Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. Subscriber Paul Leggett
    Chess Librarian
    26 Aug '10 14:55 / 1 edit
    There was a reference to bishop triangulation in the endgame triangulation thread, and it made me think of this excellent game, but I didn't want to go on a tangent there, so here it is!

    Botvinnik plays 1. g3, gets a King's Indian Attack position, trades off his bad pieces for black's good ones, and then ruthlessly exploits the light squares.

    An anthology game worthy of repeated study.

  2. 26 Aug '10 15:38
    death by asphyxiation! Nice post Paul
  3. Standard member Talisman
    Time traveller.
    26 Aug '10 17:57
    Originally posted by Paul Leggett
    There was a reference to bishop triangulation in the endgame triangulation thread, and it made me think of this excellent game, but I didn't want to go on a tangent there, so here it is!

    Botvinnik plays 1. g3, gets a King's Indian Attack position, trades off his bad pieces for black's good ones, and then ruthlessly exploits the light squares.

    An a ...[text shortened]... d6 33. h4 Qd1
    34. Qe8 f5 35. exf5 Nxf5 36. Bg8+ Kh8 1-0[/pgn]
    Yes it all looks very fancy and all that but unfortunately, every time i try to implement positional ideas into my games, tactics seem to get in the way and spoil everything! Play like that really is for the top guys. the rest of us should concentrate more on 3 move cheapos.
  4. Subscriber Paul Leggett
    Chess Librarian
    26 Aug '10 18:49
    Originally posted by Talisman
    Yes it all looks very fancy and all that but unfortunately, every time i try to implement positional ideas into my games, tactics seem to get in the way and spoil everything! Play like that really is for the top guys. the rest of us should concentrate more on 3 move cheapos.
    I see them as intertwined, and I think separating them makes learning harder.

    I also see this game as a simple one, not a fancy one- there are no stunning sacrifices, no crazy moves, no outrageous positional finesses.

    The only move that (to me) was very surprising was where Botvinnik plays Bg5 for the sole purpose of making black play ...f6, which ruins black's dark-squared bishop and makes the light squares around black's king weak. It was a very nice finesse.

    It is not by accident that Botvinnik keeps his light squared bishop, makes his opponent's bishop bad (the dark one that he left on the board), dominates the light squares, and then wins the game on a relatively simple tactic that is based on ...light square control/weaknesses.

    Every positional signpost is inscribed with the ancient words "beyond here there be tactics".
  5. Standard member ChessPraxis
    Cowboy From Hell
    26 Aug '10 18:57
    Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.
    Sun Tzu
  6. Subscriber Marinkatomb
    wotagr8game
    26 Aug '10 21:52
    Originally posted by Paul Leggett
    There was a reference to bishop triangulation in the endgame triangulation thread, and it made me think of this excellent game, but I didn't want to go on a tangent there, so here it is!

    Botvinnik plays 1. g3, gets a King's Indian Attack position, trades off his bad pieces for black's good ones, and then ruthlessly exploits the light squares.

    An a ...[text shortened]... d6 33. h4 Qd1
    34. Qe8 f5 35. exf5 Nxf5 36. Bg8+ Kh8 1-0[/pgn]
    Isn't it just a flat blunder that wins in the end though? Even i could see the knight on d7 couldn't move because of the 'Seasaw' tactic on g8...?
  7. 26 Aug '10 22:26
    Originally posted by Marinkatomb
    Isn't it just a flat blunder that wins in the end though? Even i could see the knight on d7 couldn't move because of the 'Seasaw' tactic on g8...?
    34. ... -f5 was a mistake? What should black have played instead?
  8. Subscriber Marinkatomb
    wotagr8game
    26 Aug '10 22:56
    Originally posted by Thomaster
    34. ... -f5 was a mistake? What should black have played instead?
    Well clearly it was as the game shows. ..Qd6 at least holds blacks position in tact immediately, what should white play then?
  9. Subscriber Paul Leggett
    Chess Librarian
    27 Aug '10 02:46
    Originally posted by Marinkatomb
    Well clearly it was as the game shows. ..Qd6 at least holds blacks position in tact immediately, what should white play then?
    After 34. ... Qd6 white plays 35. h5 with the idea of Bf7 and Bg6+, recapturing with the pawn with check if black takes it with the knight.

    In the position after 34. Qe8 the position is resignable, and ...f5 is possibly the least bad and best practical attempt to confuse the issue.

    Since they were in the mid 30's for moves, it's possible that time pressure kept black from fully appreciating how positionally busted he was, which explains why he didn't resign immediately after white's 34th move.
  10. 27 Aug '10 10:47
    A nice game indeed.
    Botvinnik's own comment on 34... f5 was:
    "In time trouble Black hastens his inevitable defeat (White was threatening Bf7, h4-h5 and Bg6+)."
    [from Botvinnik's Best Games, Volume 3, Olomouc 2001]
  11. Subscriber Paul Leggett
    Chess Librarian
    27 Aug '10 11:49
    Originally posted by Zaubernuss
    A nice game indeed.
    Botvinnik's own comment on 34... f5 was:
    "In time trouble Black hastens his inevitable defeat (White was threatening Bf7, h4-h5 and Bg6+)."
    [from Botvinnik's Best Games, Volume 3, Olomouc 2001]
    I didn't know he actually said that- you just made my day! Thanks!