Chess: tactic, tactics, tactics (no, really)

My previous post outlined the new all pervading philosophy in our house: tactics as the bedrock of chess improvement and I've been following it arduously in the last few months. Well, as arduously as I do anything. The upside is that I've won or drawn my last seven games (four wins and three draws), which is my equivalent of the Invincibles, while playing a selection of players stronger than me (and a few lower graded ones too). As well as playing above my grade, which is the general idea, I've noticed that in a couple games where I've been decidedly worse from the opening, and in two cases material down, my improved ability to spot tactical combinations has enabled me to get back in the game. Much more than the execution of a combination (which rarely happens), what is important is the threat of a tactical motif such as a knight fork which prevents your opponent from a straightforward capture. In my last game the fact that his e pawn was pinned against his queen at the end of a series of exchanges, meant that he was unable to capture my rook on d4 and I emerged slightly better.

Tactics, tactics, tactics: Winning Chess Tactics for Juniors

There is a little-expressed and I suspect little-followed belief that for club level players [which is what I aspire to] studying tactics is the best way of improving your results. The vast majority of chess books and DVDs are devoted to the start of the game with four volume treatises on the latest lines in fashionable GM openings not unusual. I would guess that most of the chess books I own relate to opening theory. If a golfer sees the swing as the bedrock of the their game, amateur chess players mistakenly believe that strong opening play will lay the foundations for success later on in the game. The problem is that while you might follow a Kasparov endorsed line in the Sicilian Nardorf for 15 or 20 moves at some point you'll be on your own and clueless about what to do next.

Encouraged by a book I borrowed from Hackney Library I've finally started doing what I knew I should have been doing all along. Instead of the endless reading of positional textbooks, game collections and worst of all opening books I've devoted all of my little available chess studying time to book I bought in a secondhand shop on Well Street Market: Winning Chess Tactic for Juniors.

I've been working though a page or so of 6 boards each day on the tube to work. The book's introduction encourages you to solve them from the diagram rather than setting them up on a board which is great for travelling, and that also you go through the book three times skipping ones you can't solve in five minutes to come back later. The revisiting problems is also to see whether the solution to that type of position has 'stuck' and if it comes up in a similar (as it's unlikely to be an identical) position if you'll spot it.

I really like the book as there's no messing, just problem after problem and over 500 of them. The solutions are no messing too, little more than a line of moves, no other annotation.


The introduction suggests that you spend no more than 5 minutes on any one problem and if you can't do it in that time move on. There are a few things that have occurred to me so far:

1. I often get the right move or idea but not necessarily in the right order. The lesson is that once you've spotted the theme, check it and check it again to make sure you have the strongest continuation. Given that these are forcing combinations then if there isn't a checkmate or win of material then you've missed something.

2. Which brings up the next point. In studying the positions knowing that you're looking for a combination obviously helps. You don't spend a great deal of assessing the positional niceties (although if the other side has a mate in one you do need to do something better - usually a forcing mating sequence.

Update three days after drafting this post: I've realised that if I don't up my rate I'll die before I've been through the book three times so I'm now aiming at doing 20 a day. Having said that I haven't played any matches so who knows if I'm getting any better.

Updating the update: I played for Hackney last night against Metropolitan and I did feel that I had a greater awareness of tactical possibilities. Nothing major, no winning combinations but when my opponent pushed his e pawn forward attacking my bishop I realised straight away that he couldn't capture it as the pawn was pinned against his unprotected Queen. I'll post the game soon.

My stupid chess habit: Three months later...[part one]

Some things that I remember about the last three months:


The Dutch defence for black [1. d4 f5 ]

I borrowed Neil McDonald's book on the Dutch defence from Hackney Library. [They've got three books on openings as far as I can see and two of them are on the French defence.] I flicked through it and decided it fulfilled my opening criteria:

• Easy to understand what the main objectives are
• Not too heavy in long theoretical lines [eg Sicilian Dragon]
• High likelihood that you'll get to play it as it starts on your first move.

I spent a couple weeks reading bits of the book on and off, studying the Leningrad Dutch. I chose the Leningrad Dutch because it's like the King's Indian [which I played as a kid] but with the king's bishop pawn already on f5 and I have a weakness for the king's bishop fianchetto.

Finally I was due to play it for the first time against a human opponent as Hackney were playing DHSS. That day at work I ran though a game with Fritz on my phone. Around move eight in the mainline Leningrad Dutch my position started to implode. The problem is that 1. Black's position is full of holes 2. The player of the black pieces needs to know what they're doing.

I decided not to play it. As it turns out I had black, my opponent played 1.d4 and I stuck with my usual 1....c5 and got a draw against a stronger player. He probably should have won but for some reason didn't swap his Queen for my two Rooks towards the end when he was running short of time. In that game I finally understood aboutv the importance of gain of tempo in the opening - in initiating an exchange of pawns and pieces I reached a position where it was his move. Had he initiated it and made the first capture I could have ended up in the same position but with the advantage of having the move.

I'm going to stick with playing it online or against weaker players. I'm also looking at a Stonewall-Leningrad hybrid [a Stonewall set up but the fianchettoed king's bishop. There's probably a good reason why it doesn't exist.].

