Chapter 6 of 13

The Middle Game

Choosing an objective that cannot move away, the pin, backward pawns, the weaknesses created by pawn moves in front of the castled King, and the open file.

Every example is on its own board: click a move or use the arrows, and the notes appear beside the board. The number under the board is Stockfish's evaluation for White (minus means Black is better), or the exact result when few enough pieces are left.

General remarks

Having now a fair knowledge of the end-game, we should be in a position to appreciate how the middle game should be conducted. We must throughout maintain a favourable pawn formation, in view of the end-game which might be forced on us by exchanges. On the other hand, as soon as we have gained an advantage sufficient to secure the victory in the end-game, we must ourselves, by the exchange of pieces, try to reduce the position to one of the typical elementary cases which we have discussed. Now it will invariably be found that beginners are unwilling to make these essential exchanges. This is explained by the attraction which combinations involving the action of many pieces have for them. They assume that exchanges, particularly of the Queens, make the games dull. Such ideas only prove that the beginner has not grasped the nature of chess, the essence of which is stern logic and uncompromising conclusions, and this demands the shortest and clearest way leading to a mate. To the strong player, able to play logically, logic will always be inseparable from beauty in chess.

To play logically means to subordinate all combinations to a leading plan of campaign, but there is difficulty in finding the latter. An unsound scheme, even if worked out to its logical conclusion, can of course be of no value. All the same it is better than no plan at all. And in time one gains by experience, and develops a sort of instinct for rejecting from the large number of possible operations all those which, properly countered, cannot bring any advantage.

Beside practical play, which is essential in order to gain this instinct, a methodical theoretical instruction is of inestimable value, and accelerates the development of the student's mind. Now the instruction I wish to give in the theory of chess will not take the form of an analysis, brought up right into the middle game, of the various openings, tested and found correct in master play. Such collections erroneously bear the title of "Theory of the Openings," and are, besides, quite useless at this stage, since they only embody the results of analysis.

It is first necessary to ascertain a few leading principles, which can be taught in a most simple manner, by the exercise of common sense, rather than by applying oneself to the study of long-winded analysis. The student will no longer need to discover time-worn maxims in the light of his own weary experience, and on the other hand, these principles will help him to understand analysis, and to keep clearly before his mind's eye the common and principal lines of play, of which he might easily lose sight in the labyrinth of suggested variations.

I propose to show the application of such principles to master play, and this will give us a further opportunity of deeper study, both of the rules set out in the first part for conducting the opening correctly, and of the end-game principles, which should be well considered.

I have made the pawn skeleton with its attendant grouping of pieces the main consideration in the study of the opening; now in the investigation of the problems of the middle game, I will start from the transformation which the pawn skeleton has to undergo in the course of further operations. In my opinion this is the best starting-point for the choice of effective manœuvres of the different pieces.

Objects of attack

Before we are able to evolve a practical scheme we must have under consideration the following important points: How do we know if an attack is likely to succeed? In other words: On what point should I concentrate the attack? It should be clear to all that it is of no possible use to direct an attack on anything that can move away. Yet beginners frequently infringe this obvious rule, and I have often witnessed manœuvres such as these in Diagram 90: a3, b4, and then, after the Bishop has retired to b6 even, Rb1, a4, a5. Meanwhile Black will have played …a6, to make a loophole for his Bishop at a7, and what is the result? The Black Bishop is as effectual at a7 as at c5, but White has advanced his pawns, and weakened them, as they are now more liable to attack. Moreover, White has used up five moves to achieve his aim, whilst Black only needed three. Therefore Black has gained two moves, which he can use for the development of his pieces.

Diagram 90: an objective that can move away

Diagram 91 illustrates another mistake frequently made in the choice of an objective, and one which can utterly spoil the whole game, even in its earliest stage. Black has to move, and his game is somewhat hindered by the dominating position of the White Queen. The latter prevents the Bishop from occupying a desirable square at c5, and also makes the liberating move …d5 impossible. Therefore it would seem desirable to drive the Queen away. But this should only be done if it is not attended by some further disadvantage.

