concrete, computer-assisted analysis and calculations). That
includes sometimes looking at a position switching off the analysis engine
that you have running in the background with millions of concrete moves
and specific evaluations trying to understand in general terms what is
going on here. Which fundamental principles are at work in this position? In
this article I will try to make a case for common sense and logical thinking in
chess, not as a substitute for concrete calculations or computer assistance,
but a complement.
To illustrate the dangers of trusting computer analysis and a concrete
approach over more general considerations grounded in the old
fundamental principles, take a look at this game:
Topalov Kamsky
Candidates Match, Kazan 2011, 2nd match game
1 Nf3 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 d5 4 cxd5 Nxd5 5 Qb3
Modern chess. White wishes to avoid the main lines of the Grnfeld Indian
Defense (1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 d5). But bringing out the queen early on is a
violation of the old principle of developing the minor pieces first while
keeping the major pieces especially the queen at home until later in the
game. The logical basis of this principle? The opponent can gain time by
harassing the queen with his minor pieces.
5Nb6 6 d4 Bg7 7 Bf4 Be6
There we have it Black starts harassing Whites queen.
8 Qa3!?

Here we go. Although this move has been played by a number of

contemporary world class players, such as Kramnik, Ivanchuk, Gelfand,
Radjabov, and Topalov in the present game, I have to say that I am not a big
fan on general grounds. In my view, this move runs counter to common
sense and fundamental principles of chess. The queen is tucked away on the
rim early in the game and will have some trouble reentering the battle. My
analysis engine, on the other hand, is pretty fond of the move and it has
scored reasonably well on the highest level. Still, I have a feeling that if in
pre-computer times someone would have suggested this idea to
Capablanca, Botvinnik, Smyslov or Petrosian all logical players they
would have rejected it. Chess is much different nowadays than in former
times.
8Nc6
A natural move. Black wants to harass Whites queen by a7-a5 and Nb4.
Another sharp, but natural way of attempting to punish Whites violation of
the fundamental principle of not bringing the queen out too early is the
pawn sacrifice 8c5!? After 9 Qxc5 Nc6 10 e3 Rc8 11 Qa3 0-0 12 Rd1 a5! 13
Ne5 Nd5 14 Nxc6 Rxc6 15 Bb5 Rb6! Black was already better in the game
Sadorra Ganguly, Subic 2009. Notice how White has problems with his
queen!
9 000?!

This is really taking the rule-breaking to the limit and in my view beyond
it. The text move defies common sense because neither the king nor the
queen will ever be really safe on the queenside. In most other Grandmaster
games with this position, the more cautious 9 e3 was chosen. For example,
Kramnik Nakamura, Tal Memorial 2011 continued 90-0 10 Be2 a5 11 0-0
Nb4! 12 Rfc1 c6 13 Be5 Bh6 14 Ne4 Nd7 15 Nc5 Nxc5 16 Rxc5 with an even
position and an eventual draw.
9Nd5! 10 Bg3 Bh6+!?
In the only other Grandmaster game I could find in my 4 million+ games
database with this position, Giri Vachier Lagraeve, Unive Crown 2011,
Black chose the natural 10Bf5. After 11 h4, both 11Nxc3 12 bxc3 Qd5 or
11e6!? with the idea of harassing the queen by 12Bf8 look good for
Black. In the game Black chose 110-0 which led to a draw.
11 e3
11 Kb1? would already be losing after 11Bf5+ 12 Ka1 (12 e4 Nxc3) 12
Ndb4! 13 Ne1 Bc2!, winning material.
11a5!
Planning 12Ncb4, when Whites king and queen are both vulnerable.
12 h4 Ncb4! 13 h5 c6 14 hxg6 hxg6

White already has some problems, based on his insecure king and queen
positions. Black threatens 15Bxe3+ 16 fxe3 Rxh1, and White always has to
look out for ideas like Nxc3 and Nxa2+. His next move is a defensive measure
against these two threats but is also a tacit admission that the opening has
gone wrong for White.
15 Rd2 f6! 16 Ne4 b6 17 Be2 Qc8!
Black prepares to open the position b6 c6-c5, going after Whites weak king.
18 Rh4 Kf7 19 Rd1
19g5!?
Back already has a choice between two very promising continuations. He
could strike with 19Nxa2+!? 20 Qxa2 Nxe3! 21 Qb1 Nxd1+ 22 Kxd1 Qd7
with advantage for Black. Kamsky instead chooses to stay loyal to the plan
begun with 17Qc8: To open the position by c6-c5. First, though, he pushes
Whites pieces back.
20 Rh2 g4! 21 Nfd2

21c5! 22 dxc5 f5!

