Golden Crescent Chess

24 November, 2009

Road Trip!!

Our first trip to the Houston Chess Club, while memorable, wasn't as successful as we'd hoped. Well, we're going to try and fix that: on December 5, 2009, we're headed back to the HCC to settle some scores!

http://www.houstonchessclub2000.com/

This Google Maps link will give you the driving directions to the HCC from our meeting place at Jason's Deli. Google Maps will sometimes give goofy directions, but you'll get the jist of it.

Here are the details on the HCC Saturday tournaments:

Free lecture by Larry Englebretson (Lifetime Master) for everyone starting at 10:30 AM. Tournament starts at 12:00 noon. Registration is from 11:30 AM – 12:00 noon. Time control is G/60. Round times are 12:00 noon, 2:00 PM, and 4:00 PM. 50% of entry fees collected awarded as prizes.

Adult Members: $10.00
Adult Non-Members: $15.00
Junior Members: $7.00
Junior Non-Members: $12.00

13 November, 2009

The Case For The Defense

To begin with, if you've wondered whether it is better to be an attack-oriented player or a defense-oriented player, let me say that the answer is "yes". Chess is not a game for specialists. When you begin to play through the games of the great players, you will likely be surprised to learn that attackers such as Kasparov and Tal have defended brilliantly - and that defenders such as Kramnik and Karpov have played beautiful attacks. Indeed, grandmasters of chess are well-rounded players - so if it is necessary for a peerless attacker like Kasparov to defend well, then it follows that you should also develop and improve your defensive techniques.

Why? Isn't defense boring? Isn't it better to sacrifice pieces and play for mate? Of course it is. But real life gets in the way sometimes. Sometimes your opponent gets the better of you in the opening and when the middlegame begins, you have to deal with his attack.

What then? Sheepishly resign just because the opponent has the upper hand? Of course not! No, no, a thousand times, no! You fight on until defeat is imminent - for one of you. As GM Viktor Korchnoi says, "If a player believes in miracles he can sometimes perform them." (Lisa D. loves it when I quote people)

Now I love to attack. It's great fun. But the game I am about to show you is a favorite of mine (despite its quality) and is a typical illustration of what stubborn resistance can do for a bad position.

This game was played online (a fifteen-minute game, IIRC), circa 2000. I had the white pieces.

1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. d4 cxd4
4. Nxd4 Qb6!?

This move isn't exactly a mainline Sicilian but it certainly has its attractive qualities. The d4-square is under pressure (compare this to black's play in Aparicio-Makhlaychuk, 1998 for similarities) and the attacking defense 5 Be3? just drops the b2-pawn. The primary idea behind the Open Sicilian, from black's perspective, is that if he can reach an endgame his extra pawn in the center will be very advantageous for him. For white in the Open Sicilian, middlegame attack is the name of the game.

5. Nxc6?

I wasn't very well-versed in the Sicilian back in those days. The retreat 5 Nb3, a standard book move in many lines, simply didn't occur to me. But the text-move allows black to get one step closer to that endgame with that knight trade AND moves the b-pawn to the far more useful c-file, where it will support the d-pawn once it comes to the d5-square. So yeah, I'm giving black EXACTLY what he wants in this opening - all in the first five moves!

5...bxc6
6. Nc3 g6
7. b3?

As I mentioned in the Makhlaychuk game, I had an unhealthy fixation with the fianchetto during the years 1997-2001; when I was out of ideas, I simply played b2-b3 and Bc1-b2 (or g2-g3 and Bf1-g2, depending). In the abstract, it's a fine idea - place the bishop on the long diagonal, it runs through the center and controls a lot of squares - but a chess game seldom permits such leisurely maneuvers.