Diagram 91: the Queen in the centre

Now the average player is not particularly fastidious in his methods. The Queen irritates him, therefore the Queen must be repelled one way or the other. He would probably try …c5. The result is that the Queen selects another good square, for instance at e3 or a4, but Black has not improved matters, for he still can play neither …Bc5 nor …d5. On the other hand, irredeemable harm has been done, inasmuch as the Black d-pawn now remains "backward." The attack on the Queen by …c5 must consequently be rejected. Sallies such as these, in which short-lived attacks are made by pawns upon pieces, are always of doubtful value. They must unquestionably be avoided if they break up the pawn skeleton, which is formed in the opening, and confine the mobility of the pieces.

Also with regard to manœuvres of pieces, intended solely to drive away an opposing piece, it is obviously essential that the attacking pieces in effecting their purpose should not be made to stray too far afield, lest they become out of play.

I shall delay dealing with the features underlying good forms of attack, both by pieces and pawns, until I have treated of the choice of an objective.

From what we have already expounded, it is clear that the subject of an attack should be incapable of evasion. Should it, in the course of attack, be desired to prevent a piece from being moved, that can only be effected by means of a "pin." A pawn, however, can be held in place either by occupying the square immediately in front of it, or by controlling the latter with more forces than the opponent can bring to bear upon it.

"Backward" pawns

If in Diagram 91 Black makes the mistake of playing …c5 as suggested, the backward d-pawn becomes a welcome objective for White's attack. White can keep that pawn back by playing c4 as soon as it threatens to advance, after which he would develop quietly, double his Rooks, and bring the Queen and Queen's Bishop to bear in a concentrated attack on d6. A position not unlike that in Diagram 92 will result ultimately, in which Black defends the pawn as many times as it is attacked, but in which White can bring up his e-pawn to the attack, as the d-pawn cannot move away, whilst Black has no further defensive move at his disposal. Play against a backward pawn nearly always develops on these lines, and is even easier when there is no defending Bishop of the same colour as the pawn. (See Game No. 26.)

Diagram 92: the backward pawn, attacked as often as it is defended

On fixing a weakness: the pin

Such manœuvres, in the course of which pieces are pinned and attacked, are illustrated in Diagram 90. The most obvious move, which initiates an attack and at the same time completes the development of the minor pieces, is Bg5. Attacks by means of such devices are so frequent and varied that it will be necessary to treat them at some length, which I now propose to do. I should also add that, with regard to Diagram 90, the student will derive lasting benefit from a thorough study of the position, and will thus improve his power to judge of the desirability, or otherwise, of obtaining open files, diagonals, doubled pawns, etc. After Bg5, the threat is to attack the Knight a second and third time with Nd5, and Qf3, after moving the King's Knight away. As Black's King's Knight is only supported twice, and there is no chance of bringing up more forces for its defence, Black must undertake something to provide against the threatened onslaught.

Diagram 90

The pin on f6

+0.2

Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.

Taking it all in all, we see from the foregoing that the pinning of the Black Knight can only be injurious to Black if he does not take timely measures to provide against White's Nd5, which threatens to concentrate more forces for the attack on f6 than Black is able to mobilise for its defence.

Weaknesses in a pawn position: breaking up the King's side

Beginners, after having experienced frequent trouble through their inadequate defence of this kind of attack, try to avoid their recurrence by making such pinning moves impossible from the first and playing h3 (or …h6) on whichever side the pin is threatened. Apart from the loss of time, on which I remarked at length when discussing the opening, such pawn moves have various other drawbacks.

With every pawn move it should be considered whether the squares protected by the pawn before it has moved may not need the support of that pawn at a later stage. This is particularly the case with regard to squares in front of the castled King. If one of those pawns pushes on, the squares which have lost its protection frequently offer an opening for a direct attack by the enemy's pieces on the King.

