Women’s World Chess Championship 1930

Introduction

Three years after the inaugural edition of the Women’s World Chess Championship, the 2nd edition of the tournament was organized in 1930 – once again alongside the 3rd Chess Olympiad (or Tournament of Nations, as this event was called back in the day). The Olympiad itself – as well as the accompanying events were organized in Hamburg by the president of the Hamburg Chess Club and the German Chess Federation Walter Robinow in order to celebrate the centenary of the Hamburg Chess Club. ¹

Walter Robinow. Source: https://www.schachbund.de/news/id-150-geburtstag-von-walter-robinow.html

Participants and format

In contrast to the previous edition of the tournament which fielded 12 ladies – in the Women’s World Chess Championship 1930 there were only 5 competitors:

• Vera Menchik – the defending champion and the greatest female player of the first half of the 20th century
• Paula Wolf-Kalmar – third prize winner from 1927
• Wally Henschel – a German chess player and a debutant in this competition. Incidentally enough, just like Robinow – she would also later have to emigrate to the USA due to her Jewish origins
• Katarina Beskow – the 2nd prize winner in the 1927 Women’s World Chess Championship
• Agnes Stevenson – the only other British competitor, apart from Menchik

Due to the much fewer participants than in the previous edition, ² the format of the tournament was double round-robin (all-play-all).

Games and results

The defending champion Vera Menchik was considered to be the undisputable pre-tournament favourite. Not only did she win the previous edition in a very dominant fashion – but in the subsequent three years she participated in a number of „Open“ tournaments – such as Paris 1929, Karlsbad 1929, and Hastings 1929/1930 – gaining a lot of experience in competing at the highest level.

Indeed, Menchik managed to justify these expectations and defend her title. However, the tournament path toward the title was anything but rosy.

In the first half, Vera drew with Paula Wolf-Kalmar and lost with White to the debutant Wally Henschel. It is hard to emphasize how big of an upset it was – should it suffice to say that this was Menchik’s only loss in all of her appearances in the Women’s World Chess Championships ³ Needless to say, we should take a look at this game ⁴:

Note: The games are available for free in the following lichess study and can also be downloaded for free (together with many others) on my “Free PGN Downloads” page

Even after enduring such a shock, Menchik managed to retain her composure and continued winning all her other games. By the 2nd half of the tournament, she was very much in the race for first place and her 2nd game against Paula Kalmar-Wolf turned out to be the one to ultimately decide the champion

style=”text-align: justify;”>It has to be said I was unable to figure out in which round the game was played and how many points the players had. In his book Vera Menchik: A Biography of the First Women’s World Chess Champion, R.B. Tanner stated that:

„Shortly thereafter Paula also lost to Wally Henschel and Menchik won her second title“

But given that Wolf-Kalmar finished a clear point behind, I hope it is not a big historical mishap to say that this game decided the tournament. ⁵

Thus, with the final score of 6.5/8, Vera Menchik managed to defend her title and reinforce her status as the strongest female player of the time!

References and Further Reading

http://www.olimpbase.org/1930/1930in.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Robinow

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wally_Henschel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3rd_Chess_Olympiad

The post Women’s World Chess Championship 1930 appeared first on Chessentials.

In order to track the origin of the Women’s World Chess Championship, we have to go back all the way to the year 1924.

Namely, in June 1924, a chess tournament was held in Paris, alongside the 8th Olympic Games. According to some sources, prior to the tournament, there were attempts to include it in the Olympic Games, which was unsuccessful.

Considering that AND the fact that there was an ongoing discussion within the chess world about the need to establish an international chess organization, it is not a coincidence that it was precisely during this event that, the Federation Internationale des Echecs, or FIDE, was founded by the participants of the tournament.

According to the renowned chess historian Edward Winter: ¹

„Paris, 1924 also marked the foundation of the Fédération Internationale des Echecs, with the appointment of the above-mentioned Alexander Rueb of The Hague as its President. Initially, there were 15 signatories to FIDE: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Finland, France, Great Britain, Holland, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Romania, Spain, Switzerland, and Yugoslavia.“

At the very beginning, FIDE had very little power within the chess world. In the congresses held in 1925 and 1926, a desire to become involved in the World Chess Championship was expressed. ² However, given that the World Chess Championship was already very established the World Champions had a lot of power and were in the position to organize matches without FIDE’s involvement.

Thus, in order to increase their power and influence, FIDE turned its attention to organizing other chess events. Given the past attempt to include the Paris Tournament 1924 in the Olympic Games and the fact that this event was considered to be an unofficial Olympiad, it was logical to try to organize the „official“ one.

This happened during the 4th FIDE Congress in 1927, when the First Chess Olympiad was held. ³ Apart from the team tournament for the nations that were members of FIDE, several additional events were held – including the 12-player women’s tournament.

(2nd placed Katarina Beskow plays 10th placed Agnes Stevenson. According to the source (British Chess Game Archive): This is a posed photo as neither was due to play each other on the day that it must have been taken, 18 July 1927, which was the first day of the inaugural Women’s World Chess Championship tournament at Central Hall, Westminster, London. Photo from the Daily Mirror, 19 July 1927.)

This event marks the beginning of the official lineage of the Women’s World Chess Championship. Unfortunately, it was very far from a glamourous one. Aside from the fact that the tournament was held as a SIDE event during the Olympiad rather than a SEPARATE one, there were numerous other issues with it.

Firstly, there was a matter of a very laughable prize fund. According to the book by Robert Tanner titled Vera Menchik:A Biography of the First Women’s Chess Champion, with 350 Games:

„As with all other such events prior to World War II, it was held in conjunction with the chess Olympiad. At that time, no one considered that there was adequate interest in a women’s Olympiad. Entry for the 12-player event was 1 pound, with prizes for first through fourth place of 20, 15, 10 and 5 pounds. By 2013 standards, that works out to a 42 USD entry fee and a first prize of 840 USD.“

Secondly, before the event, it was not yet known that the participants would compete for the Women’s Chess Champion title – this decision was only applied RETROACTIVELY. According to both Tanner’s book and Edward Winter’s article, this decision was announced in the August edition of the British Chess Magazine:

‘It was agreed that Article 3 of the Rules of the FIDE should be altered to include a Women’s championship of the FIDE, and this was made retrospective so as to award the title to the winner of the Women’s Tournament of the London Congress, 1927.’

It is indeed quite absurd that a world championship title was contested in an event where participants did not know that they were contesting the title.