The point. If the knight retreats to c3, 23Qxc5 is crushing. Topalov seeks
relief in an exchange sacrifice but this only temporarily stalls Black. Whites
kings position is simply too big a liability and his queen completely out of
the game.
23 Rxh6 Rxh6 24 Ng5+ Kf8 25 Nxe6+ Qxe6 26 Bc4 Rc8! 27 Bf4 Rf6 28 e4

28Rxc5! 29 exd5 Qxd5

Whites position collapses as there is no good defense against 30b5 or 30
Rxc4. Notice the inactive queen still on a3!
30 b3 Qd4! 31 Be3 Qc3+
32 Kb1 Qc2+ wins.
01
A strong game by Kamsky but also one which highlights an inherent risk in
modern chess: Dont trust your computer too much! Remember to add a
sound dose of old-fashioned human common sense as well. In his
preparation, Topalov was probably seduced by the computers initially
rather favorable evaluation of Whites set-up. It takes a while before the
analysis engine discovers the inherent dangers of placing the king and queen
on the queenside in this way. Again, computers dont have any common
sense, only humans do! Thats why it is so important to sometimes turn the
computer off and look at the position from a more general perspective.
The well honed human skills of common sense and logical thinking, on the
other hand, should never be switched off! In fact, your chess will benefit
from consciously activating common sense and logical thinking, especially at
critical junctures of the game. The question is, how to do that in practice? In
the remainder of this article, I will give some examples, including some from
my own Grandmaster practice, of how common sense and logical thinking
can be exploited in the opening, middlegame, and endgame.
Common sense in the opening
The first step in applying common sense to the opening starts long before
the first move is made. A critical feature in competitive chess is to develop a
consistent opening repertoire one that suits your particular chess style.
Yet, surprisingly many chess players have inconsistent opening repertoires
littered with openings that dont suit them. They may play some sharp
openings, some solid openings, and even some unsound sidelines. Such a
broad approach is typically not advisable. Most chess players have distinct
strengths and weaknesses chess style and the opening repertoire should
fit these characteristics.
Early in my career, I too had a number of inconsistencies in my opening
repertoire such as playing the solid 1 d4 as White but sometimes venturing
some sharp stuff like various Sicilians or the Benko Gambit as Black. Once I
became better aware of my own style solid reflector with some theorist
traits I could weed out the most counterproductive opening choices and
build a more coherent opening repertoire with which I was much more
comfortable. And my results soon improved.
Every time I start working with a new chess student, the first thing I do is
therefore to analyze 20-30 of their games. One of the clues I look for is
consistency in the opening repertoire. That is an area in a players game
which can and should be fixed by applying some common sense.
How to figure out which openings are consistent with your style? Obviously,
the first step is to define your style. I distinguish between four broad types
of chess players: Pragmatics, activists, reflectors, and theorists. Different
openings suit different styles.
Pragmatics favor being on the attack and are strong in calculations.
Such players should choose 1 e4 and build an opening repertoire
based on sharp openings, such as the Najdorf Sicilian vs. 1 e4 and the
Kings Indian or Grnfeld Indian vs. 1 d4.
Activists treasure the initiative more than anything and are very
strong at spotting beautiful combinations. These players are also
 typical 1 e4 players and should go for lines that secure the initiative,
even at the cost of sacrificing material. Against 1 e4, the Sicilian is the
most obvious choice while against 1 d4 the Grnfeld Indian or some
more adventurous openings such as the Dutch, Modern Benoni or
Benko Gambit make sense.
Reflectors are typical 1 d4 players and prefer quiet positional play
over tactical adventures. Good choices for such players against 1 e4
are the Caro-Kann, French or Ruy Lopez while against 1 d4 the Queens
Gambit or Nimzo Indian and Queens Indian are the most suitable.
Theorists prefer a slow pace of the game and above all want a solid
pawn-structure. For White, they will be well served by 1 d4 or 1 c4.
With Black, they should build a repertoire around solid main lines such
as the Ruy Lopez against 1 e4 and Slav Defense or Nimzo Indian and
Queens Indian against 1 d4.
Common sense is also very useful in preparing for individual games. At the
2008 Olympiad I had to face the Bangladesh Grandmaster Rahman. In my
preparation I noticed that Rahman is very fond of the rather rare Wijk aan
Zee line 1 d4 d6 2 Nf3 Bg4!? and has had good results with it. I searched for
ways to obtain an opening advantage for White by studying some of the
sharp lines White players had tried against this set-up, but I could not find
anything that suited me in the forcing lines.
Instead, I decided to approach the problem in a different way: Through
common sense and logical thinking, drawing on the fundamental principles
of positional chess. Blacks set-up has the drawback that it allows White to
take control of the center and gain space. These are assets that the
Founding Fathers of positional chess saw as fundamental. And if you
control the center and possess a space advantage, the fundamental
principles state that you do not need to do anything else than making sure
your opponent cannot break free! In that case the opponents forces will be
restricted and will slowly suffocate.
So that was my strategy for the game: Take control of the center, build a
space advantage and then wait and see while Black struggles to find good
squares for his pieces. A good moment may then appear in which Blacks
pieces are uncoordinated, allowing White to strike. This simple common
sense approach worked like a charm.
L. B. Hansen Rahman
Dresden Olympiad 2008
1 d4 d6 2 Nf3 Bg4
As expected.
3 e4
Taking the chance to seize the center.
3Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 h3 Bh5

