Pandolfini’s Ultimate Guide to Chess

by Bruce Pandolfini

  Diagram 130. After White’s move 2. Nd2?.

  Student: That’s a developing move.

  Teacher: Yes, but not a productive one, since it at least temporarily blocks in the queen and the dark-square bishop.

  Diagram 131. After the sharp counter 2 … e5.

  Student: What an audacious-looking move.

  Teacher: It’s an attempt to hijack the initiative by a temporary pawn sacrifice.

  Student: So let me take your pawn, 3. dxe5.

  Diagram 132. After taking Black’s pawn, 3. dxe5.

  Teacher: And allow me to move my knight to safety, 3 … Ng4.

  Diagram 133. After Black’s knight invades, 3 … Ng4.

  Student: I have this tremendous urge to drive away your knight with 4. h3.

  Diagram 134. After White blunders with 4. h3??.

  Teacher: That’s what White actually did play, and Black refuted it by 4 … Ne3!!

  Diagram 135. After Black threatens White’s queen by 4 … Ne3!!

  Student: What? That makes no sense. I can take your knight for free.

  Teacher: For free, but not without repercussions, which is why in the real game White resigned here. He realized that he had to either allow his queen to be taken by the knight or capture the knight, exposing his king to a deadly check from Black’s queen at h4. Thus, if 5. fxe3, White is bereft of pawn protection for the square g3, so that 5 … Qh4+ mates next move. For example, if 6. g3, then 6 … Qxg3# is a version of the Fool’s Mate, which, as you no doubt recall, we went over at the end of Lesson 1.

  Diagram 136. After 6 … Qxg3. a Fool’s Mate.

  Student: I get it. The culprit was the shove 4. h3??, which left g3 less defended and vulnerable.

  Teacher: By Jove, I think you’ve got it. Let me drive home a couple of principles:

  1. If it can be done safely, try to move both center pawns two squares each.

  2. Don’t move too many pawns, especially in the first part of the opening.

  After the principles comes the summary advice. The most effective way to control the center usually is to occupy it with center pawns and to back them up with appropriate piece support. White has a better chance to seize the center initially because of the first-move advantage, which is something like a chessic adaptation of squatter’s rights. Unless circumstances lead you elsewhere, try to maintain at least one pawn in the center without having to make significant concessions.

  Student: That’s fine, because I don’t like making concessions anyway.

  Teacher: While you’re playing chess, that’s a good thing. Moving the central pawns opens up space for rapid development. Moving too many pawns will slow down development and weaken your position. Only move pawns when it’s clearly helpful or required by the position.

  Student: Some pawns can’t seem to get any respect.

  Teacher: Of course, pawns may appear to be mere bagatelles, so why is it necessary to place so much emphasis on the apparently insignificant? Because in this game of grandiose minds and grand scheming, little things actually matter.

  Student: So I should respect little pawns, I guess.

  Teacher: I’d advise it. After all, the two of us might only be pawns in someone else’s larger game.

  LESSON 6

  Establishing the Neutral Zone

  BLACK’S RESPONSE

  Teacher: Let’s begin by reviewing some opening principles, since White and Black have a similar aim.

  Student: To win.

  Teacher: You guessed it. Every move should have a purpose. Each opening move should help develop your pieces or free lines for future development, establish or lay claim to control of the center, garner space and improve mobility, pose one or more threats, answer any significant threats made by your opponent, and even ward off the possibility of certain threats being made against you in the future.

  Student: I have a question about opening goals. The starting setup is the same for both sides, so I could see how their goals might be similar. Clearly, as we’ve already discussed, White has the small advantage of the first move. But does the fact that White has the first move mean that it’s a lot easier for him to secure his goals? Or does it merely mean that Black has to go about achieving his plans differently because he can’t make his first move until after White makes his?

  Teacher: Of course, doing most things is easier for the player going first. So going second does mean that Black will probably have to be a little craftier, though he can reach chessic nirvana too.

