Rapid development and the cost of a lost move, pawn play and the centre, and how these principles shape the King's Pawn games, the Queen's Pawn games and irregular openings.
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.
The only pieces available on the first move are the Knights. In order to develop other pieces as well, it is necessary to move pawns first, and such pawn moves will be best as give an outlet to as many pieces as possible. For quick development is of the utmost importance, and he who succeeds first in placing all his pieces, from their initial awkward positions, to such places as give them command of the greatest possible number of squares, has the better chance of concentrating a superior force on some important point.
It follows that White, having the first move, is, so to speak, always morally justified in attacking, whilst Black should assume the defensive. It is a step in the right direction, to appreciate the truth of this proposition. Unfortunately most beginners fail to realise it, and so pave the way, from the first, to the loss of the game.
There are not many developing pawn moves to choose from. Apparently from the point of view of quick development only e4 and d4 need be considered, since they free both Bishop and Queen, whilst other pawn moves liberate one piece only. Generally speaking it is only required to move two or three pawns to allow all pieces to be developed, and it is good, on principle, to make only such pawn moves in the opening, which are necessary for the development of pieces. To play other pawns really means the loss of a move. To "lose a move" means to make a move which is not essential to the attainment of a desired position. Thus the "loss of a move" results also from playing a piece to a given square in more moves than necessary.
Development of the pieces: on losing moves
I shall now give a few games showing the far-reaching consequences of losing moves. The first one is a typical though glaring example, which is very instructive and came to my notice some time ago:
Diagram 15
The swift punishment of lost moves
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
−4.3
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Another Queen's move. The attack on the Bishop's Pawn may be very tempting, but must necessarily be incorrect, and why? Because White is much behind with his development. It is useless to analyse any kind of attack in face of this fact. The beginner finds it hard to get used to this way of thinking. He prefers to try to unravel a long string of variations and combinations, in which he will mostly lose his bearings. Even stronger players obstruct their own powers by refusing to see the value of judging a position on general merits. They lose valuable time in thinking out endless variations, to maintain positions which could be proved valueless by general and logical deductions. Then, as in the present position, retribution comes swiftly.
A further example in which the loss of moves occurs, though not so glaringly, is the following famous game, which Morphy played against the Duke Karl of Brunswick and Count Isouard in the Royal box at the Paris opera-house.
Diagram 16
Morphy – Duke Karl of Brunswick and Count Isouard, Paris 1858
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+6.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
This is the only piece available to cover d7, for the King's Knight is pinned. White has another piece in reserve, his King's Rook, and against this Black is defenceless.
"This is the curse of every evil deed, That propagating still it brings forth evil."
The logical sequence of the moves in this game, as pointed out in the commentaries to it, is borne out by the curious coincidence that I once had the opportunity of playing a game in exactly the same sequence of moves, against a player to whom Morphy's "brilliancy" was unknown.
The leading principle of all opening moves is made clear by the foregoing pages, namely, rapid development of pieces, and consequently the avoidance of the loss of a move in any shape or form.
Pawn play
Before treating of the various systems of openings, I will say a few words on the principles of pawn play.
Each opening is characterised by a well-defined pawn formation, and concurrently a certain method in the development of the pieces. Naturally the formation of a pawn skeleton is not an independent factor, but must be evolved with a view to facilitating the favourable development of pieces. But when considering the form of a pawn position and that of the pieces, we cannot shut our eyes to the fact that pawn formation must necessarily be the dominant consideration in our mind. Pawn formation is of a more permanent character than that of the pieces, in consequence of the latter's greater mobility. When we have made a rash move with a piece, to which our attacking disposition may have tempted us, we may still have a chance of retrieving the position by timely retreat. Once a pawn has moved it cannot turn back, and only after the greatest deliberation should we embark on changes in our pawn formation in order not to disturb the balance of this "static element" of the game. But we shall see that the pawn skeleton which was formed in the opening often weathers the storm and stress of the middle game, and frequently preserves its character right up to the end-game. I will therefore make pawn formation my starting-point in an attempt to show the way through the maze of the openings on the basis of general strategical principles.