Last but not least, it would appear that the majority of the games from this event were not preserved. In my preparation for this article, I tried searching different Internet sources (e.g. this website seemed promising at first), and chess databases and I even consulted the aforementioned Vera Menchik book with 350(!!) games. Yet, despite my efforts, I was only able to find two games – both featuring the eventual winner Menchik – from the entire event. ⁴ It is a big shame, given that this event was held in 1927 (!) and that numerous games from matches held much earlier, in the 19th century, have been preserved completely.

As for the event itself, it was won in an incredibly dominant fashion by the strongest female player of the first half of the 20th century – Vera Menchik, who conceded a single draw out of 12 games and finished a clear 1.5 points ahead of the second prize winner, Katarina Beskow.

(Image Source: Edward Winter: Chess And Women)

The result was not that surprising given that Menchik already established herself as the strongest female player in prior years, who would soon afterward start competing in open tournaments against the best male players. But that doesn’t make her dominant performance any less impressive or notable. ⁵

In order to get a better feeling for the level of her play and the difference in class between her and her opposition, I present you with two annotated games from this event – against 4th prize winner Edith Martha Holloway with the Black pieces:

and against multiple British Women’s Chess Champion Edith Price, who ended up 6th in the 1927 tournament:

In any case, despite all the problems and issues, the 1927 Women’s World Chess Championship tournament was an important landmark event that kicked of a historical tradition that has persisted to this day!

References and Further Reading:

Edward Winter – Chess In 1924

Edward Winter – Chess And Women

Chess Olympiad History

Vera Menchik:A Biography of the First Women’s Chess Champion, with 350 Games

British Chess Game Archive

Wikipedia Entry On Fide

Olimpbase.org: 1st Chess Olympiad 1927

Chessgames: Game Collection – Women’s World Chess Championship

Britbase: 1927 Women’s World Chess Championship

The post 1927 Women’s World Chess Championship appeared first on Chessentials.

You can also download them in the .pgn format at my Chess PGN Download page.

In Search For Harmony

The seventh World Chess Champion Vasily Smyslov has had a fascinating chess career in many aspects. Not only was he one of the strongest players in the world for almost a decade in the 1950s¹ who participated in three World Chess Championship Matches (1954, 1957 and 1958) against Botvinnik. But he is also a very unique phenomenon in the chess world in terms of longevity – as he continued competing at a very high level until he was well in his sixties (in 1983 – at the age of 62 (!!) he reached the final of the Candidates cycle, where he lost to Garry Kasparov). Apart from Viktor Korchnoi, virtually no other player was able to compete at such a level at such an advanced age.

What was it that made Smyslov’s career so unique and long that made him stand apart from other players of his generation? Well, the first one is certainly – absolutely pure, whole-hearted, devoted love of the game – but not to the point of complete obsession as was the case, say, Fischer or some others. From every article or book I have ever read on Smyslov, it is very apparent he was completely fascinated with chess as his enthusiasm and passion simply always shine through. This is not only apparent from the very fact he continued playing it until his 60s (and beyond) – but also from the fact he published a very renowned book on the rook endgames and that he was also a very active composer of chess studies.

Another reason that is often quoted for Smyslov’s longevity is his chess-playing style. Smyslov is well-known for his positional/strategic understanding and for his exemplary endgame technique. Very often, he scored victories in a very quiet fashion, somehow imperceptibly accumulating small advantages and then slowly converting them without seemingly doing anything special. His style was often compared to Capablanca’s style in terms of simplicity and clarity. Smyslov himself wrote he was often searching for harmony at the chessboard – and it is widely accepted that such an approach preserved loads of energy and prolonged his career to the maximum.

having analyzed quite a few of Smyslov’s games and having read a book on his life and games, I am not 100% sure if such a depiction of Smyslov’s style is 100% accurate. In quite a few games in his career, he would play very energetic, tactical chess, going for material sacrifices, imbalances, and complicated, Tal-like positions – where he would often outwit/outcalculate his opponents. This is especially true of his youth, but such games can be found even in his World Championship Matches against Botvinnik, among other places.

I think it is a pity that Smyslov is almost exclusively known for his strategic/technical side as I feel this preconception of him as a player is what makes him underrated as a player and a World Champion. I have personally found his games extremely entertaining and instructive. In this article, I will present you with some of my favourite games of his. I have tried selecting some trademark Smyslov strategic victories, but also quite a few tactical games, to highlight this underrepresented, underestimated side of his a little bit more!

Hope you will enjoy it!

Vasily Smyslov Best Games

Smyslov – Kirilov, USSR, 1940.

A somewhat famous attacking gem from the early part of Smyslov’s career, featuring some brilliant, explosive combinations involving multiple look sacrifices. Well worth giving a look.

Smyslov – Botvinnik, Moscow, 1943.

Smyslov’s first-ever victory over Mikhail Botvinnik, played in the Moscow Championship at the height of WWII.

Smyslov – Rudakovsky, USSR Championship, 1945.

A very famous Sicilian game and a model example of “Occupying d5 with the knight”!

Smyslov – Reshevsky, FIDE World Championship Tournament, 1948.

Another very famous game, featured, among other things, in Kotov’s “Think Like A Grandmaster“, in the chapter about “creeping” (quiet) moves.

Keres – Smyslov, Zürich Candidates, 1953.

A very famous game, played at the crucial moment of the Zürich 1953. tournament, which enabled Smyslov to ultimately win the event and qualify for his first World Championship Match against Botvinnik.

Botvinnik – Smyslov, World Championship 1954., Game 14

Arguably Smyslov’s best game from the first World Championship match against Botvinnik.

Botvinnik – Smyslov, World Championship 1957., Game 17

Another beautiful game by Smyslov played in the World Championship match against Botvinnik – this time in 1957. This game was also played at a very crucial moment of the match, enabling Smyslov to secure a two-point lead and ultimately win the title.

Smyslov – Liberzon, Soviet Team Cup, 1968.

A beautiful game featuring a very standard, Smyslov-like strategic introduction and Tal-like complications in the later stage. Well-worth taking a look.

Smyslov – Ribli, Candidates Semifinal Match, 1983., Game 5

In 1983, Smyslov experienced sort of a swansong by qualifying for the Final Candidates Match² against Garry Kasparov. On his way, he beat strong Hungarian grandmaster Zoltan Ribli in the semi-final – and the following game played a decisive role.

Polgar Z. – Smyslov, Münich, 2000.

Finally – one from Smyslov’s very late years – a battle against a member of the very young generation – Zsofia Polgar. Without the names, you maybe wouldn’t guess Smyslov was already 79 years old at a time – very energetic play!