A second consideration is the fact that the advancing pawn itself becomes a target for an assault in which the opponent, moving up a pawn on the next file, brings his Rooks into play, or in which he sacrifices a piece for the advanced pawn and the one that protects it, thus robbing the King of the protection he sought to obtain in castling.

The following examples will contribute much to the understanding of this most important subject, the grasp of which will mean a great step forward for the student.

The position in Diagram 93 is from a game v. Scheve – Teichmann (Berlin, 1907). White played 1.h3 in order to avoid the pinning of his Knight through …Bg4. The move is not unjustified, as the Knight is required for the support of the square at d4. The pawn move, however, has the drawbacks enumerated above, and White must think of keeping a sufficiency of pieces for the fight on the King's wing, in order to prevent Black from utilising the weakness thus created for a combined assault by superior forces. In this case White does not take precautionary measures, and succumbs in a surprisingly short time.

Diagram 93

v. Scheve – Teichmann, Berlin 1907

+1.7

Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.

Diagram 94 shows a position from a game Marshall – Burn (Ostend, 1907). Strong in the knowledge that the Black Queen's side pieces are not developed, and can only with difficulty be of assistance in the defence of the King's side because of their limited mobility, White takes advantage of the weakness created by the advance of the Black g-pawn to g6, and initiates an immediate assault on the King's stronghold.

Diagram 94

Marshall – Burn, Ostend 1907

−0.2

Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.

In cases where both sides have already castled on the same wing, and the opponent has weakened his position by pushing on one of the pawns of that wing, it is seldom advisable to start an attack with the advance of one of the pawns in front of the King, as the latter's position would be weakened. An attack of this kind is only justified if there is a prospect of concentrating with all speed a superior force before the opponent has time for a counter attack.

The Black position in Diagram 95 illustrates one much favoured by "natural" players. Here the advance of the h-pawn would not be a suitable plan of attack for White as his Rook is no longer on the Rook's file, nor could it be brought back in time. In this case White must endeavour to take advantage of the weaknesses at Black's f6 and h6, produced by his move …g6. This will be the modus operandi: Qd2 followed by Bh6, forcing the exchange of Black's valuable King's Bishop. After that the Queen in conjunction with one of the Knights will attempt to force an entry at f6 or h6, as for instance in the following, the moves of which are taken from a game I once watched and took note of as being most instructive.

Diagram 95

The weak squares after …g6

+0.4

Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.

A somewhat more difficult case is shown in Diagram 96. Here the advance of the White King's side pawns has undeniably produced weaknesses in the pawn skeleton, and these would be fatal had the Black pieces as much mobility as the White ones. But the congestion of Black's pieces on the Queen's side makes his defence unwieldy, and White has no difficulty in accumulating his forces on the King's side for the final assault. The prospects are that White will be able to bring home his attack, before Black has a chance of forcing exchanges and of bringing about the end-game, which through the weakness of the White pawns would probably turn to his advantage. The play (E. Cohn – Ed. Lasker match, Berlin, 1909) is instructive, and shows how the attack should be conducted in such positions.

Diagram 96

E. Cohn – Ed. Lasker, Berlin 1909

+1.4

Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.

Doubled pawns

In the foregoing positions it was seen how fatal weaknesses can be, which are produced by the premature advance of the pawns in front of the King, on whom the opposing pieces can force their attack. When the pawns concerned are on the opposite wing to their King, the disadvantages of a premature advance are felt in a different way. The weakness concerns the pawns themselves and not the forces behind them, and is apt to cause the loss of the end-game, particularly of Rook end-games. Let us compare the positions in Diagrams 97 and 98. In the one case the chain of Black pawns is broken by the absence of the g-pawn, in the other of the b-pawn. The absence of the g-pawn can lead to serious consequences in the middle game, because of the weakness of Black's f6 and h6 (compare Diagram 90); it can, however, hardly become awkward in the end-game, as the pawns on the f- and h-files are within the protecting reach of their King.