Before I go on with the game, I need to make clear the point I am trying to make: the fianchetto is very often an excellent idea. This maneuver is the central idea behind several excellent opening systems, (the King's Indian Defense, the Queen's Indian Defense, the Benoni Defense, the Sicilian Dragon, various English Opening variations, etc.) so I'm not telling you to avoid using the fianchetto; I was using it as a crutch back in those days, making it a substitute for thinking about which moves were relevant to the position. This is a lazy and dangerous approach to chess, especially in complex, tactical openings like the Open Sicilian.

Consider the text-move, 7 b3? To complete the fianchetto, white will need to play 8 Bb2 - what does that accomplish? The white king is stuck in the center and the other bishop is doing nothing on f1; why not 7 Bc4 and 8 0-0 instead? Sure, black can insert something contentious like 7...Ba6 to prevent castling, but then 8 Bxa6 Qxa6 9 Qd4! is strong: 9...Nf6 10 Bg5 Bg7 11 e5. White is now ready to castle and black's knight is getting kicked around like a tin can.

7...Bg7
8. Bb2 Qa5
9. Qd2 Nf6
10. Bd3 O-O
11. O-O Ng4
12. h3 Ne5
13. f4 Nxd3
14. cxd3 Ba6
15. Rf3 Bb7
16. Qf2??

I have purposefully avoided comment for the past several moves because the topic here is defending bad positions. White has reasonably handled a bad opening up until now - but this move is a screaming, howling, why-on-earth-do-I-still-bother-with-chess quality blunder. 16 d4 c5 17 d5 was the most plausible continuation; white is still worse off but at least in this line he enters a middlegame with level material.

16...Bxc3
17. Bxc3 Qxc3
18. Rf1 c5
19. f5 Qd4!

A queen trade would be disastrous for white, and for that reason white must play an awkward move to keep the queens on.

20. Re3 Kg7
21. Kh1 g5
22. h4 h6
23. Qg3 f6
24. Ref3 d6
25. Qg4 Bc6!

White was threatening a forced draw with Qg4-h5-g6+, Qg6-h6-g6, with perpetual check. Black has maneuvered very nicely: besides preventing that draw, all of his pawns are on dark squares - which of course allows his extra piece, the bishop, to travel unimpeded.

26. Qh5 Be8
27. Qg4 h5
28. Qg3 g4
29. R3f2 Qe5?!

This is a subject close to my heart - the unjustified one-move threat. Black has done a superb job improving his most of his pieces after winning the bishop. Here, black could play 29...Bf7 to connect the rooks and begin invading the queenside in earnest; even 29...a5 looks pretty good. Why redeploy an already well-placed piece (to attack a piece which will most certainly not agree to be traded) when black's material superiority can assert itself on the other side of the board? When you've got your opponent in retreat covering up one weakness, it's always a good policy to explore the possibility of creating another one. Eventually, defensive pieces charged with covering multiple problem areas will break under enough well-placed pressure and make winning a game simple.

30. Qe3 Rb8
31. Rc1 Rb4
32. Rc4!?

What's this? Isn't white supposed to avoid trades when down in material? Yes. But it also occurred to me that the result of this trade (which black is quite happy to accept for all reasons obvious) makes a lot of central light squares uninhabitable for the black bishop. So by agreeing to the trade, I reduce the effectiveness of black's extra piece.

32...Rxc4
33. bxc4 Bc6

33...Qc3 creates a tactical idea in conjunction with ...Be8-f7 and ...Bf7xc4.

34. Rf1 Rb8
35. Qd2 Qb2?

35...Rb2 is much stronger and looks decisive, since 36 Qa5 fails to 36...Qg3. Alternatively, 36 Qe3 Rxa2 eventually allows ...Qb2 and white is plastered to his back rank.

36. Qa5 Rb7
37. Qd8 Qxa2
38. Qc8 Qa6?

38...Rb1 is superior. The hanging bishop can't be touched since white loses the exchange.

39. Qe6 Qb6
40. Kg1 Bd7??

Black has utterly wasted his extra piece. Far from utilizing the bishop, black assists white by blocking the defense of a vital pawn with that extra material.