References and further reading

If you want to find out more about Smyslov’s life and games, I can recommend the following two resources:

• Life and Games of Vasily Smyslov: Volume I – The Early Years by FM Andrey Terekhov
• Smyslov on the Couch by Genna Sosonko

The post Vasily Smyslov Best Games appeared first on Chessentials.

You can also download them in the .pgn format at my Chess PGN Download page.

The Magician From Riga

Out of all World Chess Champions, Mikhail Tal’s life and games have very likely captivated the hearts and minds of chess players worldwide. When you ask people who their favourite player is, sooner or later his name enters the mix and most chess players can remember at least one of his memorable sacrifices, if not more. Even though his short tenure as the World Champion only lasted for one year (from 1960 when he won the World Championship match against Botvinnik until 1961 when he lost the Return World Championship match to the same opponent), his legacy and the effect on the chess world have been unparalleled – even for the World Chess Champion standard.

What is it about Tal’s style that makes his games so memorable? Well, his extremely combative, tactical, and sharp style and his absolute willingness to search for creative ideas and sacrifice material in the process – even under the most unexpected, surprising circumstances. Even though chess history has seen a number of true tactical geniuses, ¹ no other player had such an innate ability (and inclination) to create total chaos on the board, go for material sacrifices and positions where everything and display Tal’s level of creativity and imagination.

Due to his tremendous calculating ability as well as a certain talent to simply “see” through the variations, Tal would often come on top in these tactical skirmishes. Even though his concepts and sacrifices were often not 100% correct from the objective standpoint, they posed his opponents with very difficult problems they were often unable to solve over the board, with the clock ticking. ²

Such a playing style was particularly fresh and novel in the 1950s and 1960s. At the time, the whole chess world was influenced by the strict Soviet school of chess, spearheaded by the likes of Botvinnik and Smyslov, which had a very solid strategical/positional foundation. Tal’s daredevil, seemingly “gambling” style sent shockwaves at a time – especially when it transpired you can reach the very summit of chess and become World Champion with it.

When you also add Tal’s witty, jovial and humorous character into the equation, as well as the tragic circumstances connected to the lifelong health issues that hindered him from achieving as much as he could achieve in chess, you can understand why he is a fan favourite.

In this post, we will take a look at some of his famous and memorable games. The games have been fully annotated by the author of these lines ³ Of course, given his legacy, it was very difficult to make a selection – the full list of his memorable games would extend further away from the number ten. But in order to keep it reasonable and manageable, one has to cut the line somewhere.

Hopefully, this post will serve as a motivation for the reader to find out more about Tal and to look for other wonderful Tal gems for themselves. Now, without further ado, let’s dive into the magical world of the magician from Riga.

 Mikhail Tal – Alexander Tolush, USSR Championship, 1957.

A very one-sided stomp of the King’s Indian Defence with the White pieces. Perhaps not the most spectacular game, but very instructive and a good introduction to the Tal style.

Mikhail Tal – Alexander Koblents, Riga, 1957.

A mind-boggling Sicilian skirmish against his own coach Alexander Koblents. One of those typical Tal games that makes your head dizzy with all the possibilities, tactics and reach ideas.

Milko Bobotsov – Mikhail Tal, World Championship U26, 1958.

A remarkable positional queen sacrifice in the Saemisch King’s Indian that has since become more-or-less standard. Not the typical Tal game, but a very beautiful one nevertheless.

Mikhail Tal – Vasily Smyslov, Candidates Tournament, 1959.

The famous clash against Vasily Smyslov from 1959. candidates where Tal managed to “trick” his very experienced opponent and defeat him in just 26 moves, with the help of some very exciting and flashy tactical shots.

Mikhail Tal – Mikhail Botvinnik, World Championship 1960., Game 1

The first game of the Tal’s 1960 World Championship Match against Botvinnik and the only instance in that match where Botvinnik dared to venture the French Defence.

Mikhail Botvinnik – Mikhail Tal, World Championship 1960., Game 6

Another very famous and celebrated game, in which Tal went for the speculative piece sacrifice in the King’s Indian which completely rattled the Patriarch.

Mikhail Tal – Hans-Joachim Hecht, Varna, 1962.

A famous game featuring a spectacular queen’s sacrifice, during which Miguel Najdorf allegedly kissed Tal after the latter made the tremendous 19.exf6 move!

Mikhail Tal – Lajos Portisch, Candidates Quarterfinal, 1965., Game 2

Another game with a very high competitive significance – played at the Quarterfinal Candidates match against Lajos Portisch – and another one of those amazing Tal attacks that makes you smile :).

Mikhail Tal -Michael Stean, Alekhine Memorial, 1975.

A very instructive and also attractive game where Tal displayed his understanding of the White side of the Tarrasch Defence, apart from the usual genius tactical stuff.

Mikhail Tal – Johann Hjartarson, Reykjavik, 1987.

Last but not least – a sort of swansong game by Mikhail Tal against Johann Hjartarson, during which he displayed a masterful understanding of the Ruy Lopez structures and topped it with a spectacular sacrificial finish.

The post Mikhail Tal Best Games appeared first on Chessentials.

Great Female Players

Question 1

Today is Valentine’s Day and is there a better way to celebrate the occasion but by giving spotlight to chess players that are often not given the credit they deserve – (great) female chess players.

In that context, it is virtually impossible to have a conversation without talking about the Polgar family, which yielded three great chess players and the greatest female chess player that ever lived. For starters, we will be asking you for the names of the three Polgar sisters that shook the chess world and also for the name of the father of the Polgar family, who was the man behind this “project”.

Question 2

Even though the Polgar sisters broke many boundaries and became first in many regards, they weren’t the first women players to be awarded the title of Grandmaster.

This honor was awarded to one of their predecessors – a famous Georgian player who was also the fifth women chess champion. She was granted the title after scoring “only” two grandmaster norms in 23 games but being awarded the title by FIDE due to her outstanding performance at the Lone Pine tournament in 1977.

For half a point, we ask you:

a) The name of the afore-mentioned Georgian player?
b) The name of the female player who became the first Grandmaster in a more “conventional” way, scoring three norms and exceeding 2500.

Question 3

Since we already mentioned Female World Chess Championship:

a) Which female chess player, born in Russia to a Czechoslovakian father and English mother, was the first-ever female player to compete with male players in top tournaments and the first-ever Women World Chess Champion, capturing the title in 1927 and defending it further 6 times with a whopping score of +78=4-1?

b) Which female chess player from Germany was her World Championship challenger in the first-ever Women World Chess Championship matches held in 1934 and 1937?