6 Qe2!
This is a small subtlety which is known to be Whites best. By threatening 7
Qb5+, winning the b7-pawn, White wins a tempo for his subsequent
advance on the kingside. The queen is not really blocking the light-squared
bishop as this bishop will be developed to g2 and h3 anyway.
6c6 7 g4! Bg6 8 h4!
Here we see the effect of interpolating 6 Qe2 c6: The e4-pawn is
overprotected and White can proceed with his space-gaining advances on
the kingside.
8h5 9 g5 Nfd7

This was the well-known theoretical position that I was aiming for. White
controls the center and has gained space on the kingside. But theory has not
yet established how White should best continue from here. A number of
forcing ideas have been tried, such as 10 d5!?; 10 Bh3 Be7 11 d5!?; 10 Bh3
followed by 11 Nd2 and 12 f4; or even the direct 10 Nd2 followed by 11 f4. I
my preparation, I was unconvinced by these attempts. The simple plan I
execute over the next few moves instead is in my view much more
straightforward: Just complete development, centralize the pieces, and ask
Black how he plans to free his cramped position!
10 Bf4 Na6 11 Bg2 Be7 12 00 00 13 a3 Nc7 14 Bg3 Re8 15 Rad1 a6 16
Ne1!
Black is already in serious trouble. Whites last move introduces two threats:
Either f2-f4-f5, harassing Blacks bishop on g6, or simply Nd3-f4, picking off
the h5-pawn. Black has to do something but that is exactly what Whites set-
up has been directed against: Preventing Black from breaking free. 16e5?
17 dxe5 dxe5 18 Bxe5 simply loses a pawn because of the pin in the d-file
and 16f6 17 f4 doesnt help much. That only leaves
16d5 17 Nd3
...but Whites center is securely overprotected so he can simple continue
with the intended knight transfer.
17dxe4 18 Nxe4 Bf8 19 Ne5
19 Nf4 was equally good and will probably just transpose to the game
continuation.
19Bxe4
19Nxe5 20 dxe5 Qb8 21 Nd6 followed by Bf3xh5 is horrible for Black.
20 Bxe4 g6
21 Nxg6!
The time to strike has come. Blacks pieces are restricted and poorly
coordinated, and they will thus be unable to come to the kings rescue in
time. White gets three pawns and an attack for the piece so it is not even a
real sacrifice.
21fxg6 22 Bxg6 Re7 23 Qxh5 Rg7 24 Rd3!
This rook lift threatens 25 Rf3 and 26 Bf7+.
24Ne8
25 Re1!
Following the Number One Rule of Attack: Include all your pieces into the
attacking force. With the fall of the e6-pawn, Blacks position collapses.
Notice that the bishop on g3 also plays a part here by preventing Black from
using the c7 and d6 squares in his defense.
25Rxg6 26 Qxg6+ Bg7
Setting a last trap 27 Rxe6? Nf8.
27 Qxe6+ Kh8 28 Rde3! Nc7 29 Qf7
30 Re7 next wins.
10
Common sense in the middlegame
In the middlegame too, common sense and logical thinking can be useful.
This is especially the case in slow maneuvering positions where concrete
calculations are less important.
In such positions, outlining to yourself the general features of the position
may help you find the right plan and even the right move. Before reading
on, take a close look at the following position and try to answer the question
that the American Grandmaster Yasser Seirawan posed to the readers of
Chess Life: Could you please verbalize your assessment of the position?
Using words, weigh the advantages of the position first for White and then
for Black.