Useful links:
The games in Neil McDonald's Starting Out: The Dutch Defence on Chessgames (buy it on Amazon UK)

ChessTweets: The first game is drawn

This is the first ChessTweets game in full. Overall it was a good experience and like old-fashioned correspondence chess but with shorter gaps. In tough positions I would set up a board and play through a few variations which I think is probably the best way of learning.

[Event "Game 2051: @pgallagher34 vs. @catfunt"]
[Site "http://chesstweets.com"]
[Date "2010.08.18"]
[Round "1"]
[White "pgallagher34"]
[Black "catfunt"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

1. d4 Nf6
2. c4 g6
3. g3 Bg7
4. Bg2 O-O
5. Nc3 d6
6. Nf3 c5
7. O-O Nc6
8. d5 Na5
9. Nd2 e5
10. a3 b6
11. b4 Nb7
12. e4 Ng4
13. Bf3 Nh6
14. Bg2 f5
15. Nf3 Ng4
16. h3 Nf6
17. Ng5 Qe7
18. Re1 Bd7
19. exf5 gxf5
20. Nb5 Rfc8
21. Ne6 Bxe6
22. dxe6 e4
23. Rb1 Qxe6
24. Qc2 d5
25. Bf4 Ne8
26. f3 cxb4
27. Rxb4 Nbd6
28. Bxd6 Nxd6
29. cxd5 Qg6
30. Qf2 exf3
31. Re6 Rc1+
32. Kh2 Ne4
33. Rxg6 Nxf2
34. Rxg7+ Kxg7
35. Bxf3 Rc2
36. Bg2 Rd2
37. Rf4 Kg6
38. Kg1 Ne4
39. g4 Rd1+
40. Rf1 Rxf1+
41. Kxf1 a6
42. Nc7 Ra7
43. gxf5+ Kxf5
44. Bxe4+ Ke5
45. d6 Kxd6
46. Ne8+ Ke6
47. Bf3 Rf7
48. Kg2 Re7
 49. Bg4+ Kd5
50. Nf6+ Kd4
51. Nd7
1/2-1/2

Final position: 51. Nd7 1/2-1/2

Update: BBC v Home Office

[Event "22:42"]
[Site "Shredder for iPhone / iPod touch"]
[Date "2010.11.11"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Keith Dunmore, Home Office"]
[Black "Paul, BBC"]
[WhiteElo "-"]
[BlackElo "1682"]
[ECO "E61"]
[Opening "King's Indian Defence"]
[Result "*"]

1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. d4 Bg7 4. Nf3 O-O 5. Bf4 d6 6. Qd2 Re8 7. e4 Nbd7 8. O-O-O
c5 9. e5 Nh5 10. exd6 Nxf4 11. dxe7 Rxe7 12. Qxf4 cxd4 13. Nd5 Nb6 14. Nxe7
Qxe7 15. Nxd4 Qc5 16. Nb3 Qf8 17. Qd6 Bh6 18. Kb1 Bf5 19. Ka1 Qe8 20. c5 Bf8
21. Qd2 Na4 22. Qe2 Qc6 23. Qb5 Bg7 24. Nd4 Rd8 25. Qxc6 bxc6 26. Bc4 Bxd4 27. Rd2
Nxb2 28. Rxb2 Bc3 29. Rc1 Bxb2 30. Kxb2 Rd2 31. Kc3 Rxf2 32. Rg1 Be6 33. a4
Rf4 34. Bxe6 fxe6 35. Kb3 Kf7 36. Rd1 Rf5 37. Rd7 Kf6 38. Kb4 a5 39. Kxa5 Rxc5
40. Kb6 Rd5 41. Rxh7 e5 42. a5 Rb5 43. Kxc6 Rxa5 *

Chess on Twitter: ChessTweets, update

This is the latest state of play. I'm happy with my position being material ahead and should win the white passed pawn soon.

Sicilian Kan: Railways

The second game of the season was against Railways for the BBC. We played at home so there's no excuse of intimidating venues. I lost on the black side of an ...e6 Sicilian, the opening I've decided to play against e4, to a stronger player than me although the initial Shredder analysis suggests I had chances while under the cosh and missed some obvious tactical plays.

[Date "2010.10.12"]
[White "Kocan, Barry A"]
[Black "Paul, bbc"]
[ECO "B41"]
[Opening "Sicilian/Kan Variation"]
[Result "1-0"]
London Commercial Chess League

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6 5. Be3 Qc7 6. a3 Bc5 7. Nc3 b5 8. Be2
Bb7 9. O-O Nf6 10. Bd3 d6 11. Qe2 Nbd7 12. f4 O-O 13. Rf3 Bb6 14. Rg3 Nc5 15. Rf1
Ncxe4 16. Nxe4 Nxe4 17. Rh3 g6 18. Qg4 Nf6 19. Qg5 Qd8 20. g4 Re8 21. Qh6 Nxg4
22. Qxh7 Kf8 23. Bxg6 Qd7 24. Qh8 Ke7 25. Qh4 Nf6 26. Qg5 Rg8 27. Rh7 Rxg6 28. Qxg6
Rf8 29. Qg5 Be4 30. Rg7 Bc5 31. f5 Bxd4 32. Bxd4 e5 33. Bc3 Qa7 34. Rf2 Qc7
35. Re2 d5 36. Bb4