Chess Strategy by Edward Lasker (inspirational novels .TXT) 📕

–––––––––––––

8 | #R | #Kt| #B | #Q | #K | #B | #Kt| #R |

|–––––––––––––|

7 | #P | #P | | #P | | #P | #P | #P |

|–––––––––––––|

6 | | | | | | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

5 | | | #P | | | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

4 | | | | | ^P | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

3 | | | ^Kt| | | ^Kt| | |

|–––––––––––––|

2 | ^P | ^P | | | | ^P | ^P | ^P |

|–––––––––––––|

1 | ^R | | ^B | ^Q | ^K | ^B | | ^R |

–––––––––––––

A B C D E F G H

Diag. 20

The best plan for Black is to decline the doubtful gift of the pawn and to bring about one of the positions, as sketched above, in which, by playing P-Q4 early in the game, Black is sure of the free development of all his forces.

Black is able to play P-Q4 early in all such openings, where White does not force the defensive move P-Q3 by attacking Black’s King’s Pawn. For instance, in the King’s gambit, since the move 2. P-KB4 does not threaten PxP, Black can reply at once by 2. … P-Q4 (Falkbeer Counter Gambit). After 3. PxQP, P-K5 (to permit of Kt-KB3, which at present is not feasible on account of 4. PxP); 4. P-Q3, PxP; 5. QxP, White is a pawn ahead, but his Queen obstructs his KB; therefore Black has better developing chances and should be able to win the pawn back at the very least.

A second example is the Vienna game, which proceeds as follows:

2. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3

3. P-B4 P-Q4 (Diagram 21)

If White plays 4. PxQP, Black can play P-K5, as in the Falkbeer gambit mentioned just now. In answer to 4. PxKP, on the other hand, Black can play KtxP without having the slightest difficulty with his development. For instance,

5. Kt-KB3 B-K2

6. P-Q4 P-KB3

7. B-Q3 KtxKt

8. PxKt Castles

9. Castles Kt-B3 or B-KKt5

and Black also will soon have an open file for his Rook, with no disadvantage in position.

–––––––––––––

8 | #R |#Kt | #B | #Q | #K | #B | | #R |

|–––––––––––––|

7 | #P | #P | #P | | | #P | #P | #P |

|–––––––––––––|

6 | | | | | |#Kt | | |

|–––––––––––––|

5 | | | | #P | #P | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

4 | | | | | ^P | ^P | | |

|–––––––––––––|

3 | | |^Kt | | | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

2 | ^P |^P | ^P | ^P | | | ^P | ^P |

–––––––––––––

1 | ^R | | ^B | ^Q | ^K | ^B |^Kt | ^R |

–––––––––––––

A B C D E F G H

Diag. 21.

There is, however, one opening in which Black has the utmost difficulty in preventing White from getting a positional advantage in the centre. It is called the Ruy Lopez, and is held by many to be the strongest opening for White. The initial moves are: 1. P-K4, P-K4; 2. Kt-KB3, Kt-QB3; 3. B-Kt5. With this move White at once attacks the Black KP, though indirectly, by threatening to exchange the B for the Kt. To make the capture effective, however, White must first protect his own King’s Pawn, which would otherwise be lost after 4. BxKt, QPxB; 5. KtxP, Q-Q5!. At first, therefore, Black need not provide against the threatened exchange.

I shall treat at some length the various defences from which Black can choose, and in studying this most important King’s side opening, we shall have occasion to note many points of general interest for operations in the centre.

Broadly speaking, two entirely different systems of defence can be distinguished: either Black will try to maintain his centre pawn, or else, giving up the centre, try to gain some other advantage as compensation.

Black can only maintain his centre pawn if he can prevent his QKt from being exchanged. As is readily seen, White can attack Black’s KP a second time with P-Q4, whilst after Black’s P-Q3 any other defensive move would hinder development. These considerations lead to the first main line of defence in which Black plays 3. … P-QR3. After 4. B-R4 Black has the option of releasing the pin by playing P-QKt4 at some opportune moment. If White elects to exchange his Bishop for the Kt forthwith, he can remove the Black centre pawn after 4. … QPxB by playing 5. P-Q4, but the exchange of the B for the Kt gives Black a free development and in consequence a good game. (Compare note to move 4 in Game No. 12.)

Diagram 22 reproduces a typical position in this defence. The more usual continuation for White is 4. B-R4, Kt-B3;

–––––––––––––

8 | #R | | #B | #Q | #K | | | #R |

|–––––––––––––|

7 | | | #P | | #B | #P | #P | #P |

|–––––––––––––|

6 | #P | |#Kt | #P | |#Kt | | |

|–––––––––––––|

5 | | #P | | | #P | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

4 | | | | | ^P | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

3 | | ^B | | | |^Kt | | |

|–––––––––––––|

2 | ^P | ^P | ^P | ^P | | ^P | ^P | ^P |

|–––––––––––––|

1 | ^R |^Kt | ^B | ^Q | ^R | | ^K | |

–––––––––––––

A B C D E F G H

Diag. 22.

5. Castles; he does not trouble to protect his KP as its capture would allow his Rook an open file on which to act against the opposing King (compare Games Nos. 14 and 17) 5. … B-K2. Now Black can capture the KP without much risk, as the Bishop is on the King’s file. 6. R-K1, White covers his pawn, and thereby threatens to win a pawn by BxKt. Therefore Black must not delay playing 6. … P-QKt4.