  Student: Suppose Black does the same thing as White. That is, after White opens up by moving his king-pawn two squares (1. e4), is it a good idea for Black to follow suit and move his king-pawn two squares as well (1 … e5)?

  Diagram 137. A double king-pawn opening.

  Teacher: It’s not a bad idea at all. For a newcomer, it’s probably the most practical approach, especially because it tends to be more direct and easy to understand. There are other plausible things that Black can do, but however he replies, his moves should take into account White’s moves and likely follow-ups. Nothing should be played in a vacuum.

  Student: What specifically does 1 … e5 do?

  Teacher: A number of things. Three of the more significant reasons for countering with a double king-pawn defense (1 … e5) are to: (1) get a fair share of the center; (2) clear lines for development; and (3) discourage White from moving his d-pawn to d4.

  Student: Could you expand on this double king-pawn stuff please?

  Teacher: After 1. e4 e5, the opening falls into the double king-pawn variety, meaning that both sides have advanced their king-pawns two squares each. Black does so for reasons similar to White’s, but with a profound difference. Black’s thrust is additionally concerned with dissuading White’s eventual d4. Black is thinking defense—for now. White, in turn, is not really thinking so much of stopping Black’s queen-pawn from moving to d5 (Black’s counterpart to White’s advance d2-d4), at least, not at this point, because Black is a move behind and doesn’t really have the time to advance the d-pawn with confidence yet. Still, such an advance (d7-d5, or d6-d5 if the d-pawn has already been moved one square) could be important for Black down the road. So White’s extra move confers a playing edge in this symmetrical setup, at least to the extent that it allows White to pursue certain aggressive plans with greater assurance than Black could. In a theoretical sense, and even in a practical one, White is playing for a win and Black for a draw—with the same move!

  Student: In general, is it wise for Black to copy White’s play?

  Teacher: Not really, but let’s think this through. For practical reasons it’s inevitably impracticable to copy for very long anyway. If one side gives a check, for example, the opponent must first get out of check before being able to ape the other side. Moreover, it may be impossible to restore the same setup as the first player after the check is given, even if you had the time to try. The position may not allow it. And suppose the first player gives checkmate? That can’t be copied, no matter what, for there’s no last licks in chess—the game is simply over. And there’s even a psychological consideration. If one player copies the other, it’s as if he’s saying I’m content to draw. That’s a very dangerous situation to be in once the other player senses it, because it enables him to take chances he might not otherwise take, realizing that the defender is not likely to want to get his hands dirty.

  Student: So that’s why we don’t see more copying, because it tends to be impossible, difficult, or even deleterious to the copier’s own game?

  Teacher: That’s right, not just because it’s hard to do, but also because it’s often undesirable, even when it doesn’t immediately lose. We see this in many examples of symmetrical play—even fairly early in the attempt at symmetry, the second player gets the worst of it. The Petrov Defense, 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6, provides a clear instance.

  Diagram 138. After 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6.

  Student: What happens if White takes Black’s king-pawn now, 3. Nxe5?

  D
iagram 139. After 3. Nxe5.

  Teacher: If White were to capture the e-pawn, 3. Nxe5, it would be a mistake for Black to continue in like vein, 3 … Nxe4. Instead of taking back on e4 right away, which well soon look at, the right decision is to delay taking in favor of first driving away White’s knight from e5, specifically by 3 … d6.

  Diagram 140. After the possible response 3 … d6.

  Student: Suppose White then retreats his attacked knight, 4. Nf3?

  Diagram 141. After the retreat 4. Nf3.

  Teacher: After the knight retreats, then it’s okay to take the White king-pawn, 4 … Nxe4, and Black can cope with the pinning 5. Qe2 by the unpinning 5 … Qe7.

  Diagram 142. After 4 … Nxe4 5. Qe2 Qe7.

  Student: It’s interesting. If White were now to play 6. d3, and if Black were to retreat his knight, 6 … Nf6, the position would once again be symmetrical, although White would still have the extra move. How did they get symmetry without copying exactly?