The centre
If our pawn skeleton is to promote the freedom of all the pieces, we must not build it up with the narrow view of developing minor pieces only, but must consider from the very first in which way it will enable the Rooks to get into action. We can unite these tendencies in making the centre of the board the main field of action for all our forces. This means for both sides the King's and Queen's fourth squares (e4 and d4 for White, e5 and d5 for Black), and also in a lesser degree the Bishops' fourth squares. We shall get a clear insight into the positional advantage of having command of the centre later on, when discussing the middle game. At present I will only touch the subject in a general way, explaining it in an elementary form, which will be sufficient to develop an understanding for pawn strategy in the opening. In the course of further deductions, after the grasp of this difficult stage of the game has become stronger, I will go into details which will allow the subject to be stated in a more precise form.
Placing the pieces in the centre is of value, because there they have more mobility than near the edge, which, of course, limits their range of action, and also because from the centre a concentration of forces on a given point can generally be effected in the quickest way.
In most cases two centre squares become inaccessible at once, through the opponent placing one of his pawns in the centre; therefore it would seem a good plan to lure that pawn away, and this is rendered feasible by playing e4 or c4 when the opponent has a pawn on d5, and d4 or f4 when he has a pawn on e5. In the following we will consider such manœuvres as could apply either to White or Black, from the point of view of White, to whom the initiative is, as pointed out above, a sort of birth-right. Naturally, should White lose a move, as, for instance, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.a3? the position is reversed, and Black is bound to obtain the initiative which is White's birthright.
The pawn moves mentioned above also have the tendency of giving the Rooks an opportunity for action. A Rook standing behind an advanced pawn may support its further advance, or, if the pawn should be exchanged, might get an open file.
The damage we wish to inflict on our opponent we must, of course, try to avoid ourselves. Thus we will not easily give up a centre pawn unless we can obtain some other advantage in doing so. This advantage may be, that in exchanging the centre pawn we open up lines of attack for our pieces, or that we are able to place one of our pieces in a commanding position in the centre of the board.
The following example may serve as an illustration. Supposing White plays 1.d4 d5 2.c4. His aim is to tempt Black's centre pawn away and to make his c4 and e4 accessible for his own forces. Black might be justified in taking the pawn, if he really could hold the pawn thus gained. We shall show later on that this is not so, and that White can win it back easily and advantageously. Therefore Black is more likely to play 2…e6. Not 2…Nf6; for after 3.cxd5 Nxd5 4.e4 would open White's game and drive the Knight away at once, gaining a move. Supposing, however, Black plays 2…Bf5; should White now think mechanically, "I will take his centre pawn and consequently have the better game," his deduction would be wrong. For after exchanging his Bishop for the Knight, which otherwise would drive his Queen away, Black brings the latter into a dominating square in the centre.
Diagram 17
Taking the centre pawn is not always winning the centre
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+1.1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
2…Bf5. The notes are on the highlighted moves.
This position shows, that to bring one's opponent's centre pawn away and to keep one's own, does not under all circumstances mean the command of the centre, but that the opening up of files and diagonals for one's pieces towards the centre is an important moment in the fight for positional advantage.
Considerations of this kind will help to improve our judgment in many of the various openings treated in the following pages. We will class the openings in this way: A. White 1.e4: (a) Black 1…e5, (b) Black any other move. B. White 1.d4: (a) Black 1…d5, (b) Black any other move. C. White any other first move. We shall find that openings classed under C generally lead to positions treated under A and B.
A. King's Pawn games
We have already come to the conclusion that after 1.e4 e5 White does well to try to force the exchange of Black's centre pawn on d4 or f4, and that Black will try to counteract this, unless by allowing the exchange he gets a chance of exerting pressure in the centre by means of his pieces.
We will first see what happens when White undertakes the advance in question on his second move. Superficially the difference between 2.d4 and 2.f4 is that in the first case the pawn thus advanced is covered, while in the second it is not. An opening in which a pawn sacrifice is offered, is called a "gambit"; 2.f4 is therefore a gambit.