What have we witnessed so far? To be sure, black has played rather poorly since preventing the perpetual check - but why? Aided by the urgency of a ticking clock, black has committed errors related to the possiblity that white was threatening, or could threaten, something. In short, black is tiptoeing around ghosts. 29...Qe5?! and 35 Qb2? were undoubtedly motivated by the desire to get the queens off the board. With 38...Qa6? black was so fearful of losing his extra material that he failed to recognize that the bishop was in no real danger. And with the text-move, black was so concerned with the white queen's location that he didn't stop to consider this reality: Her Majesty really can't do anything more than look scary on the e6-square. Black wanted to drive it out at all costs.

The point is, when you're on the short end of the stick, threaten something. Anything. Don't just sit there. Maybe your defense will unnerve the opponent; I'm sure that this is what happened in this game.

41. Qxe7+ Kg8
42. Qxf6 Ba4
43. Qe6+ Rf7
44. Qg6+ Kf8
45. Qh6+ Ke8
46. Qxh5

White has recovered two pawns for the bishop, which is, materially, nearly equal .

46...Bc2

Of course, it's curtains for the critical d3-pawn, right?

47. Qh8+!

The Lady in White deserves a raise for her all of her hard work in this game. With this move white keeps the d3-pawn on the board for now.

47...Kd7
48. Qc3 Qb3
49. Qa5 Qa4?

Just grab the d3-pawn! Jeez!

My original note to this move, written after I first analyzed this game, read "Black has played...as though he has the material deficit." That's kind of a stupid comment, I thought as I glanced over the old annotations. However, as I reviewed the game in preparation for writing this post I realized that this comment invites two interpretations. On the one hand, the proper approach for the player short on material is to play more alertly and boldly, since passive play will avail him nothing; in that sense, the note is nonsensical. But on the other hand, the idea that a player with a material deficit will play not to harrass the opponent but solely to preserve what he has, regardless of what's going on in the game, reacting rather than acting, it is that sense in which my original note does have some merit. Black has had the majority of the game dictated to him despite winning significant material in the opening. So keep this in mind - do not let a game get out of your control in this way. It is extremely important to keep a cool head when evaluating threats. Otherwise, reflexive reactions to those threats, over and over again, will transform you into a non-participant at the board. What opponent could be easier to deal with than the one playing your game rather than his own?

50. Qd2 Rf8
51. Rc1 Bb3
52. Qg5 Qa3 - Finally, a counterthreat!
53. f6?

This is pure bluff, as it turns out. 53...Rxf6! 54 Qxg4+ is the best white can get from this, since the white rook is en prise on c1.

53...Ba4 - But of course, black takes it seriously...
54. Qxg4+ Kc6
55. Rf1 Qxd3
56. f7 Qd4+
58. Kh1 Qe5
59. Rf5 Qe7
60. e5 dxe5
61. Rxe5 Qxf7
62. Re6+! Kc7

Believe it or not, the only alternative (62...Ka5) is checkmate! (63 Qe1++)

63. Re7+ 1-0

Rook and bishop can often compensate for a queen, and the win isn't forced quite yet. But considering the emotional state black must have been in, can you blame the guy for tipping his king?

Often a position appears to be so strong that the game should just win itself. But as GM Jan Hein Donner put it, "Chess games are not won with good positions but with good moves." I did nearly everything I could to make the win difficult for my opponent, and he responded with bad moves. Had I hunkered down in a corner, waiting for the end, my opponent would have picked me apart in routine fashion. Never give up. Never, never, never. (Churchill)

***Edit by Ricardo*** Besides correcting several errors on the move list, I hadn't yet posted a playback link. You may now click the new link below if it pleases you.

Ricardo Aparicio-NN

05 November, 2009

In Defense of Latvians and Their Gambits: Dad's Big Night

My father likes to send me his chess games (especially when he wins), and so I thought I would post his most recent victory - a quirky defense of the Latvian Gambit!