  Teacher: By a kind of transposition, where a certain position is arrived at by a different move order. Transpositions can be cardinal to serious opening play, but that’s a concept best left for your chessic future, after you’ve mastered the essentials.

  Student: Can you show me how White should continue if Black takes the king-pawn, 3 … Nxe4?

  Diagram 143. After 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 Nxe4.

  Teacher: If Black does copy White on move three, 3 … Nxe4, he runs into the nasty White queen attack, 4. Qe2, a move earlier, when his mirror-image response, 4 … Qe7, would fail to 5. Qxe4, defending White’s knight against comparable capture by Black’s queen.

  Diagram 144. After 4. Qe2 Qe7 5. Qxe4.

  Student: But after 4. Qe2, couldn’t Black simply retreat his knight, say 4 … Nf6?

  Diagram 145. After 4. Qe2 Nf6.

  Teacher: That doesn’t help, for White can answer with 5. Nc6+, freely attacking Black’s queen at d8 and delivering a mesmerizing discovered attack to the Black king at e8 from White’s queen at e2. However Black gets out of check, he winds up losing his queen for a knight.

  Diagram 146. After 5. Nc6+, winning Black’s queen.

  Student: Okay, this example of mimicry didn’t work out. But it seems as if even serious competitors occasionally respond with the same or similar-looking moves.

  Teacher: But they generally do so for at least slightly different reasons. Furthermore, they try to remain vigilant for possibilities to break the symmetry favorably, increasing or pilfering the initiative in the process. Bobby Fischer, in particular, was a genius at finding meaningful small differences in apparently symmetrical games.

  Student: So it’s unwise to copy your opponent without good cause. But let me ask you this. One reason you said Black plays 1 … e5 was to discourage White from moving his d-pawn two squares. How does this actually stop White from opening up in the center? And does Black have other ways to deter White’s 2. d4?

  Teacher: Let me play around with the second question first. Black has several alternatives to 1 … e5 that discourage White from playing a favorable 2. d4. For one, Black can play the Sicilian Defense, 1 … c5, which, like the double king-pawn response 1 … e5, immediately guards the square d4. In both cases, after either 1 … c5 or 1 … e5, White’s advance 2. d4 could then be answered by a pawn capture, when White doesn’t really want to take back on d4 with his queen, exposing it to early attack.

  Diagram 147. The Sicilian Defense.

  Student: Is there an alternative approach for Black, such as not guarding against 2. d4 at all?

  Teacher: Yes, there is. For instance, you could challenge the White e-pawn instead. Thus, after 1 … Nf6, Alekhine’s Defense, White’s own king-pawn would be menaced, requiring some immediate attention.

  Diagram 148. Alekhine’s Defense.

  Student: Is Alekhine’s Defense the only way for Black to attack e4 directly?

  Teacher: No, there’s another interesting direct assault on the e-pawn, and that’s the advance 1 … d5, known as the Center Counter Defense.

  Diagram 149. Center Counter Defense.

  Student: But doesn’t that lead to the early development of Black’s queen after 2. exd5, when 2 … Qxd5 3. Nc3 gains a tempo for White?

  Diagram 150. After 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3.

  Teacher: Very observant of you. And you’re right, bringing out the queen too soon is a chessic no-no. But this is a case where Black is actually doing fine. Potentially (among other responses), he could move his queen to a5 (diagram 151) and continue satisfactorily. Furthermore, you haven’t considered the possibility that Black doesn’t bring his queen out immediately on move two, that instead he delays queenly development by first playing 2 … Nf6 (diagram 152), attacking the d5-pawn for a second time. But let’s not get into all that here. Suffice it to say that Black could indeed counter with 1 … d5 if he were so inclined. White would still be okay, but so would Black.

  Diagram 151. After 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5.

  Diagram 152. After 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6.

  Student: There really are a lot of possibilities here.