2.d4 is only a gambit if after 2…exd4 White does not recapture the pawn. Nevertheless this opening has been called the "centre gambit," and though the denomination is not correct we will adhere to it, as it is in general use.
A very considerable difference between the centre gambit and the King's gambit lies in the fact that in the former acceptance is compulsory, whilst in the second it may be declined.
For: 2.d4 threatens to take the King's Pawn. To defend it by means of 2…d6 is unwise, since White exchanges pawns and then Queens, by which Black loses his chance of castling and impedes the development of his Rooks. 2…Nc6 is also bad, since after 3.dxe5 Nxe5 4.f4, White drives the Knight away, gaining a strong hold on the centre, and Black has no compensation for giving up his centre pawn. It may be mentioned here that after 2…Nc6, 3.d5 would be a useless move, as to begin with it would be inconsequent, since d4 was played in order to clear the centre, and moreover it would block up a diagonal which could be most useful to the King's Bishop.
We conclude now that Black cannot hold his pawn at e5. He must relinquish the centre by 2…exd4. He will now either attempt to bring away White's King's Pawn by advancing his own d-pawn to d5, or try to utilise the King's file, which was opened by his second move, and operate against White's e-pawn. The Rooks are indicated for this task. We shall refer to the execution of these plans later on.
In the King's gambit, White's attempt to bring away Black's King's Pawn may be safely ignored.
The move 2.f4 does not threaten to take the King's Pawn, as Black would win White's e-pawn by …Qh4+. Black can therefore develop in security with 2…Bc5, and if then White prevents the Queen check by Nf3, there is no objection to Black protecting his King's Pawn with …d6, as the King's Bishop is already developed. After 4.Bc4, Black has still no need to protect his e-pawn with …Nc6, but can play …Nf6 first, because after 5.fxe5 dxe5 6.Nxe5 would be answered by 6…Qd4, winning a piece. Black keeps the upper hand in these early encounters because he has made a developing move with a piece, whilst White has played a pawn move which is useless for the purpose of development.
Diagram 18 shows the position which results from the following plausible moves:
Diagram 18
The King's Gambit declined
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
A different pawn formation is the result if White enforces the exchange of Black's centre pawn at once. This he can do by playing d4, e.g. 2.f4 Bc5 3.Nf3 d6 4.d4 exd4 5.Nxd4, or 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb6. Here Black can get an early advantage by attacking White's e-pawn, taking possession of the e-file after castling on the King's side.
All things considered, the student should in my opinion decline the gambit, as in doing so he can get an easy and satisfactory development. The treatment of the "King's Gambit accepted," which aims at holding the gambit pawn, is most difficult and leads early in the game to such complications as none but an expert can hope to master. As an example of the difficult play which ensues when Black defends the pawn in the King's Gambit, here is the latest variation of an attack introduced by Professor I. L. Rice, and called the "Rice Gambit":
The Rice Gambit
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
It is therefore unwise for the beginner to accept the gambit, unless there be a chance of compensation for the disappearance of his centre pawn, by forcing the exchange of White's centre pawn as well. The following line of play would fulfil this condition: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 d5! Black thereby abandons the gambit pawn.
On principle, and when he has the choice, the beginner should give preference to simple and clear development in the opening, rather than to the gain of a pawn, when this involves difficult and intricate play. This principle must also guide us in other openings.
A good example is to be found in the so-called "Danish gambit" (the names of the various openings, which I mention for the sake of completeness, are generally derived from towns or countries in which they were first extensively played and analysed), which will lead us back to those openings in which White plays d4 on his second move. After 2.d4 exd4, White has the option of sacrificing two pawns to obtain a very rapid development 3.c3 dxc3 4.Bc4 cxb2 5.Bxb2. It may now be just possible for Black to avoid the many threats which White can bring to bear with his beautifully placed forces, perhaps by giving back one or both of the pawns gained. But this question can only be of interest to us if there is no opportunity of adopting a simple line of development at the outset. As it is, this opportunity is not wanting. All that Black needs to do is to push on his Queen's Pawn as soon as possible, thus freeing his own Queen's Bishop.