John DeVries: I played a casual chess game last night (Halloween night!) with Ken Henkelman, an 1800 USCF rated chess player who does not play any more in rated chess tournaments. I play Ken every week at Waco Chess Club meetings - he beats me at least 3/4 of the time! However, sometimes the stars align just right, and I beat Ken! Last night was just such a time.

The following game is worthy of review. It is a "Latvian Gambit" ( I played Black). "Latvian Gambit" was actually invented 400+ years ago by a great Italian player, Greco. It was called the "Greco Roman Gambit" until the 20th Century. The great 19th Century English Grandmaster, Joseph Blackburne, played the ""Greco Roman/Latvian Gambit", but stopped using it after he was crushed in an important international grandmasters' tournament. The "Greco Roman Gambit" reputation collapsed. No masters played it. Then, in the years before World War II, a group of masters from Latvia (Russia) (Mikail Tal came from Latvia but was not part of this group) began experimenting with it and challenged several chess clubs to Latvian Gambit correspondence games (these chess clubs were filled with master players) and never lost. Okay, a few of the games were draws. Since that time, it has been called the "Latvian Gambit".

Today's grandmasters totally disregard the Latvian Gambit, and the Latvian Gambit is humorously derided by my friends in the Waco Chess Club. I keep playing it, because I don't feel comfortable playing

-2- ....Nc6 when White opens with e4.

Grandmaster Anatoly Lein wrote a book on the Latvian Gambit - a chess master friend in San Antonio gave me the book, and I lost the book ! So most/all of my knowledge regarding the Latvian Gambit comes from my over-the-board experience.

The Latvian Gambit goes as follows. It is a gambit for the player with the Black pieces. -1- e4 e5 -2- Nf3 f5?!

In last night's game, Ken made a couple small, but important errors. Still, I slaughtered him. I'm going to keep the following game in my "DeVries Great Chess Games Database" (the database has a very small number of games!). The game (please see below) is worthy of review. If I ever get to play you with the Black pieces, and you play

-1- e4 and -2- Nf3, I will play the Latvian Gambit. Enjoy!!!

Ken Henkelman vs John DeVries 10-31-2009 (Casual Game)

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 f5
3. Nxe5 Qf6
4. d4 d6
5. Nc4 fxe4

This is all standard - now the battle begins

6. Nc3 Qg6
7. f3 Nf6
8. Qe2 Be7
9. fxe4 Bg4

One of the key moves in the game for Black --- I don't mind going one pawn down here.

10. Qe3 0-0

White never gets to castle in this game.

11. Bd2 Nc6
12. Nd5 Nxd5
13. exd5 Bf6

Black 13th move is nice!

14. Qg3 Nxd4
15. Bd3 Rae8+
16. Ne3 Nf5

The White Knight at e3 is pinned.

17. Bxf5 Qxf5
18. c3 Bg5
19. h3 Bxe3
20. Bxe3 Bh5 - 20. hxg4 might have saved White

Black's Bishop on h5 will prove decisive.

21. Kd2 Qxd5+
22. Kc1 Qd3

Now it is over for White.

23. Re1 Bg6, 0-1

**EDIT by CCGC Blogger** Please click the link below if you'd care to play through this game.

Ken Henkleman-John DeVries

01 November, 2009

Physician, Heal Thyself

I think it's useful, when given advice, to see how the advisor behaves in the very situations he provides advice about. You don't want to see someone recommend one thing and do something else. Reminds me of this Dilbert Cartoon.

So when I posted about what a player should do when he/she is confronted with the unfamiliar, I promised to show you how I handled that situation. Did I take my own advice?

The game I present today is from my utterly disastrous showing (+0-3=0) from the Gulf Coast Open in 1998. I have the white pieces against a nine-year old Ukrainian girl, Inga Makhlaychuk.