After 7. B-Kt3, P-Q3; (Diagram 22) White cannot yet execute the manoeuvre which underlies the whole tendency of the Ruy Lopez, namely P-Q4, maintaining the pressure in the centre, because after KtxQP, 9. KtxKt, PxKt; 10. QxP? White loses a piece through 10. … P-B4, etc. It is therefore necessary to play P-QB3 first. White could also obtain a rapid development by Kt-B3, P-Q3, B-K3 or Kt5, but this arrangement is not popular, because Black can play Kt-QR4 and exchange the valuable KB. The pawn at QB3 supports an advance in the centre, and also provides a retreat for the KB. The QKt can be developed in this way: Kt-Q2- B1-Kt3 or K3. Black, however, must try to round off his pawn position on the Queen’s side, by moving his QBP into line. Black’s pawns at K4 and QB4 then exert a pressure on White’s Q4. And this pressure threatens to be reinforced by B-Kt5. From these considerations the following development seems to be natural: 8. P-B3, Kt-QR4; 9. B-B2, P-B4; 10. P-Q4, Q-B2 (to support the KP); it leads to the position in Diagram 23.

–––––––––––––

8 | #R | | #B | | #K | | | #R |

|–––––––––––––|

7 | | | #Q | | #B | #P | #P | #P |

|–––––––––––––|

6 | #P | | | #P | |#Kt | | |

|–––––––––––––|

5 |#Kt | #P | #P | | #P | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

4 | | | | ^P | ^P | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

3 | | | ^P | | |^Kt | | |

|–––––––––––––|

2 | ^P | ^P | ^B | | | ^P | ^P | ^P |

|–––––––––––––|

1 | ^R |^Kt | ^B | ^Q | ^R | | ^K | |

–––––––––––––

A B C D E F G H

Diag. 23.

11. P-KR3

One of the few instances in which this pawn move is justified. It deprives Black’s QB of its only good square, and saves the KKt, the cooperation of which is urgently needed in the centre.

This system of opening will receive more exhaustive treatment under the heading of “Middle Game.” (Compare Game No. 12.)

In the second main line of defence, of which I shall treat now, Black renounces the maintenance of his KP, and makes an attempt to find compensation by attacking White’s King’s Pawn. The King’s file, opened by the disappearance of the Black pawn, offers opportunities for that purpose. After the first few moves we arrive at the following position, which

–––––––––––––

8 | #R | | | #Q | | #R | #K | |

|–––––––––––––|

7 | #P | #P | #P | #B | #B | #P | #P | #P |

|–––––––––––––|

6 | | |#Kt | #P | |#Kt | | |

|–––––––––––––|

5 | | ^B | | | | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

4 | | | |^Kt | ^P | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

3 | | |^Kt | | | | | |

|–––––––––––––|

2 | ^P | ^P | ^P | | | ^P | ^P | ^P |

|–––––––––––––|

1 | ^R | | ^B | ^Q | ^R | | ^K | |

–––––––––––––

A B C D E F G H

Diag. 24.

may be reached thus: 3. B-Kt5, P-Q3; 4. P-Q4, B-Q2; 5. Kt-B3, Kt-B3; 6. Castles, B-K2; 7. R-K1, PxP; 8. KtxP, Castles. The exchange on the seventh move is compulsory, because the loss of a pawn after BxKt is in effect threatened, now that the White KP is supported by the Rook.

Black’s intention of exerting pressure on the KP is now difficult of execution, because his pieces are very cramped and hinder one another in a restricted area. The KB in particular cannot be brought into action without great difficulty, for instance by: R-K1, B-KB1, P-KKt3, and B-Kt2. It is therefore advisable for White to develop his QB at Kt2 instead of at Kt5, in order not to give Black a chance of exchanging his troublesome Bishop. (In a game Bernstein-Emanuel Lasker, Moscow, 1914, there happened 9. BxKt, PxB; 10. B-Kt5, P-KR3; 11. B-R4, Kt-R2; 12. BxB, QxB with a good game for Black.)

The defence has a totally different trend, if Black gives up his own KP, but captures the White KP at once. I have already pointed out that White would not mind his KP being taken, in view of the attack on the open King’s file. Let us now consider in which way this attack can be planned. There are two essentially different lines, according to whether Black interpolates P-QR3 or not.

After 3. B-Kt5, Kt-B3; 4. Castles, KtxP; 5. R-K1, Black gets out of it comfortably by playing Kt-Q3, B-K2 and Castles, and White cannot permanently prevent Black’s game from being freed by the advance of the QP. P-Q4 for White on the fifth move is therefore stronger. Black cannot very well exchange the pawns, leaving the King’s file quite exposed, and must submit to White playing PxP, maintaining the pawn at K5 and preventing Black’s P-Q4 for some time to come.

The opening might continue in this way: 5. P-Q4, B-K2; 6. Q-K2, Kt-Q3; 7. BxKt, KtPxB (to make room for the Kt); 8. PxP, Kt-Kt2 (Diagram 25).

–––––––––––––

8 | #R | | #B | #Q | #K |