Question 4

It is well known that Robert James Fischer was very dismissive toward women chess – he allegedly claimed he could give a knight odds to any women chess player of his time.
There is also evidence he has been particularly dismissive toward his contemporary who held the title of the Women US Chess Champion from 1959-1962 and who became famous after becoming the first-ever chess player to appear on the cover of Sports Illustrated in 1961 – almost a decade before Fischer himself appeared on the front page of the very same magazine.

For half a point, we ask you for her name.

Question 5

To conclude this section, let’s get back to the present. For half a point, we ask you:

a) Who is the current nr. 1 on the female rating list if we know she has been the leading female player for almost a decade (ever since Judit Polgar’s retirement) and if we know that she is currently inactive in the chess world because she devoted herself to her studies at the University of Oxford?

b) Which young Russian chess player, which narrowly lost the most recent Women’s World Championship Match in January 2020, is currently the 2nd highest rated women in the world?

c) Which Chinese chess player – currently the 4th highest rated woman in the world –  beat the Russian chess player from b) in their 2020 World Championship match, thus retaining the title of the Women Chess Champion which she has been a proud owner since 2018?

Know Thy Classics

In this section, we will provide you with 5 famous chess positions arising from (recent and less recent) classic chess games. For 0.5 points, we seek:

• The name of the players involved in the game
• The move played in the game

Position #1 – Budapest 2003, White to move

Position #2 – St. Petersburg 1896, Black to move

Position #3 – London 1883, White to move

Position #4 – New York, 1856, Black to move

Position #5 – Hoogovens Wijk aan Zee, White to move

Famous Chess Books

Question #1

Apart from being THE greatest player of all time (sorry Fischer fans), Garry Kasparov has also been a prolific writer throughout his career. Already in the 80s, he published several books. But only later in his career did he get wide recognition for his ambitious series of books devoted to chess history. Even though the follow ups Garry Kasparov On Modern Chess and Garry Kasparov on Garry Kasparov were fairly successful, the first series of books devoted to great players and World Champions from the past was the most prominent one. For half a point, we ask you:

A) The name of this book series?
B) How many books does this series consist of?

Question #2

Garry Kasparov is not the only World Champion who was a prolific writer. Mikhail Tal was not only a very gifted tactician, but also a very prolific and entertaining writer, who managed to infuse his wit and humour into a number of chess books.

Tal has written around 10 chess books. For half a point, we ask you to write the names of two of them.

Question #3

We are still in the domain of books written by World Champions. Two of the virtually most famous chess books of all time bear the name of the American genius Robert James Fischer. For half a point:

a) The name of his famous book in which he analyzed a number of his own games in great detail?

b) The name of the book he c-author by Stuart Margulies and Donn Mosenfelder, aimed at beginners. This book was one of the best-selling chess books of all time, with over one million copies sold.

Question #4

Chess books are not only written by Chess World Champions but also ABOUT Chess World Champions. For half a point, we ask you to name the author of the following renowned chess books, both published relatively recently:

A) Chess Duels: My Games with the World Champions

B) The World Champions I Knew (Hint: This book was recapped by the author of these lines and Ben Johnson in an episode of the Perpetual Chess podcast)

Question #5

Last but not least – even though the book Zürich 1953, devoted to the Candidates tournament in Zürich in 1953 (quite surprisingly) is one of the most famous chess books of all time. Even though it was not authored by a World Champion, its author was a reasonably strong player – a World Championship Candidate who barely missed becoming the World Champion himself, drawing his match in Moscow against great Mikhail Botvinnik 12-12 (allowing Botvinnik to keep the title).

For half a point:

a) Who is the author/chess player?

b) When was the afore-mentioned match against Botvinnik played (year)?

Who said it?

In this section, we will provide you with 6 famous/funny chess quotes. Your task is simple – for 0.5 points per quote, guess the player/person who said it.

Quote #1:

“Chess, like love, like music, has the power to make men happy.”

Quote #2:

“Play the opening like a book, the middlegame like a magician, and the endgame like a machine.”

Quote #3:

“Some sacrifices are sound, the rest are mine.”

Quote #4:

“Not all artists are chess players, but all chess players are artists.”

Quote #5:

“This may come as a little surprise, but may I introduce my bamboo stick.”

Quote #6:

“Chess doesn’t drive people mad, it keeps mad people sane.”

In Chronological Order?

In this section, we will provide you with 2 questions consisting of chess historical lists. Your task is to order them in Chronological order (from the oldest to the newest). 1 point per chronology.

In Chronological Order #1

Order the World Champions: Tal, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Petrosian, Spassky

In Chronological Order #2

Order the FIDE World Champions: Anand, Ponomariov, Karpov, Kasimdzhanov, Khalifman

In Chronological Order #3

Order the female World Chess Champions: Nona Gaprindashvili, Lyudmila Rudenko, Xie Jun, Maia Chiburdanidze

Guess The Player

In the final section of the quiz, we will provide you with 5 pictures of famous chess players and 5 edited excerpts from Wikipedia bios of famous chess players.

For half a point, you have to guess the player on the basis of the photo/bio.

Guess The Player #1

__________ (born 31 March 1987) is an Indian chess player who is also reigning women’s world rapid champion. In 2002, she became the youngest woman ever to achieve the title of Grandmaster at the age of 15 years, 1 month, 27 days […]. In October 2007, _________ became the second female player, after Polgár, to exceed the 2600 Elo rating mark, being rated 2606

Guess The Player #2

________________(born December 31, 1980) is an American chess player, poker player, commentator and writer. She is a two-time United States Women’s Champion and has the FIDE title of Woman Grandmaster. _________ is the author of the books Chess Bitchand Play Like a Girl and co-author of Marcel Duchamp: The Art of Chess. She is the Women’s Program Director at US Chess, MindSports Ambassador for PokerStars and a board member of the World Chess Hall of Fame in Saint Louis.

Guess The Player #3

__________________(Russian: _____________; born 17 June 1976) is a Russianchess grandmaster and an eight-time Russian Chess Champion who now frequently commentates on chess. In his free time, he loves playing Hearthstone, making self-deprecating remarks and analyzing the Grünfeld defence.