1. e4 e6
2. d4 d5
3. e5 c5

This is the Advance Variation of the French Defense. I had played scores of terrible games against the French when squared off with against Chessmaster 3000, so I vowed that I would always play the Advance against the French to channel the game into very specific positions. A noble idea, but at the time 3 e5 was all that stuck with me. In other words, what now?

4. c3

"Don't make too many pawn moves in the opening." So what gives here? In this position it's reasonable. Neither player has developed a piece, and the basic idea here is that white can maintain a pawn on d4, which is consistent with another piece of advice: "When in doubt, play in the center."

4...Nc6 - "Knights before Bishops!"
5. Bb5

Fritz calls this "last book move". Trust me - it wouldn't be hard to find a book on the French Defense showing many more moves in the Advance. Of course, five moves beats my three. But what happened to "Knights before Bishops"? Well, the pin on the knight helps maintain the pawn on d4. Or am I just making excuses for myself? Fritz said it was a standard move, how bad can it be?

5...Qb6

I like this move. It threatens the Bishop and aims at d4 yet again. Is it too early to move the queen, though? To answer that question, take a look around and see if any of the white pieces can attack it.

6. Bxc6+ bxc6

You may be wondering why black recaptured with the pawn. Remember, I have mentioned how black is attacking the d4 pawn and that white has been playing to keep the d4 pawn in place. Well, with the doubled pawns, it's easy to see that black can play ...c5xd4 and if white recaptures with the pawn, black can again attack the d4 pawn with the other c-pawn with ...c6-c5. The stupid looking 7 Na3, 7 Qb3, or even 7 Qa4 was better than giving up bishop for knight and a central pawn majority. Besides, capturing the knight violated the rule "Avoid moving a piece more than once in the opening."

7. Ne2 cxd4
8. cxd4 Ne7
9. 0-0 Nf5!

My precocious opponent is determined to harrass the d4 square!

10. Nbc3 Ba6

Here's a good stopping point. Consider that we've been talking about the d4 square over and over and over. So what do you suppose the point of this move must be?

11. b3

"Secures c4 - 11 Re1!?= must be considered" - Fritz. Indeed, Herr Fritz; but I was not taking the center into account - I was simply playing the moves I wanted to play. And my approach then, when in doubt, was to fianchetto my bishops. Aren't they POWERFUL on those long diagonals?

11...Bb4 - and black is better, says Fritz.
12. Bd2 0-0 - 12...Nxd4 safely rips off a pawn
13. Na4 - equalizes, says Fritz.
13...Qa5
14. Bxb4 Qxb4

"If you can get out of the opening without losing a piece, you're OK." - IM Jack Peters. The problem is that my d4 pawn is toast and generating counterplay will not be easy. Fritz gives a line which preserves my d4 pawn at the cost of doubling my queenside pawns on the b-file: 15 a3 Bxe2 16 axb4 Bxd1 17 Rxd1=. That "=" is Fritz's evaluation; I don't see how those doubled pawns aren't a liability in the endgame, but I'm a pretty weak player. Need proof of that?

15. Nc5?? Bxe2
16. Qxe2 Nxd4

There is no rescuing my knight. The queen must be moved out of danger, since a counterattack on her queen fails to ...Nd4xe2+, at which point black's queen skips harmlessly away.

I had planned to comment on the entire game, but the rest of the game is even worse than the opening was. Everything worth learning in this game came from the opening - and it's easy to see that black's moves adhered to common sense principles and white's moves did not. This is how nine-year olds can defeat twenty-three year olds in chess. The pieces are ageless.

Don't misunderstand - I'm not trying to spare myself by not commenting on the rest of the game. You can click the link below and view the rest of it.

Ricardo Aparicio-Inga Makhlaychuk

27 October, 2009

Dost Mine Eyes Deceive Me?: Chess Costumes for Halloween!