Diagram 19
The Danish Gambit met by …d5
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
The equalising power of Black's …d5 in all King's Pawn openings where White has played d4 can be noticed in many variations. I shall now give a few typical examples, which will show the line of play that can be adopted in many similar cases, and which can often be evolved one from the other by altering the order of the moves.
I. Centre Gambit
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
II. King's Bishop's Opening
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
III. Scotch Gambit
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
IV. Scotch Game
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
In no case should Black forfeit his chance of playing …d5. It is tempting after 2.d4 exd4 3.Nf3 to cover the pawn at d4 by …c5, but in that case White would sacrifice a pawn by c3, by this means opening the Queen's file for himself, and so preventing Black from ever playing …d5. Thus, for the loss of a pawn, White has a paramount advantage in position.
Diagram 20
A pawn for a paramount advantage in position
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
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 …d5 early in the game, Black is sure of the free development of all his forces.
Black is able to play …d5 early in all such openings, where White does not force the defensive move …d6 by attacking Black's King's Pawn. For instance, in the King's gambit, since the move 2.f4 does not threaten fxe5, Black can reply at once by 2…d5 (Falkbeer Counter Gambit). After 3.exd5 e4 (to permit of …Nf6, which at present is not feasible on account of 4.fxe5); 4.d3 exd3 5.Qxd3, White is a pawn ahead, but his Queen obstructs his King's Bishop; 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:
Diagram 21
The Vienna Game
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
−0.3
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
If White plays 4.exd5, Black can play 4…e4, as in the Falkbeer gambit mentioned just now. In answer to 4.fxe5, on the other hand, Black can play 4…Nxe4 without having the slightest difficulty with his development.
The Ruy Lopez
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.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5. With this move White at once attacks the Black e-pawn, though indirectly, by threatening to exchange the Bishop for the Knight. To make the capture effective, however, White must first protect his own King's Pawn, which would otherwise be lost after 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.Nxe5 Qd4!. 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 Queen's Knight from being exchanged. As is readily seen, White can attack Black's e-pawn a second time with d4, whilst after Black's …d6 any other defensive move would hinder development. These considerations lead to the first main line of defence in which Black plays 3…a6. After 4.Ba4 Black has the option of releasing the pin by playing …b5 at some opportune moment. If White elects to exchange his Bishop for the Knight forthwith, he can remove the Black centre pawn after 4…dxc6 by playing 5.d4, but the exchange of the Bishop for the Knight gives Black a free development and in consequence a good game. (Compare the note to move 4 in Game No. 12.)
The more usual continuation for White is 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O; he does not trouble to protect his e-pawn as its capture would allow his Rook an open file on which to act against the opposing King (compare Games Nos. 14 and 17).
Diagrams 22 and 23
The Ruy Lopez, holding the centre
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
White cannot yet execute the manœuvre which underlies the whole tendency of the Ruy Lopez, namely d4, maintaining the pressure in the centre, because after 8.d4 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 exd4 10.Qxd4? White loses a piece through 10…c5, etc. It is therefore necessary to play c3 first. White could also obtain a rapid development by Nc3, d3, Be3 or Bg5, but this arrangement is not popular, because Black can play …Na5 and exchange the valuable King's Bishop. The pawn at c3 supports an advance in the centre, and also provides a retreat for the King's Bishop. The Queen's Knight can be developed by way of d2 and f1 to g3 or e3. Black, however, must try to round off his pawn position on the Queen's side, by moving his c-pawn into line. Black's pawns at e5 and c5 then exert a pressure on White's d4. And this pressure threatens to be reinforced by …Bg4. From these considerations the following development seems to be natural:
In the second main line of defence, of which I shall treat now, Black renounces the maintenance of his e-pawn, 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:
Diagram 24
The Ruy Lopez, giving up the centre
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
The defence has a totally different trend, if Black gives up his own e-pawn, but captures the White e-pawn at once. I have already pointed out that White would not mind his e-pawn 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 …a6 or not.
After 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.O-O Nxe4 5.Re1, Black gets out of it comfortably by playing …Nd6, …Be7 and …O-O, and White cannot permanently prevent Black's game from being freed by the advance of the d-pawn. 5.d4 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 dxe5, maintaining the pawn at e5 and preventing Black's …d5 for some time to come.