Guess The Player #4

_____________ was a Soviet and Russian chess player and world-class grandmaster at his peak. He won the Soviet Championship twice (in 1955 and 1979) and was a Candidate for the World Championship on six occasions (1953, 1956, 1962, 1965, 1968, and 1971).
He won four Ukrainian SSR Championship titles (in 1950, 1957, 1958, and 1959) and shared first in the 1991 World Seniors’ Championship, winning the title outright in 1992.

Guess The Player #5

__________is a Soviet-born Americanchess grandmaster, and a five-time U.S. champion.
__________ reached the final of the FIDE World Chess Championship 1996 at the age of 22, and reached a ranking of fourth in the world rankings in 1995. He played almost no FIDE-rated games between 1997 and late 2004.
__________ won the Chess World Cup 2007. This earned him a Candidates Match against Veselin Topalov, which he lost. _________ also competed in the Candidates Tournament in 2011, losing to Boris Gelfand.

Guess The Player #6

Guess The Player #7 and #8

Guess The Player #9

Guess The Player #10

Answers

Great Female Players

Question 1: Sofia, Zsuzsa (Susan), Judit, Laszlo

Question 2: Nona Gaprindashvili, Susan Polgar

Question 3: Vera Menchik, Sonja Graf

Question 4: Lisa Lane

Question 5: Hou Yifan, Alexandra Goryachkina, Ju Wenjun

Know Thy Classics

Position 1: a) 18. Rh7+; b) Judit Polgar, Ferenc Berkes

   [Event "Budapest Hunguest Hotels"]  [Site "Budapest"]  [Date "2003.04.18"]  [Round "7"]  [White "Polgar, Judit"]  [Black "Berkes, Ferenc"]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "C13"]  [WhiteElo "2715"]  [BlackElo "2578"]  [Annotator "Finkel,A"]  [SetUp "1"]  [FEN "1r1q1r2/pbpnbpk1/1p2p1p1/6P1/3PBQP1/5N2/PPP2P2/2KR3R w - - 0 18"]  [PlyCount "13"]  [EventDate "2003.04.11"]  [EventType "tourn"]  [EventRounds "9"]  [EventCountry "HUN"]  [EventCategory "17"]  [SourceTitle "CBM 095"]  [Source "ChessBase"]  [SourceDate "2003.07.25"]  [SourceVersion "1"]  [SourceVersionDate "2003.07.25"]  [SourceQuality "1"]   {[#]} 18. Rh7+ $1 Kxh7 (18... Kg8 19. Rdh1 f5 20. gxf6 Bxf6 21. Rh8+ Bxh8 22.  Rxh8+ Kxh8 23. Qh6+ Kg8 24. Qxg6+ Kh8 25. Qh7#) 19. Qh2+ Kg8 20. Rh1 Bxg5+ 21.  Nxg5 Qxg5+ 22. f4 Qxf4+ 23. Qxf4 Bxe4 24. Qxe4 1-0   