  Teacher: Of course, there are options. All these moves (c7-c5, Ng8-f6, and d7-d5) are possible for Black, as well as several others, but they require a more developed comprehension of chess to play correctly. For a beginner, though, 1 … e5 is the most direct way to cope with the potential of 2. d4.

  Diagram 153. The Double King-Pawn Defense.

  Student: But what about my first question? Does 1 … e5 essentially stop White from playing 2. d4?

  Diagram 154. After 2. d4.

  Teacher: Not really. White certainly can play 2. d4 without losing material. If, for example, Black captures the queen-pawn, 2 … exd4, White can recoup the pawn by 3. Qxd4. So 2. d4 doesn’t lose a pawn; rather it trades d-pawn for e-pawn. Trading is not losing.

  Diagram 155. After 2 … exd4 3. Qxd4.

  Student: Wait a second. Could you differentiate between trading and losing?

  Teacher: Absolutely. You win material if you get more than you give up. You lose material if you get less than you give up. And you trade material if you get the same in value as you give up.

  Student: So winning material is generally good, losing material is generally bad, and trading material is not necessarily either one, but dependent on the circumstances of a given position?

  Teacher: That’s right. In fact, everything in chess is dependent on circumstances, not just the desirability of trading. If trading material turns out to be a bad transaction, it will be for non-material reasons. Naturally, if a trade is desirable for one player, it tends to be disagreeable for the other.

  Student: I hear the word exchange used a lot. Is that the same as a trade?

  Teacher: Yes, and no. It’s true that chessplayers also refer to trades as exchanges. But the word exchange has another meaning too. To exchange, the verb, which means to trade, should not be confused with the exchange, the noun. By the same token, the phrase the exchange has a specific meaning. It refers to the difference of about two points in value, between a rook and a minor piece. You win the exchange by trading a bishop or a knight for a rook, a net gain of about two pawns in value. You lose the exchange when you’re on the short end of the same deal. Instead of saying winning the exchange or losing the exchange, some chessplayers may say winning quality or losing quality.

  Student: So gaining quality is the same thing as gaining the exchange.

  Teacher: Correct. Furthermore, if you’re up the exchange, your opponent must be down the exchange. You can also sacrifice the exchange, often shortened to sac the exchange, which means you voluntarily give up a rook for a minor piece. Such a transaction can be offered for either tactically immediate or strategically long-term considerations.

  Student: So is it good for White to move his d-pawn two squares ahead here, on his second move, or not?

  Teacher: It’s not that simple. White can play d4 without losing material, for 2 … exd4 can be answered by 3. Qxd4, bringing out the Wh
ite queen (diagram 156). Of course, White could delay capturing on d4 until other units are in place so that the queen doesn’t have to come out unfavorably. The problem is when White’s queen does take back immediately on d4. That’s when Black can start to attack it by developing his own forces usefully, namely his queen-knight to c6. This gains time at White’s expense, for White will then have to waste a move shifting the queen to safety.

  Diagram 156. After 3 … Nc6, forcing White’s queen to move.

  Student: You’ve just told me that Black is okay after 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 (diagram 150). So why isn’t White okay after 1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. Qxd4 Nc6 (diagram 156)? Aren’t they virtually comparable?

  Teacher: Not entirely, because White has an extra move, which he has used to advance his e-pawn two squares. In some cases, that decision could turn out to be detrimental, since White’s king-pawn might soon serve as a target, thus requiring White to invest time and resources in its protection. Still, White’s position in diagram 156 is not unreasonable. He simply has better ways to insure long-term pressure on Black. White doesn’t need to take such early chances, bringing the queen out this way.

  Student: And the earlier position, the one we saw in diagram 150?

  Teacher: There, Black is fighting to establish a kind of dynamic equality, so bringing his queen out early is more in tune with his aims to bring “a gun to a knife fight.” In chess, the smallest differences can lead to important ones.

  Student: So how bad is it to bring out the queen early?