Karpov Seirawan
Exhibition Match, Saint Louis 2012
Did you finish your assessment? Then lets see how Seirawan answered his
own question: I would say that the position favors White. He has a little
more space in the center and, in the long term, his two bishops may come
alive and offer a serious pull in the late middlegame. For the short term,
however, look at the arrangement of Whites pieces. All of them are on the
back rank and well out of harms way. Making his pieces untouchable is a
hallmark of Karpovs style of play. From my perspective, the position is quite
solid. Ive cleverly traded my light-squared bishop, while putting the rest of
my army on the light squares. But Im facing a problem: My solid position is
cramped. Generating counterplay will not be easy. While both players have
to keep a constant awareness of Blacks ideas of d5xc4, to be followed up
by e6-e5 or c6-c5, opening up the position, to do so prematurely would
only improve the prospects of Whites two bishops. Patient maneuvering is
needed. Black faces one major strategical problem: White may achieve the
big clamp. If White could play two moves at once (c4-c5 and f2-f4), there is
a serious danger that bereft of counterplay Black would be strangled without
a whimper.
A brilliant and highly instructive assessment by Seirawan! In a clear, logical
way he explains the main features of the position, the dangers especially
Black is facing, and outlines the strategic choice Black is faced with. Stepping
back from calculations for a while, really trying to understand the position, is
a highly recommended approach in the early middlegame. But Black still has
to make a move. Take another minute before reading on to decide on
Blacks next move and be ready to explain why that is the best move!
17Nb6!
Did you find it? And are you ready to answer the why question? If you
apply common sense and logic to this decision, the text move is actually not
so hard to find. It follows directly from the discussion above about the
general features of the position. Here is how Seirawan explains his decision
process notice again the logic, clarity, and common sense leading to the
correct move: An important move. As I had decided against lines that would
open the position, to the advantage of the two bishops, I began to anticipate
the big clamp mentioned above. In that case, I will need to prepare
counterplay based upon the central push f7-f6, followed by e6-e5,
creating some breathing room. To advance the f-pawn, the f6-knight has to
get out the way. To do that, the d7-knight will have to get out of the way as
well. Therefore this needed shift. As Sherlock Holmes would probably have
added: Elementary, dear Watson!
18 b3
Karpov refrains from going for the big clamp. After 18 c5 Nc8 19 f4 Ne7 20
Bd3 Nd7! 21 Bf2 f6 22 b4 e5, Seirawan assesses the position as level.
18Nc8!
Centralizing the knight.
19 Bd3 Nd6 20 a4 Nd7!

Apart from toying with d5xc4 + c6-c5 or e6-e5 ideas, the text move also
introduces the possibility of adopting a rock-solid Stonewall structure by f7-
f5. So Karpov decides to act.
21 c5 Nc8 22 Bf1?!
Typical Karpovsque prophylaxis but letting Black off the hook a bit. Seirawan
recommends 22 f4! Ne7 23 b4 f6! 24 b5 axb5 25 axb5 e5 26 Ne2 Nf8!, with a
solid position for Black but maybe still an edge for White because of his
extra space.
22Ne7 23 b4 e5!
With this push Black equalizes completely and may even hope for an
advantage.
24 dxe5!?
If White allows Black to exchange on d4, this pawn might be vulnerable and
Black could batter up on it with maneuvers like Nd7-f8-e6 and Ne7-f5,
forcing White onto the defensive. However, even after the text move it is
clear that Black is fine. Whites problem is that after b4-b5 Whites only
active plan his isolated c5-pawn will always be a cause of concern.
24Bxe5 25 Ne2 Nf5 26 b5 axb5 27 axb5 Qc7 28 Rd3?!
With the idea of 29 Rb3 and after bxc6, bxc6 penetrating to b7 with the
rook. But this is too slow. Instead, White should pull the brakes with 28 Nd4
Nxd4 29 exd4 Bg7 30 Qb4 Nf8 31 Bc3 Ne6 32 Ra1 Ra8. Seirawan assesses
this as balanced I would probably say that Black has a tiny edge since
White is tied to the defense of the d4-pawn. Either way, the most likely
result would be a draw.
28Ra8 29 Qc2 Ng7 30 Nd4 Ne6 31 Nxe6 Rxe6 32 Rb3 Bg7 33 Bb4 Ree8 34
Rcb1 Ra4!
Black prepares to double on the a-file, forcing White to go for exchanges.
But with each exchange the c5-pawn becomes an even larger liability.
35 Ra3 Rxa3 36 Bxa3 Ra8 37 Bb4 Qe5 38 g3