Position 2: a) 18… Ra3!!; b) Harry Nelson Pillsbury – Emmanuel Lasker

   [Event "St Petersburg Four Masters"]  [Site "St Petersburg"]  [Date "1896.01.04"]  [Round "4.1"]  [White "Pillsbury, Harry Nelson"]  [Black "Lasker, Emanuel"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "D50"]  [Annotator "Kasparov,G"]  [SetUp "1"]  [FEN "2r2rk1/pp3pp1/4bb1p/q2p1P1Q/3P4/2N5/PP4PP/1K1R1B1R b - - 0 17"]  [PlyCount "31"]  [EventDate "1895.12.13"]  [EventType "tourn"]  [EventRounds "18"]  [EventCountry "RUS"]  [SourceTitle "Tournaments"]  [Source "ChessBase"]  [SourceDate "2004.03.11"]  [SourceVersion "1"]  [SourceVersionDate "2004.03.11"]  [SourceQuality "1"]   {[#] The American Harry Nelson Pillsbury was one of the brightest stars to  ever sparkle in the chess firmament. He never played in a world championship  match, but for a year he was considered the future of the game. His  sensational victory in his international debut at the Hastings Christmas  tournament 1895/96, ahead of the newly crowned world champion Lasker, won him  a place amongst the very best players. At the time there was an uncertainty  about the true hierarchy at the top of the chess world, which made new  contests inevitable. To clarify the situation five of the best players in the  world were invited to a tournament in St. Petersburg in 1896: Lasker, Steinitz,  Pillsbury, Chigorin and Tarrasch (at the last moment Tarrasch cancelled his  attendance because of his duties as a medical practitioner). Each player  played six games against each of the others. After three rounds Pillsbury was  in the lead and Lasker was second, but even he was badly losing his  micro-match against Pillsbury 2 1/2 : 1/2. It was only due to Steinitz'  successful performance against the leader that Lasker managed to remain in  contention, just one point behind Pillsbury. The following game was played in  the fourth round. If Pillsbury would win, the outcome of the tournament would  be more or less clear. And then the chess world would call into question the  legitimacy of Lasker's title, forcing him to play a new match for the world  championship with this young energetic opponent under very unfavourable  circumstances.} 17... Rxc3 $3 18. fxe6 $2 {Objectively Objektiv war} (18. bxc3  Qxc3 19. Qf3 {was better, but Pillsbury doesn't yet understand why he should  head for a worse endgame. besser, aber Pillsbury versteht noch nicht, warum er  sich mit einem schlechteren Endspiel zufrieden geben soll.}) 18... Ra3 $3 {  This paradoxical rook sacrifice drives White's king out into the fight, where  he will meet his destiny. Dieses paradoxe Turmopfer zwingt den weißen König  aufs Schlachtfeld, wo er seinem Schicksal erliegen wird.} 19. exf7+ {Lasker's  ingenious idea proved to be correct in all variations: Es stellt sich heraus,  daß Laskers geistreicher Plan in allen Varianten korrekt ist:} (19. bxa3 Qb6+  20. Ka1 (20. Kc2 Rc8+ 21. Kd2 Qxd4+ 22. Ke1 (22. Bd3 Rc2+ $3 23. Kxc2 Qb2#)  22... Qc3+ 23. Ke2 Qc2+ 24. Rd2 (24. Ke3 Bg5+) 24... Qe4+ 25. Kf2 Bd4+ 26. Kg3  Rc3+ {etc.}) 20... Bxd4+ 21. Rxd4 Qxd4+ 22. Kb1 fxe6 23. Be2 Qe4+ 24. Ka1 Rf2 {  with a decisive attack mit entscheidendem Angriff.}) ({Vielleicht sieht} 19. e7  $5 {looks stronger, but it doesn't break the co-ordination of Black's pieces:  stärker aus, aber auch dieser Zug kann nicht die Koordination der schwarzen  Figuren unterbrechen:} Re8 $1 (19... Rc8 $4 20. Qf5 $1 {and the queen comes  back to the defence und die Dame eilt zur Verteidigung zurück.}) 20. bxa3 Qb6+  21. Kc2 Rc8+ 22. Kd2 Bxd4 {and after this deadly quiet move White is  defenceless, e.g. und nach diesem tödlich-stillen Zug ist Weiß hilflos, z.B.}  23. Ke2 Qe6+ 24. Kf3 Qe3+ 25. Kg4 g6 $1 26. Qxd5 h5+ {with mate to follow. It  would be interesting to know whether a computer can come close to executing  such a great combination. mit anschließendem Matt. Es wäre interessant, zu  erfahren, ob die heutigen Computer eine so großartige Kombination berechnen  können.}) 19... Rxf7 20. bxa3 Qb6+ 21. Bb5 $1 {The best chance. Die beste  Chance.} (21. Ka1 Bxd4+) (21. Kc2 Rc7+ {both lose as above. verlieren wie  zuvor.}) 21... Qxb5+ 22. Ka1 Rc7 $2 {A pity. After spending so much energy and  creativity to reach this position Lasker, under heavy time pressure, misses  the simple win Schade! Lasker hat so viel Energie und Kreativität verbraucht,  um diese Stellung zu erreichen. In schwerer Zeitnot verpaßt er einen einfachen  Gewinn:} (22... Qc4 23. Qg4 Re7 $1 {threatening Re4 and Re2, e.g. mit den  Drohungen Te4 und Te2, z.B.} 24. Rhe1 Bxd4+ 25. Qxd4 Rxe1 26. Qxc4 (26. Qd2  Rxd1+ 27. Qxd1) 26... Rxd1+) 23. Rd2 Rc4 24. Rhd1 $2 {Losing again. Verliert  wieder.} (24. Re1 $1 {would lead to a nice draw: hätte zu einem schönen Remis  geführt:} Qa5 $1 (24... Qc6 25. Qe8+) 25. Re8+ Kh7 26. Qf5+ g6 27. Re7+ $3 (27.  Qxf6 $4 Rc1+ 28. Kb2 Qc3#) 27... Bxe7 28. Qf7+ Kh8 29. Qe8+ Kg7 30. Qxe7+ {  with perpetual check. mit Dauerschach.}) 24... Rc3 $2 {A very serious mistake  that could change everything dramatically Ein sehr ernster Fehler, der alles  dramatisch verändert. Nach} (24... Qc6 $1 {gives Black an easy win. hätte  Schwarz leicht gewinnen können.}) 25. Qf5 (25. Re1 $1 {was more energetic,  forcing Black to retreat: war aktiver, Schwarz wäre gezwungen, den Rückzug  anzutreten:} Rc8 {and White has a clear advantage. und Weiß hat einen klaren  Vorteil.}) 25... Qc4 26. Kb2 $2 {[#] Lasker's time trouble is making Pillsbury  nervous! He feels that his opponent has lost the thread of the game, but he  himself cannot keep up with the pace. Laskers Zeitnotprobleme machen Pillsbury  nervös! Er fühlt, daß der Gegner den Faden verloren hat, aber er kann selbst  das Tempo nicht durchhalten.} (26. Kb1 $1 {would pose serious problems for  Black, e.g. hätte Schwarz ernsthafte Probleme bereitet, z.B.} Rxa3 27. Rc1 $1 {  and chess history would have gone a different route. und die Schachgeschichte  hätte einen anderen Weg eingeschlagen.}) 26... Rxa3 $3 {In the magical world  of chess lightening can hit the same place twice! I wonder if Pillsbury could  believe his eyes - here the horror comes again! In der magischen Welt des  Schachs kann der Blitz doch zweimal an gleicher Stelle einschlagen. Ich glaube,  daß Pillsbury seinen Augen nicht traute – das Gespenst auf a3 ist  wiedergekehrt.} 27. Qe6+ Kh7 28. Kxa3 $4 {Exhausted by the black hurricane  Pillsbury succumbs to a mating threat. Vom schwarzen Sturm erschöpft, tappt  Pillsbury in ein Mattnetz hinein.} (28. Kb1 {was also losing: führte auch zum  Verlust:} Bxd4 $1 29. Qf5+ g6 $1 30. Qd7+ Bg7 {but the immediate}) ({aber  sofortiges} 28. Qf5+ $1 {would have saved half a point: hätte den halben Punkt  gerettet:} Kh8 29. Kb1 $1 Rxa2 $1 (29... Bxd4 30. Qf8+ Kh7 31. Qxa3) 30. Rxa2  Qb3+ 31. Kc1 Bg5+ (31... Qxa2 32. Qc8+ Kh7 33. Qc2+) 32. Rad2 Qc3+ 33. Qc2 Qa1+  34. Qb1 Qc3+ {and draw. und remis.}) 28... Qc3+ 29. Ka4 b5+ $1 {The final  touch. Das I-Tüpfelchen.} 30. Kxb5 Qc4+ 31. Ka5 Bd8+ 32. Qb6 Bxb6# {mate ended  this fascinating human drama. "Too many mistakes" you say? Please don't rush  to write off this game. Remember its unique historical importance! That day  Caissa chose Lasker, and as we know today, the chess goddess did not err. Her  cruel decision marked a fork in the lievs of both players. Lasker, inspired by  this victory, won the tournament convincingly. Later that year he crushed  Steinitz in a rematch and kept his title for 25 more years! Pillsbury, after  the above disaster, collapsed and lost five games out of the remaining eight,  ending up third behind Steinitz. He never achieved the same peak of playing  strength as in that magnificent year and died eight years later at the age of  34. Who know how often Harry Nelson Pillsbury remembered that traumatic day in  St. Petersburg and the chances he had missed - chances that would have changed  his entire life and the course of chess history. womit ein faszinierendes  menschliches Drama zu Ende ging. "Zu viele Fehler" sagen Sie? Bitte schreiben  Sie nicht diese Partie zu schnell ab. Denken Sie an ihre historische  Bedeutung! An jenem Tag entschied sich Caissa für Lasker, und, wie wir heute  wissen, irrte die Schachgöttin nicht. Ihre vielleicht etwas grausame Wahl  markierte eine Wende im Leben der beiden Spieler. Lasker, von seinem Sieg in  dieser Partie inspiriert, gewann das Turnier in überzeugender Manier. Später  im gleichen Jahr zerschmetterte er Steinitz im Rückkampf um die  Weltmeisterschaft. Er behielt den Titel für weitere 25 Jahre! Pillsbury  dagegen brach nach diesem Desaster förmlich zusammen, verlor fünf von den  nächsten acht Partien und beendete das Turnier als Dritter hinter Steinitz. Er  konnte nie wieder den gleichen Gipfel der Spielstärke erklimmen wie in diesem  glorreichen Jahr. Er starb acht Jahre später im Alter von 34. Wer kann wissen,  wie oft er diesen traumatischen Tag in St. Petersburg durchlebt hat und dabei  an die verstrichenen Chancen denken mußte – Chancen, die sein Leben so  gründlich geändert hätten.} 0-1   