Diagram 97: the g-pawn gone, a middle-game weakness

Diagram 98: the b-pawn gone, an end-game weakness

On the other hand, the absence of the b-pawn is of no consequence for the middle game. There is nothing behind it which could invite an attack. The a- and c-pawns, however, are very weak for the end-game, as they are quite out of reach of the King (compare Game No. 19). I do not wish to imply that Black should have avoided the exchange at c6 at all cost; such an exchange has always the compensating advantage of opening a file for the Rooks, which advantage often means a favourable middle game, as will be readily understood. Further, it is often possible to get rid of the weak a-pawn by pushing it on, and eventually compelling the exchange of the opposing b-pawn, an exchange which can usually be enforced if the Rooks have occupied the open b-file. The pawn itself is often useful at c6, in that it can support the advance of …d5 in the centre, should it be desired, or it can, by pushing on, be brought to exercise further pressure on the opposing b-pawn.

Manœuvres of the pieces: open files

The break-up of the pawn position on the Queen's side can become awkward in the end-game and sometimes in the middle-game when the pawns can be attacked, and pieces brought to bear on the Queen's side without leaving the King's side denuded of forces. This will be illustrated by the position in Diagram 99, from a game Fr. Lazard – Ed. Lasker (Paris, 1914).

Here the pawn positions on both sides are broken, and the player that occupies the open files first, gets a decisive advantage. In this case it is Black's move. We can conclude at once that White has played the opening badly. He must have lost two moves, for he has still to capture the c-pawn and then, being White, it should be his move. This disadvantage, small as it may seem, with which White has emerged from the opening, is sufficient to bring him into the greatest difficulties. Black, of course, does not defend the pawn by …Bb7 or …Bd7, as this would practically reduce the Bishop to a pawn and, moreover, White, by Rb1 or Rd1, would both attack the Bishop and obtain an open file. Instead of that, Black utilises the two moves, which he has, as it were, as a gift in an otherwise equalised position, to bring both Rooks on the b-file. This policy allows Black to occupy the seventh or eighth rank at will, and to attack the White pawns from the flank or rear, according to circumstances. This menace hampers the radius of action of the White pieces, as they must always be ready for the defence of the threatened pawns, and this gives Black by far the superior game.

Diagram 99

Fr. Lazard – Ed. Lasker, Paris 1914

−0.1

1…
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.

Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.

We have now seen how the possession of open files reacts on the mobility of the opposing forces, forever increasing their difficulties until the positional advantage is converted into material gain. We shall meet with cases later on in which the greater mobility of minor pieces achieves the same result and find more and more proofs of the truth of the main general principles which I introduced at the outset.

Let us now recapitulate the chief points touched upon in the course of our deliberations: 1. Generally speaking, attacks should only be directed to objects which cannot be moved away. 2. If in particular cases the attack is aimed at driving off an opposing piece from an especially favourable post that attack is unwise, if it involves the weakening the pawn position, or if pieces have to take up inferior positions in order to effect their purpose. 3. Pawn moves always create weaknesses, either by leaving other unsupported pawns behind, or by giving opposing pieces access to squares formerly guarded by them, and this more specially so in front of the castled King. 4. Attacks which depend on pawn moves are only justified if overwhelming forces can be accumulated in support, as the advanced pawns might become the object of a counter attack. 5. As pawn moves have very generally some drawbacks, the middle game is the pieces' own hunting ground. As in the opening, the first consideration of sound play in the middle game is to make only such moves as do not reduce the mobility of the pieces.

As illustrative of such manœuvres I shall now give examples from actual master play. In my annotations of these games I have tried to keep before the student's mind constantly the main ideas underlying the different combinations which spring from general strategical principles. I thus avoid burdening his memory with a mass of detail, and bring into prominence the basic principle of each line of play, thereby developing his capacity for conducting a middle game, even after an unusual opening.

I have fixed mainly upon such games as are illustrative of the openings treated in the first part of this book. In most cases the first moves will, therefore, not need any special remarks. The end-games, being typical examples, will only need reference to the chapters in which they have been respectively dealt with.