38Nf8!
Again a nice logical maneuver by Seirawan. The knight heads to e6 where it
not only hits c5 but also supports a possible d5-d4. And whats more, on e6
the knight is safely protected. This is key to prophylactic and blunder-
avoiding chess if all your pieces are well protected, the risk of falling prey
to a sudden accident is considerably reduced.
39 Rb3 Qa1 40 Rb1 Qa2 41 Qxa2 Rxa2 42 Be1 Bb2 43 bxc6 bxc6 44 Rd1 Ba3
45 Rb1 Bb2 46 Rd1
We have reached an endgame in which Black has the upper hand because
White will be unable to hold onto his c5-pawn. After repeating moves
Seirawan has to make a critical decision: How best to capture this pawn
with the bishop or the knight?
46Ba3?!
Not the most accurate. It turns out that it was better to go after the pawn
with the knight, as the text move allows White to activate his rook. But
Seirawan rejected 46Ne6?! because of 47 Rd2 Ra1 48 Rxb2 Rxe1 49 Rb6!,
with a draw. However, this line can be improved by 46Nd7! 47 Rd2 Ra1 48
Rxb2 Rxe1, and now Whites rook doesnt have access to b6. He will need to
lose a tempo with 49 Rb7 Nxc5 50 Rc7 Ne4 (threatens 51Nd2) 51 Kg2, but
then Black has good winning chances after the accurate 51Rd1! with the
idea of 52Rd2, as pointed out by Seirawan.
47 Rb1! Bxc5 48 Rb8
This active rook now offers White good drawing chances despite the pawn
deficit.
48Rc2
Perhaps 48d4 49 exd4 Bxd4 gave Black better practical winning chances.
49 Bd3 Rc1 50 Kf1 Bd6
51 Rb1!
Good defense by the former World Champion. White accepts to trade his
active rook because he has seen that he can force Blacks c- and d-pawns
forward with the maneuver Bb1-c2-a4-c6. Then he will be able to build a
blockade on the light squares.
51Rxb1 52 Bxb1 Ne6 53 Bc2! Kf8 54 Ba4! c5
Forced as 54Nd8? is met by 55 Ba5.
55 Bc6! d4 56 exd4 Nxd4 57 Bd5
Now the draw is clear; Black will never be able to break the light-squared
blockade.
57Ke7 58 Bc3 Nb5 59 Bb2 Nc7 60 Bb3 f6 61 f4 h5 62 h4 Ne6 63 Kg2 Bc7 64
Bc3 Nd4
Acknowledges the draw by allowing the transposition to an endgame with
bishops of opposite color and no possibilities for progress.
65 Bxd4 cxd4 66 Bc4 Ba5 67 Kf2 Bd2
White just puts his king on e2 and shuffles his bishop back and forth
between c2 and d3.

Common sense in the endgame

I have met some chess players who are not fond of the endgame because of
the need to memorize a lot of boring endgame positions, such as rook and
pawn vs. rook, how to mate with bishop and knight, and how to defend rook
vs. rook and bishop. It is true that in such technical endgames, memorization
is critical, although you may still benefit from applying common sense even
if you have forgotten some of the details!

There is, however, a whole different class of endgames which I call strategic
endgames. In this type of endgames, there is no known best play and
players need to make a number of critical decisions. Here common sense
and logical thinking are key components and may be of great help.
One of many reason that Magnus Carlsen is currently the Number One
player in the world is his exceptionally strong play in strategic endgames.
Carlsen possesses the ability like e.g. Capablanca, Smyslov or Karpov
before him to outplay other world class players in deceptively simple
strategic endgames. Often he exploits common sense and logical thinking.
Here is a good example:

Radjabov Carlsen
Tal Memorial, Moscow 2012
Six pawns, a rook and a bishop on each side and no apparent weaknesses
can Black really win this with a 2784 player on the White side? As it turns
out, there is still much play in this position! Magnus identifies a subtle
advantage in Blacks camp: His extra number of central pawns. In fact, the
double c-pawns constitute an asset for Black as they help increase his
influence in the center. But how to exploit this potential strength? Magnus
provides a very logical answer to this question.
29...Kd7!
Black wants to prepare the slow advance of his central pawns, but for the
moment he cannot push the pawns because of the vulnerability of the b5-
pawn e.g. 29d5? 30 exd5 cxd5 31 Bxb5. But there is no need to hurry, so
Carlsen devises a subtle plan: First, the king is brought to b6 to protect the
b5-pawn, then Black is able to play c6-c5-c4 followed by c7-c6, and finally
d6-d5, taking over the center. Very logical, isnt it once you get the idea!
30 Ra1 Bb3!
Preventing any counterplay by a3-a4.
31 Rc1 Kc8! 32 Kf2 Kb7 33 Kg3 Be6
And now the king is kept out of g4.
34 Ra1 Kb6 35 Rc1 c5! 36 Ra1 c4! 37 Bc2 Kc5 38 Re1 c6! 39 Bb1
The first part of the plan has been executed but for now White has
prevented the desired advance d6-d5 because of the indirect threat on the
e5-pawn, e.g. 39d5? 40 exd5 cxd5? 41 Rxe5. So what now? Another logical
answer: The king has done his duty on the kingside, lets bring him back to
f6, after which d6-d5 is unstoppable!
39Kb6! 40 Bc2 Kc7 41 Kf2 Kd7

42 a4!?
Faced with a difficult defense, White abandons the passive wait-and-see
policy. But it is not clear that this advance improves his position; it also
hands Black a clear target: The b2-pawn.
42bxa4 43 Ra1 Rb8! 44 Ra2 d5!
Finally! This advance is what Black envisioned all along.
45 exd5
White elects to eliminate as many pawns as possible. 45 Bxa4 d4 is not
pleasant either.
45cxd5 46 Bxa4+ Kd6 47 Bc2 d4!
The central pawns keep rolling.
48 Be4 Rb6 49 Ke2 g4!
Leaving White with an unenviable choice. White is not happy to take on g4,
as this leaves Black with two connected central passed pawns. But if White
just waits, Black takes on f3, exchanges the bishops with Bd5, and
penetrates via the h-file to h2, exploiting the newly opened second rank.
Notice how helpless White is against this simple but powerful plan because
of the weakness of the b2-pawn and the passive White rook.
50 fxg4 Bxg4+ 51 Kd2 Be6 52 Kc2 Bd5!
Here too the exchange of bishops is a key part of Blacks plan. Once the
bishops are removed from the board, the passed central pawns are ready to
advance. Notice the timing of this move: Black waited until Whites king
went to c2 in an attempt to free the rook on a2 from its defensive duties.
Why it is important to exchange the bishops exactly at this moment we will
soon see.
53 Bxd5

53d3+!
This important intermediate move exploits Whites kings position on c2.
With this advance, Black makes sure that White cannot eliminate more
pawns with a timely cxd4. Notice that with the bishops on the board White
also couldnt take on d4, as this would set up a discovered threat by the
Black bishop on the rook on a2 by a timely c4-c3.
54 Kd2 Kxd5 55 Ke3 Rg6! 56 Ra5+ Ke6

The triumph of Blacks logical strategy, begun with the king maneuver to b6
on move 29! The central passed pawns decide the game.
57 Ke4
57 Kf3 Rf6+ 58 Ke3 Rf1 transposes, and the king and pawn ending after 57
Ra6+ Kf5 58 Rxg6 Kxg6 is lost for White, e.g. 59 b4 cxb3 60 Kxd3 e4+, and
one of the pawns queens.
57...Rg4+ 58 Kf3 Rf4+ 59 Ke3 Rf1!
The final penetration. White has no defense against 60...Re1+ 61 Kd2 Re2+
62 Kd1 e4, and the pawns roll decisively forward. Rather than facing this
bleak scenario, White resigned.
01
Tips for self-improvement
Summing up, common sense and logical thinking still has a lot to offer chess.
Yes, many of the old, fundamental principles have nowadays been
challenged and may not be as universally applicable as was once thought.
This progress was caused by the style of inventive and non-dogmatic players
that I call Creative Concreteness and the rise of powerful chess programs.
However, while modern chess computers are stronger than even the best
players in the world, they still cannot match humans in the areas of common
sense and logical thinking. Applying a sound dose of common sense in the
opening, middlegame, and endgame is a powerful, but sometimes neglected
practical skill in chess!
I certainly do not argue that computer analysis and evaluations are
worthless, but it is in my experience counterproductive to trust the
computer too much chess is still a game played between two humans.
My advice is therefore to look for a good balance between the specific and
the general and general considerations are strongly supported by the
ability to apply common sense and logical thinking.
Master another chess topic