Position 3: a) 28. Qb4! b) Johannes Zukertort – James Henry Blackburne

   [Event "London International Masters"]  [Site "London"]  [Date "1883.05.05"]  [Round "6.2"]  [White "Zukertort, Johannes Hermann"]  [Black "Blackburne, Joseph Henry"]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "A13"]  [Annotator "ChessBase"]  [SetUp "1"]  [FEN "2r4k/pb2q2P/1p6/3Pp3/4p3/1P2R3/PBrQ2PP/5RK1 w - - 0 28"]  [PlyCount "11"]  [EventDate "1883.04.26"]  [EventType "tourn"]  [EventRounds "26"]  [EventCountry "ENG"]  [SourceTitle "HCL"]  [Source "ChessBase"]  [SourceDate "1999.07.01"]  [SourceVersion "2"]  [SourceVersionDate "1999.07.01"]  [SourceQuality "1"]   {[#]} 28. Qb4 $1 $18 R8c5 29. Rf8+ Kxh7 30. Qxe4+ Kg7 31. Bxe5+ Kxf8 32. Bg7+  Kg8 33. Qxe7 1-0   

Position 4: a) 17… Be6!!; b) Donald Byrne – Robert James Fischer

   [Event "New York Rosenwald-03"]  [Site "New York"]  [Date "1956.10.17"]  [Round "8"]  [White "Byrne, Donald"]  [Black "Fischer, Robert James"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "D97"]  [Annotator "Mueller,Karsten"]  [SetUp "1"]  [FEN "r3r1k1/pp3pbp/1qp3p1/2B5/2BP2b1/Q1n2N2/P4PPP/3R1K1R b - - 0 17"]  [PlyCount "49"]  [EventDate "1956.10.07"]  [EventType "tourn"]  [EventRounds "11"]  [EventCountry "USA"]  [SourceTitle "100 Jahre Schach"]  [Source "ChessBase"]  [SourceDate "2000.04.19"]  [SourceVersion "1"]  [SourceVersionDate "2000.04.19"]  [SourceQuality "1"]   {[#] Der Aufstieg von Robert James - genannt Bobby - Fischer bis zum Gewinn  der Weltmeisterschaft gegen Spasskij 1972 in Reykjavik löste weltweit einen  großen Schachboom aus. Er hatte sich bereits in frühester Jugend dem  königlichen Spiel verschrieben und arbeitete sehr hart an seinem Erfolg. "Im  November 1956 erschien dann Fischers Name zum ersten Mal in den bedeutendsten  Schachzeitschriften der Welt, als er Donald Byrne ... in einem Spiel großer  Klarheit und Brillanz schlug. Hans Kmoch nannte es in seinem "Chess Review"  "das Spiel des Jahrhunderts" und schrieb: "...ein erstaunliches Meisterstück  im Kombinationsspiel, von einem dreizehnjährigen Jungen gegen einen mächtigen  Gegner geführt, das den schönsten Großtaten in der uns bekannten  Schachgeschichte gleichkommt..." (Gligoric in "Fischer-Spasskij", S. 160f).}  17... Be6 $3 {dieser Läuferrückzug ist die eigentliche Pointe der ganzen  Kombination.} ({Nach} 17... Nb5 $2 {hätte Weiß indessen das Blatt zu seinen  Gunsten wenden können:} 18. Bxf7+ $1 Kh8 (18... Kxf7 $2 19. Qb3+ Be6 20. Ng5+  Kg8 (20... Kf6 $2 21. Qf3+ Bf5 22. Nxh7+ Kf7 23. Bxb6 $18) 21. Nxe6 Nxd4 22.  Nxd4+ Qxb3 23. Nxb3 $18 {(Fischer)}) 19. Bxb6 Nxa3 20. Bxe8 $14 {(Shipov)}) 18.  Bxb6 $6 {danach spielt sich die Stellung für Schwarz leicht. Rückzüge des  Läufers c4 waren zäher.} (18. Bxe6 $2 {führt zu einem sehr hübschen erstickten  Matt:} Qb5+ 19. Kg1 Ne2+ 20. Kf1 Ng3+ 21. Kg1 Qf1+ 22. Rxf1 Ne2#) (18. Qxc3  Qxc5 19. dxc5 Bxc3 20. Bxe6 Rxe6 $19) (18. Bd3 $5 Nb5 19. Qb4 Qd8 $19) (18. Be2  $5 Nb5 19. Qb4 Qd8 20. a4 a5 21. Qb2 Nd6 $19) (18. d5 $2 Bxd5 19. Rxd5 $2 Qb1+  20. Ne1 Qxe1#) 18... Bxc4+ 19. Kg1 Ne2+ 20. Kf1 Nxd4+ 21. Kg1 (21. Rd3 $2 axb6  22. Qc3 Nxf3 $19 23. Qxc4 $2 Re1#) 21... Ne2+ 22. Kf1 Nc3+ 23. Kg1 axb6 24. Qb4  (24. Qd6 Rad8 (24... Nxd1 25. Qxd1 Rxa2 $19) 25. Qxd8 Ne2+ 26. Kf1 Nd4+ 27. Kg1  Rxd8 $19) 24... Ra4 25. Qxb6 (25. Qd6 Nxd1 26. Qxd1 Rxa2 27. h3 Ra1 $19) 25...  Nxd1 $19 26. h3 Rxa2 27. Kh2 Nxf2 28. Re1 Rxe1 29. Qd8+ Bf8 30. Nxe1 Bd5 31.  Nf3 Ne4 32. Qb8 b5 33. h4 h5 34. Ne5 Kg7 35. Kg1 Bc5+ 36. Kf1 (36. Kh1 Ng3+ 37.  Kh2 Nf1+ 38. Kh3 Bxg2#) (36. Kh2 Bd6 $19) 36... Ng3+ 37. Ke1 Bb4+ 38. Kd1 Bb3+  39. Kc1 Ne2+ 40. Kb1 Nc3+ 41. Kc1 Rc2# {Dieser Sieg bewirkt, daß Fischer im  Rosenwaldturnier mit 4.5/11 am Ende den achten Platz teilt, für einen  Dreizehnjährigen zweifellos ein sehr großer Erfolg. Quellen: "Das große  Schachbuch", Martin Beheim Schwarzbach, Droemer Verlag, S. 214.  "Fischer-Spasskij, Schachmatch des Jahrhunderts", Svetozar Gligoric, Droemer  Knaur Verlag 1972. Kommentar von Shipov aus der ChessBase MEGABASE 99 (MCL 07)}  0-1   