The opening might continue in this way:
Diagram 25
The Rio de Janeiro Defence
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.6
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
The whole of the manœuvres now centre round Black's endeavours to force his …d5, and White's attempt to prevent it. Black ultimately gains his point, as will be seen, but at the expense of such disadvantages in the pawn position that it is questionable whether the whole variation (called the Rio de Janeiro Defence) is playable.
The game is much more favourable for Black if he first plays 3…a6, and retains the option of driving the White King's Bishop away by …b5, after which …d5 can be enforced very soon.
Diagram 26
The Open Defence
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
The openings as sketched out up to this point give a sufficiently clear idea of the possibilities of combining sound development with an attempt to capture the centre after the opening moves 1.e4 e5. In most cases, Black's centre pawn being open to attack by White's d4, we find an early break-up of the centre, and concurrently the opening of the e- or d-file for the Rooks. That is why games opened in this fashion have been classed very generally as "open," whilst all the other openings are called "close games." Lately the distinction has been abandoned, and very rightly, since in the latter openings, too, the centre can be cleared occasionally. We attain typical close positions when Black does not play 1…e5 in answer to 1.e4, but relinquishes all claim on his e5 and takes possession of his d5 instead, leaving White the option of interlocking the pawns in the centre with e5.
On principle it does not seem advisable for Black to play …d5 on the first move in reply to 1.e4. Although White's centre pawn disappears after 2.exd5 Qxd5, Black loses a move through 3.Nc3, and his Queen has no place from which it cannot be driven away very soon, unless it be at d8. This, however, would amount to an admission of the inferiority of the whole of Black's plan.
The French and Caro-Kann Defences
There are two moves which deserve consideration as a preliminary to …d5, namely, 1…e6 (French Defence) and 1…c6 (Caro-Kann defence). After 2.d4 d5, we attain the positions set out in Diagrams 27 and 28, to which we must devote a good deal of attention.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Diagram 27: the French Defence
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Diagram 28: the Caro-Kann Defence
These openings are worthy of study as being especially interesting examples of the struggle for the centre.
As early as the third move, White has to take an important decision. Is he to play e5 and prevent the opening of the e- or d-file for a long time to come, or should he proceed to develop his pieces, and leave Black the option of anticipating the blocking of the centre by playing …dxe4 himself?
I shall first turn my attention to those games in which White plays e5, starting with the French Defence, after which the Caro-Kann Defence will be easily understood.
The position which ensues in the centre after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 divides the board diagonally, and it is easy to recognise roughly the main lines of play which will govern the game. White has more scope on the King's side, where his pieces will have greater mobility, and prospects of attack. Black's chances are on the Queen's side. Both sides will have to advance more pawns in order to obtain openings for their Rooks, and use them for the attack, since they have no future on the e- and d-files, as was the case in the openings mentioned hitherto.
The obvious moves to this end are: for White the advance of the f-pawn, for Black that of the c-pawn and sometimes even of the b-pawn, that is when the c-pawn has not been exchanged for the opposing d-pawn, but has pushed on to c4. In Diagrams 29 and 30 we see the chains of pawns formed by these manœuvres.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Diagram 29: the pawn chains, with …c5
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Diagram 30: the pawn chains, with …c4 and …b4
White's pawn attack is more dangerous than Black's, because it involves a direct assault on the King. And we shall see that Black will usually be compelled to suspend operations on the Queen's side temporarily, to ward off the storm by the White pawns on the King's side. He will attempt this either by …f6 attacking White's centre or by …f5 preventing White from playing f5. In the latter case White can only make a breach in the Black barrier by playing g4 as well. These manœuvres result in the pawn formations given in Diagrams 31 and 32.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Diagram 31: Black attacks the centre with …f6
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Diagram 32: Black stops f5 with …f5, and White answers g4
We must now turn to the development of the pieces corresponding to these pawn skeletons. If White plays e5 on his third move, he prevents the Black King's Knight from reaching f6, whence he might have moved to d7. This is a desirable position, from which he could support the advance of …c5. But the Knight has other chances of development, to h6 and f5, whence he can take his share in the attack on the White Pawn at d4. In consequence White must postpone f4 in order not to intercept the action of the Queen's Bishop on h6. Now, in that case White's Pawn at e5 has not sufficient support against the attack by Black's …f6 (Diagram 31), and the latter move gives Black the advantage. The two main variations illustrative of these considerations are:
The French Defence
the premature 3.e5
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
Let us now find out whether it is advantageous to effect the same subsequently. A developing move can be interpolated, e.g. 3.Nc3 Nf6. If White plays e5 now he gains time for his advance of f4, as Black's Knight must retreat. On the other hand he cannot now maintain his pawn at d4, as he has blocked his c-pawn. We arrive at the following plan of development:
Diagram 33
The French Defence, 4.e5
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
For that reason another line of play has come to the fore in which White exchanges his inactive Queen's Bishop for Black's troublesome King's Bishop.