New Name, Same Game: The Professor's Opening Revisions

1) Ruy Lopez --- "No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!"
2) The Sicialian --- "Some Italian Guy" or "My Name is Tony. How you doin'?"
3) Blackmar-Diemer Gambit --- "The Black Cat Ding Bat"
4) Caro-Kann Defense --- "The Ricardo"
5) Latvian Gambit --- "The Iron Curtain Coming Down"
6) Queen's Gambit --- "The Queen's Sac"
7) King's Gambit --- "The DeVries"
8) The Spike or Grob Opening --- "The Vince"
9) The English Open --- "Wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more say no more."
10) The Fried Liver Attack or the Fegatello Attack --- Hmmmm....I don't think I really need to rename this one.

Player Profile: Ricardo

In the first of our Player Profile series, we hear from CCGC member Ricardo about his first steps in chess, his favorite players, and more. Check back frequently for more player profiles!

RICARDO

Age: 34

Nickname: the Fist

When did you learn how to play chess? I learned the moves at nine, but I didn't really learn anything else about the game until I purchased Chessmaster 3000 when I was seventeen. In that software I was exposed to all sorts of amazing facets to the game of chess: its rich history, the great players who shaped that history, the brilliant games they played, the thousands of different lines of opening play. It was like The Matrix when Neo swallowed the red pill. Or the blue pill, hell, I don't know. Whatever the color was, Neo learned that there was far more to existence than he ever dreamed - my experience with chess through Chessmaster 3000 was the same.

Favorite openings: 1 e4 and 1 c4. I suppose I'd rather play against Sicilians or Ruy Lopezes more than other 1 e4 openings. The Caro-Kann and French can be frustrating, and the Pirc tends to get a little dry. I don't care much for facing the Alekhine, and I've always had trouble with the Scandanavian. As for 1 c4, I like all types of English positions, though it's often slower than several 1 e4 lines.

As black I prefer the Caro-Kann and occasionally the Sicilian against 1 e4. Against 1 d4 or 1 c4, I have yet to find a defense I really like - I've been recently experimenting with the Slav and related defenses.

Favorite players: Yasser Seirawan is probably my favorite favorite, though I have a default fondness for all American players. (USA! USA!) Outside of our shores, I like David Bronstein, Mikhail Tal, Viktor Korchnoi, Viswanathan Anand, and of course Garry Kasparov. I actually admire a lot of Grandmasters, too many to name here. This is just the short list.

Favorite games: (I'll try to keep this short) Morphy-Duke & Count, 1858; Ed. Lasker-Thomas, 1912; Eliskases-Grunfeld, 1933; R. Byrne-Fischer, 1963; Benko-Suttles, 1964; Fischer-Petrosian, 1971; Bronstein-Ljubojevic, 1973; Spassky-Tal, 1973; Karpov-Korchnoi, 1974; Ljubojevic-Andersson, 1976; Kasparov-Portisch, 1983; Alburt-Weinstein, 1984; Seirawan-Kasparov, 1989; Seirawan-Timman, 1990; Hodgson-Oll, 1993; Kasparov-Shirov, 1994; Anand-Lautier, 1997; Kasparov-Topalov, 1999; An obscure but beautiful game is Kupferstich-Andreassen, 1953

Favorite chess books: Seirawan's Winning Chess series, Garry Kasparov's Fighting Chess, The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal, The Sorcerer's Apprentice by Bronstein and Furstenburg, The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played by Chernev, Chess: The Art of Logical Thinking by McDonald, Profile of a Prodigy (Bobby Fischer) by Brady, Learn From The Grandmasters edited by Keene, Five Crowns by Seirawan and Tisdall, Persona Non Grata by Korchnoi, The Inner Game of Chess, Soviet Chess, and Los Voraces 2019 by Soltis, The Seven Deadly Chess Sins by Rowson. I'm probably forgetting a title or two.

