“If you have an advantage, then you must attack; otherwise the advantage will disappear.”
— Wilhelm Steinitz, world champion (1886-1894)
Shelves of books — and reams of columns — have been written on the importance of positional play, the variety of pawn structures, the art of the endgame and the subtleties of the 16…a6 line of the Nimzo-Peloponnesian Benko Gambit Reversed. But in their heart of hearts, even the most sophisticated players would prefer to execute a rattling good attack leading to neat checkmate.
We all have our preferred styles of play, our pet variations, our comfort zones at the chess board. But when the wind is up and the blood is in the water, we are all alike, with a single-minded focus on hunting down the enemy king. The great Dutch GM and author Jan Timman, in his 2006 book “On The Attack,” analyzed the attacking styles of 11 modern masters, ranging in style from Anand and Karpov to Shirov and Kasparov, and found a common thread in their play:
“Interestingly, while there are differences between the players’ styles,” Timman writes, “when it comes to ‘hitting home,’ there are more similarities than differences between them. The reason for this is precisely because they all know very well how to meet the demands of the position.”
The common theme in today’s attacking games is this: If you want to get at the king, first eliminate his courtiers. In both games, the key to a successful attack is to eliminate — often brutally — the guards protecting the enemy monarch.
The United States has qualified for the World Team Championships later this year in Antalya, Turkey, easily winning the 9th Panamerican Team Championships last month over teams from Brazil, Cuba and Uruguay. U.S. GM Sam Shankland scored a nice Board 4 win in the penultimate round over Uruguayan FM Daniel Izquierdo, capped by a fierce mating attack on the Black king.
In a Dutch Leningrad, Black faces an early dilemma after 11. Qxd2 dxe5 12. Qd5+, when uncomfortable for the second player is 12…Qxd5 13. cxd5 Nd4 14. Nxd4 exd4 15. Rfd1 Re8 16. Bxd4 Bxd4 17. Rxd4 Rxe2 18. Rc4 Re7 19. Rac1, with a clear edge for White.
But Izquierdo opens himself up to far worse after 12…Kh8 13. e4 fxe4?! (Qe7! 14. Rad1 Rd8 15. Qb5 holds the balance) 14. Qxe4 Bf5 15. Qe3 Qe7 (Qd3 was worth a look, though White still has a pull after 16. Qxd3 Bxd3 17. Rfe1 e4 18. Bxg7+ Kxg7 19. Ng5) 16. Nh4 Bg4 17. h3 Bd7 18. Rad1, with all Shankland’s pieces poised for the attack.
Black should have tried 18…Rad8, but he failed to sense the danger and pays a heavy price: 18…Bf6? (see diagram) 19. Nxg6+! (an offer that obviously must be accepted as the king, queen and rook are forked) hxg6 20. Qh6+ Kg8 (Qh7 21. Qxh7+ Kxh7 22. Rxd7+ Kg8 23. Rxc7 and wins) 21. Qxg6+ Kh8 22. Qh6+ Kg8.
Now White methodically removes Black’s key defenders, allowing the attack to break through: 23. Rxd7! Qxd7 24. Bd5+ Rf7 25. Qxf6 Raf8 26. Qg6+ Kh8 27. Bxc6!, and the elimination of the piece guarding e5 forces Black’s resignation. The game might have gone 27…bxc6 28. Bxe5+ Rg7 29. Qxg7+ Qxg7 30. Bxg7+ Kxg7 31. f4, with an elementary endgame win.
The only flaw in Shankland’s play is that it failed to produce to a quick checkmate. That wasn’t the case in Moldovan GM Dmitry Svetushkin’s pretty crush of Russian GM Valery Yandemirov from the recent Moscow Open A tournament in the Russian capital, annually one of the strongest open events in the world.
The center quickly gets locked up in this Ruy Lopez Steinitz Deferred, and it looks as if neither player will be doing any attacking for a long while. But the g-file opens up on 20…f4 21. g3 g5 22. gxf4 gxf4 23. Kh1 Kh7 (Kf7!?, heading for the queenside, is a Petrosianesque alternative that just might work here) 24. Rg1 Rf6?! (Rg8 25. axb4 axb4 26. Qg2 Bf6 27. Qh3 Raf8 was tougher) 25. axb4 axb4 26. Qg2, and it is White who is better positioned to exploit the open line.
The g6-square proves a perennial sore spot for Black’s defense. As his pieces contort themselves to shore up the defense, Svetushkin finds an unexpected way to blow up the position.
Thus: 29. Rg1 Rf6 (the threat was 30. Qg4 Rf6 31. Nxf4! exf4 32. Bxf6, winning) 30. Qg4 Ndf8 31. h4! (a simple advance that’s extremely hard to counter) Rf7 (Qd7 32. h5 Qxg4 33. Rxg4 Ne7 34. Naxc5! dxc5 35. Bxe5 Rf7 36. Rxf4 Rxf4 37. Bxf4, and the White pawn chain will dominate) 32. h5 Nh8, and with every Black piece pushed back, White decides it’s time to detonate the pawn center.View Entire Story
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
Raised in Northern Virginia, David R. Sands received an undergraduate degree from the University of Virginia and a master’s degree from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. He worked as a reporter for several Washington-area business publications before joining The Washington Times.
At The Times, Mr. Sands has covered numerous beats, including international trade, banking, politics ...
Independent voices from the TWT Communities
Empowering mind/body/spirit and health dialogue along with cutting-edge, conscious social, political, and world commentary with Adam Omkara. Join the Evolution!
A politically conservative and morally liberal Hebrew alpha male hunts left-wing viper
The cold hard truth about politics in America today and the state of this once great nation.
World's Ugliest Dog Contest
Spelling Bee finale
Marines train Afghan soldiers
Rolling Thunder 2013
Benghazi: The anatomy of a scandal