Diagram 34
The French Defence, 4.Bg5
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.5
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
White has now the choice of two lines of development. He can either prepare for c3 to support his d-pawn, or he can develop his King's side, holding the pawn at e5 only (the variations).
Other moves here
To avoid this drawback Rubinstein has evolved the following variation, in which provision is made from the first for the freedom of action of the Queen's Bishop: 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4, to open the diagonal for the Bishop at b7, e.g. 5.Nxe4 Nbd7 6.Nf3 Be7, followed by …b6 and …Bb7.
We will now leave the French defence and turn our attention to the Caro-Kann, of which the initial position was shown in Diagram 28. Here also we find two essentially different systems of development, according to whether White plays e5 or gives Black the option of exchanging pawns by 3.Nc3. In the first case a very noticeable difference from the French defence is, that Black can bring out his Queen's Bishop. Here the process of development may be:
The Caro-Kann Defence, 3.e5
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
On the whole we can conclude that in the Caro-Kann defence White obtains a good game by 3.e5.
A line of play which used to be in vogue, namely, 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6 or 5…gxf6, gives Black an even chance, for although he loses his centre pawn he obtains a good development, and later in the game he has opportunities of exercising pressure on White's d-pawn through his open d-file.
Except the French defence and the Caro-Kann, there is no game in which an irregular reply to White's 1.e4 necessitates any special considerations either in development of pieces or pawn formation. In all such cases it is sufficient to maintain the pawn centre and to occupy such squares with the pieces, whence they cannot be driven away with the loss of a move. Just one example: If Black plays 1…c5 (Sicilian defence), White will not play his King's Bishop to c4, because Black can reply …e6, and gain a move by …d5.
B. Queen's Pawn games
Let us now consider the openings in which the first move is 1.d4 on either side. Here the centre cannot be cleared as early as in the openings beginning with 1.e4 e5. The advance of a second centre pawn, which there led to a clearance, is not feasible in this case. White does not command his e4, and for some time to come he will be unable to advance the King's pawn beyond e3. In consequence the e-file does not seem a likely opening for the Rooks, and another file must be found for them. The conclusions arrived at for Black in the French defence hold good for both sides in the opening now under consideration, and accordingly the c-file is that most advantageous for the Rooks. The advance of the c-pawn strikes at the opposing centre, and, that being of paramount importance, the Queen's Knight must not be developed at c3 before the c-pawn has been pushed on. Another development might be conceivable for the Rooks; viz. on the f-file, and also the g- or h-file; here, as we shall see, an occasion may arise for storming the opposing King's side by a pawn attack. But in this case, too, although it seems unnecessary to play the c-pawn, it is advisable to develop the Knight via d2, as there is a constant threat of the c-file being forced open subsequently by the opposing forces.