What do you do away from the chessboard? I'm a college student and longtime guitarist. I also like to do some writing here and there, hence my involvement with the blog.

What's so cool about chess? There's so very much! The players, their games, the books, the history...getting invested in this game will yield great rewards. The unique combination of entertainment and mental stimulation this game provides is unlike any other. Don't limit yourself to casual games of chess! Play over the great games played by the masters! Study tactics! Try solving composed problems and studies! You'll be amazed with what you learn and how much fun it is.

24 October, 2009

About That Game I Posted Before

Ricardo again. A regular post is coming sometime next week, but I found a new online tool with which I can share games with you in a more effective way. (Thank you, Caissa.com! Your link now joins our other great chess links there on the right). Click below for a viewable version of my queen sacrifice game:

NN-Ricardo, 2008

20 October, 2009

What To Do When You Don't Know What To Do

Hi again. I'd like to take a moment to discuss the opening. I've been praised for my opening knowledge here and there, but to be honest I don't consider my opening knowledge to be anything significant. I suppose I am fairly well acquainted with several openings on a superficial level, but beyond that I am only well-versed in my favorite opening lines, like most experienced players. Below are some time-tested tips that have served me well over the years. Unfortunately, I've found in my recent conversations that many people have never been exposed to these tips. What follows is nothing specific about any one opening. These are just common sense guidelines to keep in mind, especially when you're in an opening you have no experience with.

There are five "perfect" first moves for white: 1. c4, 1. d4, 1. e4, 1. g3, and 1 Nf3. That's not my advice, that's the late GM Edmar Mednis talking. And by "perfect", he means that they are both safe and relevant to the greater goal of controlling the center. 1. h4 might be a safe move, but it does nothing to address the center. 1. f4 might take control of the e5 square, but it uncovers a dangerous diagonal (1 f4 e6 2 g4?? Qh4, mate). If you play 1. e4 all the time and you want to surprise an opponent who knows you, consider another "perfect" move - 1. c4 is my fallback when I get a little bored with 1. e4.
Don't make too many pawn moves in the opening. OK, so how many is too many? Generally, two or three should be it. There are numerous exceptions to this, though: take for example white in the Alekhine defense (1 e4 Nf6 2 e5 Nd5 3 d4 d6 4 c4 Nb6 - nothing but pawns in the first four moves, and two alternatives for move five are either 5 exd6 or 5 f4 (!)) or black in the Morphy Ruy Lopez (1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0 b5 - three pawn moves in the first five moves). The best way I can clarify this otherwise vague, exception-plagued guideline is like this: In the opening, move only those pawns which open lines for your bishops and/or contest the center and/or chase enemy pieces off of good squares. Avoid moving pawns which weaken your king's position and/or loosen your grip on the center and/or restrict your piece's freedom of movement and/or actually prod your opponent's pieces onto better squares. Whew! Pawns are tricky, aren't they? This guideline makes clear the idea that one should become at least somewhat acquainted with opening systems. Because those considerations are so numerous and circumstantial, it's best just to plan on developing pieces after you've moved a couple of pawns already.
Develop knights before bishops. This guideline is so strongly confirmed by centuries of grandmaster practice I'm tempted to call it a rule:

The English opening: 1 c4 c5 2 Nc3 or 1 c4 e5 2 Nc3 or 1 c4 Nf6 2 d4 e6 3 Nc3. Knights before bishops.
The Queen's gambit declined: 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3. Knights before bishops.
The Nimzo-indian defense: 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Bb4. Knights before bishops.
The Queen's indian defense: 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 b6 4 a3 Bb7 (Ba6). Knights before bishops.
The King's indian defense: 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 Bg7 4 e4 d6. Knights before bishops.
The Benoni defense: 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 e6 4 Nc3 exd5 5 cxd5 g6. Knights before bishops.
The Caro-Kann defense: 1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 dxe4 4 Nxe4 Bf5 - Aha! An exception. However, 4...Bf5 is very popular, but 4...Nd7 is almost as popular and has been played by no less than former World Champion Anatoly Karpov, amongst many other all-time greats. So let's just say the Caro-Kann is a sort of exception.
The Sicilian defense: 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 - Knights before bishops. Rather play a different 2nd move with black? OK: 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 e6 (2...Nc6 proves the near-rule) 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6. Knights before bishops.
The Pirc defense: 1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 - Knights before bishops.
The Scandanavian defense: 1 e4 d5 2 exd5 Qxd5 (the most mainstream opening around to feature early queen moves) 3 Nc3 Qa4 4 Nf3 Nc6 - Knights before bishops.
The Ruy Lopez, which I already covered
The French defense: 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 Bb4 - undoubtedly the best of the exceptions to the rule. Most French defense experts consider this to be black's best 3rd move. (Although, 3...Nf6 is a popular alternative...)
The Alekhine defense, which is another exception worth mentioning. White usually plays a lot of pawn moves and opens slowly against it, so frankly I must recommend another approach against the Alekhine - more on that in a later post.

I hope that list confirms the idea - if you don't know what to do in the opening, move knights before bishops. After that too-long digression, let's get back to our list of opening guidelines.

Avoid moving a piece more than once. To that I have to add the phrase, "without a very good reason". If the opponent is threatening imminent checkmate, by all means move that knight again. If your bishop is being threatened by a pawn, of course, move it out of the way. If you can win queen for rook, go for it. Move the rook again. If none of those stipulations are in play, then look for around for another piece to develop.
Castle early. Castle early. Castle early, castle early, and castle early. Oh and before I forget, castle early.
"Patzer sees a check, patzer gives a check!" This quote is attributed to Bobby Fischer. Don't check just because a check exists. Take some time and try to see if it's worth playing the checking move (it usually isn't). Similarly...
If your "attack" is a one-move threat, with no follow-up of any kind, it'll probably cost you in the long run. So you play c4-c5, attacking his queen on d6. The opponent simply moves his queen out of the way and you have given up control of the d5 square. The black knight on f6 is much happier, as is the black bishop on b7. In retrospect, attacking the queen wasn't such a good idea. Keep that sort of thing in mind.
Your first reaction to your opponent's threat should not be "How do I deal with this?" - it should be "Can I safely ignore this?" Nothing I can add to that.
When you are ahead in material, trade pieces. (This is more of a middlegame guideline than an opening guideline, but it's such an important concept I include it here) Think of it this way. Let's say you are Bill Gates and you are in a contest with Warren Buffet to see who has more cash. You (Gates) have 50,020,000 dollars. Buffet's got 50,000,000 dollars. Technically, you've got more money than he does - .04% more money. .04% is something close to nothing. Now, let's say you and Buffet had an agreement to each give away 49,999,999 dollars a piece. Now you've got 20,000% more cash than he does! Chess is the same. If you're a pawn ahead, it's worth so much more when you trade away everything else.
"It is better to sacrifice your opponent's pieces" - GM Savielly Tartakower. We all want to sacrifice material and brilliantly checkmate our opponent. Try to put those thoughts aside and just play as simply as possible.
"Centrum, centrum, ooh la la!" That phrase actually appears, verbatim, in a book (Grandmaster Meets Chess Amateur, Steve Davis & GM David Norwood) and was attributed to a Soviet chess coach. His point? Play in the center. The most important squares on the board are a square from c3 to c6, c6 to f6, f6 to f3, and f3 to c3. Always fight to control those squares.
Do not develop the queen too early. There are exceptions, as in the Scandanavian defense; otherwise, get your minor pieces and rooks developed before the queen.

In my next post - how well did I follow these guidelines?

(Sorry about the numbers - I couldn't crack the HTML code. There are twelve total guidelines listed here.)

16 October, 2009