We will start with the games in which the c-pawns are played in the earliest stages of the opening, so that the pawn skeleton in Diagram 35 forms the basis of development. The sequence of moves is of moment, because the advance of the e-pawn, whether forced or not, determines the possibility of bringing out the Queen's Bishops. The simplest process of development based on Diagram 35 is the following, in which both sides block up the Queen's Bishop.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Diagram 35: the pawn skeleton of the Queen's Pawn games
The Queen's Pawn game, both Queen's Bishops blocked
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
In order not to relinquish the square b4 to Black, White can also try the following manœuvre:
Diagram 36
The symmetrical position
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
In order to obtain a more thorough understanding of the Queen's Pawn game, we must now turn our attention very closely to the opening moves. Already on the second move White can play 2.c4 and turn the game into a Queen's gambit, which Black can either accept or decline. Black would be justified in playing 2…dxc4, and so furthering White's object of getting his (Black's) Queen's Pawn away, if he could permanently hold the gambit pawn, or if the giving up of the square d5 fits into a reasoned system of development. The latter was, for instance, the case in the play leading to the position shown in Diagram 36. But Black is well advised to wait until White has moved the King's Bishop before taking the pawn on c4. This forces the Bishop to move twice, and Black regains the move he lost in his development, when he played …dxc4.
It would be quite incorrect to try to hold the pawn by …b5 as follows:
Diagram 37
Holding the gambit pawn
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
These considerations point to the conclusion that after 2.c4 there is no inducement for Black to take the pawn. On the contrary, he will cover his centre pawn, which White wishes to tempt away, either with …e6 or …c6. The attempt to develop the Queen's Bishop before playing …e6 is not to be recommended, because the b-pawn remains unprotected and open to an immediate attack by 3.Qb3. Of the two remaining replies, 2…e6 and 2…c6, I will first discuss the former, as being the more natural of the two, since …c6 does not fit into the scheme for opening the c-file for the Rooks. White, on the other hand, can bring out his Queen's Bishop before playing e3, in this way:
Diagram 38
The Queen's Gambit declined
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.3
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
No fault can be found with this move, although it blocks the Bishop, since the latter can only be developed effectively at b7. Moreover, the Knight at d7 supports the projected …c5. White cannot win a pawn now with 5.cxd5 exd5 6.Nxd5, because of 6…Nxd5 7.Bxd8 Bb4+. Therefore 5.e3 must be played first.
Quite a different system of opening ensues, when Black does not delay pushing the pawn to c5 until after his pieces are developed, but makes the advance on his third move. Here Black has the advantage of being able to avoid the pinning of his Knight by the opposing Queen's Bishop.
Diagram 39
The Queen's Gambit, 3…c5
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The third of the typical main positions in the Queen's gambit. Two continuations must now be considered. White can either develop his King's Bishop at g2, and concentrate on the Black d-pawn, which is somewhat weak, or he can place the King's Bishop on one of the available squares between f1 and a6. In the first instance, the e-pawn need not be played at all, and the Queen's Bishop retains the option of developing at g5, f4, and even e3. In the second, where the e-pawn must make room for the King's Bishop, White must decide at once between Bf4 or Bg5, and only Bf4 can be seriously considered on account of the variation, which only furthers Black's development.
Other moves here
With this we will close the discussion of the variations initiated by 2.c4 e6, and study the reply 2…c6. The first question which arises in our mind is: Which file will Black be able to utilise for his Rooks? An attempt to free the King's file through …e5 is conceivable. But White can prevent this by simply playing Nf3.
Two other possibilities present themselves: after playing …e6, …Nf6 and …Nbd7, Black could steer into a line similar to the Queen's gambit accepted with …dxc4 and …c5, or he could keep the centre closed with …f5 and …Nf6, with the intention of playing …Ne4 and using the f-file for activating his Rook via f6. Diagram 40 gives the position reached after:
Diagram 40
The Stonewall
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
The following variation is reminiscent of the "Stonewall" in the formation of the centre pawns. White develops his Queen's side just as Black did in the opening shown in connection with Diagram 38.
Diagram 41
An attacking set-up for White
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
Before bringing the discussion of the Queen's Pawn opening to a close, I may remark that in tournaments it has become usual for White not to play c4 at once, but to play Nf3 as a preliminary, in order to avoid the complications of the Queen's counter gambit: 2.c4 e5.
The Queen's Counter Gambit
the trap
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
+0.4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Step through the moves with the arrows, or click a move.
It now only remains for us to discover whether Black has any other answer to 1.d4 which would necessitate close analysis on White's part. Here must be mentioned: 1…Nf6, 1…c5, and 1…f5. The former move prepares …d6, followed by …e5. In this opening there is no reason why White should play c4, as there is no prospect of opening the c-file for the Rooks. Furthermore, Black has relinquished the square d5 and made e5 the basis of operations. It will be more advisable to prevent Black from playing …e5 as far as this can be achieved in conformity with a logical development, e.g. 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3. Not 2.Nc3, because Black could then lead into the Queen's gambit by playing …d5 and …c5, after which White has the disadvantage of not being able to open the c-file. 2…d6 3.Bf4 Nbd7 4.e3. Now Black can only enforce …e5 after …c6 and …Qc7. Meanwhile White mobilises all his pieces, whilst Black's Queen's Bishop remains blocked and the Knight must remain at d7 to cover the e-pawn. If, on the other hand, Black exchanges pawns in order to free the Knight, there is no Black centre left.
With regard to the second irregular reply to 1.d4, namely, 1…c5, two ways are open to White. One is to turn the opening into an ordinary Queen's gambit by playing e3, on which Black can play …d5. The second is to play 2.d5. Black will then develop his King's side with …g6 and …Bg7. The Bishop is well posted here, and can frequently take up an attacking position at e5 or d4. (See Game No. 45, Rubinstein – Spielmann.)
If White plays 2.dxc5, we have after 2…e6 a Queen's gambit accepted by White, and, as pointed out before, this line of play is not commendable.
The last of the three irregular answers mentioned above: 1…f5 leads to two entirely different plans, according to the second move chosen by White.
White can confine himself to a simple development such as: Nf3, Bg5, e3, Nbd2 (Nc3 would only be good if preceded by c4, because Black would again lead into a Queen's gambit with …d5 and …c5). The other possibility is the following: in view of the fact that 1…f5 does absolutely nothing to aid development, White can initiate a violent attack by giving up his King's Pawn (2.e4) and thus accelerate his own development. The play might be as follows: 2…fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 c6 (4…d5?5.Bxf6, followed by Qh5+); 5.f3. If Black takes the pawn he lays himself open to an attack hard to meet. It seems best to play 5…e3, which calls back the White Queen's Bishop and leaves White's f-pawn as a hindrance to the development of the King's Knight.
C. Irregular openings
Many openings in which neither e4 nor d4 is the first move lead to well-known positions by a simple transposition of moves. For instance, a Queen's gambit may well have the following opening moves: 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.e3 d5 5.d4, or a French defence these: 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.Bg5 e6 4.e4.
There are, of course, systems of opening which deviate absolutely from those which have been proved sound and are in general use, and it is those openings that puzzle the beginner most of all. He says: What is the good of learning correct openings, if my opponent plays incorrectly and wins all the same? This line of thought is wrong from its inception. The student is not supposed to "learn" openings by heart, but to understand how the general principles of Chess Strategy are applied to any opening. Such knowledge can never be obtained from a tabulated analysis, but can only be arrived at by the application of common sense. If a player succeeds in winning in spite of an inferior opening, it only proves that subsequently he has played a stronger game than his opponent, who, after playing the opening according to the book, did not know how to proceed further. And herein lies the weakness, and not in the absence of knowledge of the analysis of openings. The latter is rated far too highly. Any player will hold his own in the opening, as soon as he has grasped the real meaning of those principles which I cannot repeat often enough, viz.: 1st, quick development of pieces and avoidance of lost moves; 2nd, the maintenance of a pawn centre, hampering the development of the opposing forces, and the avoidance of pawn moves that do not contribute to the development of pieces.
How to conduct the middle game and end-game is not entirely a matter of deduction from such general rules. In order to play the end-game correctly, one must know certain things and positions which arise from and may be said to be peculiar to the purely arbitrary rules of chess. The same applies to the middle game, as in most cases it must be played with a view to the end-game which ensues, unless there be a chance of mating the opponent before. The student should have, therefore, a knowledge of the end-game before he can hope to be able to conduct the middle game efficiently. For this reason I have decided to treat of the end-game first.
8
7
1a
b
e