Position 5: a) 24. Rxd4! b) Garry Kasparov – Veselin Topalov

   [Event "Hoogovens"]  [Site "Wijk aan Zee"]  [Date "1999.01.20"]  [Round "4"]  [White "Kasparov, Garry"]  [Black "Topalov, Veselin"]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "B07"]  [WhiteElo "2812"]  [BlackElo "2700"]  [Annotator "Stohl,I"]  [SetUp "1"]  [FEN "b2r3r/k4p1p/p2q1np1/NppP4/3p1Q2/P4PPB/1PP4P/1K1RR3 w - - 0 24"]  [PlyCount "41"]  [EventDate "1999.01.16"]  [EventType "tourn"]  [EventRounds "13"]  [EventCountry "NED"]  [EventCategory "17"]  [SourceTitle "CBM 069"]  [Source "ChessBase"]  [SourceDate "1999.04.01"]  [SourceVersion "1"]  [SourceVersionDate "1999.04.01"]  [SourceQuality "1"]   {[#] My comments to this fantastic game will be limited to some moments of  interest, which I haven't seen highlighted before in the earlier published  sources (Internet, various magazines etc.)} 24. Rxd4 $1 (24. Qxd6 $2 Rxd6 25.  b4 cxb4 26. axb4 Nxd5 $17) (24. Nc6+ Bxc6 25. dxc6 Qxf4 26. Re7+ (26. gxf4 Nd5  $5 $15) 26... Kb6 27. gxf4 Nd5 28. Rxf7 Rdf8 $15) 24... cxd4 $2 {Ftacnik: 'It  should be noted, that 24...Kb6! would most certainly save the game for black,  but we would be robbed of some fascinating lines. '} (24... Kb6 $142 $1 $11) (  24... Bxd5 $5 25. Rxd5 $1 Nxd5 (25... Qxf4 26. Rxd8 Qh6 (26... Qc7 27. Rxh8  Qxa5 28. Re7+ $18) 27. Re7+ Kb6 28. b4 $1 $18) 26. Qxf7+ Nc7 27. Re6 Rd7 (27...  Qd1+ 28. Ka2 Rd7 29. Re7 $16) 28. Rxd6 Rxf7 29. Nc6+ Ka8 30. f4 $44) 25. Re7+  $3 {The real point of the combination.} (25. Qxd4+ $2 Qb6 $1 26. Re7+ Nd7 27.  Rxd7+ (27. Qc3 Qg1+) 27... Rxd7 28. Qxh8 Rxd5 $19) 25... Kb6 (25... Qxe7 $2 26.  Qxd4+ $18) (25... Kb8 26. Qxd4 Nd7 27. Bxd7 Bxd5 28. c4 $1 $18) 26. Qxd4+ Kxa5  (26... Qc5 27. Qxf6+ Qd6 28. Be6 $3 Bxd5 29. b4 $18) 27. b4+ Ka4 28. Qc3 $5 {  This shows Kasparov's combination was more intuitive, than arithmetically  exact. Ftacnik: 'It seems, that white could have won more easily with the help  of a fine move 28.Ra7!!'} ({A simpler and even more beautiful win was found by  (I think) Kavalek:} 28. Ra7 $1 {/\} Bb7 (28... Nxd5 {Ftacnik} 29. Rxa6+ $3 Qxa6  30. Qb2 Nc3+ 31. Qxc3 Bd5 32. Kb2 Qe6 33. Bxe6 fxe6 34. Qb3+ $1 Bxb3 35. cxb3#)  29. Rxb7 Qxd5 (29... Nxd5 30. Bd7 $3 Ra8 (30... Rxd7 31. Qb2 Nc3+ 32. Qxc3 Qd1+  33. Kb2 Rd3 34. Ra7 $1 $18) 31. Bxb5+ axb5 32. Ra7+ Qa6 33. Qxd5 Qxa7 34. Qb3#)  30. Rb6 $1 $18 (30. Rb6 Ra8 (30... a5 31. Ra6 Ra8 32. Qe3 $3 Rxa6 (32... Rhe8  33. Rxa8 Rxa8 34. Kb2 $18) 33. Kb2 axb4 34. axb4 Kxb4 35. Qc3+ Ka4 36. Qa3#)  31. Qxf6 a5 32. Bf1 $18)) 28... Qxd5 29. Ra7 Bb7 $8 30. Rxb7 (30. Qc7 $2 Qd1+  $11) 30... Qc4 (30... Rhe8 31. Rb6 (31. Ra7 $2 Rd6 32. Kb2 Qe5 $19) 31... Ra8  32. Bf1 $3 $18 {/\Rd6}) 31. Qxf6 Kxa3 {Now White wins by force.} (31... Rd1+  $142 32. Kb2 Ra8 (32... Qd4+ 33. Qxd4 Rxd4 34. Rxf7 Rd6 35. Re7 {/\Be6}) 33.  Qb6 Qd4+ (33... a5 34. Bd7 $1 Rd5 35. Qe3 axb4 36. Ra7+ $18) 34. Qxd4 Rxd4 35.  Rxf7 a5 36. Be6 axb4 37. Bb3+ Ka5 38. axb4+ Rxb4 (38... Kb6 39. Rxh7 {and with  3 pawns for the exchange White gradually wins.}) 39. c3 $16 {_|_R}) 32. Qxa6+  Kxb4 33. c3+ $1 Kxc3 (33... Kb3 34. Qa2+ Kxc3 35. Qb2+ Kd3 36. Re7 $1 $18) 34.  Qa1+ Kd2 $8 (34... Kb4 35. Qb2+ Ka5 (35... Qb3 36. Rxb5+) 36. Qa3+ Qa4 37. Ra7+  $18) 35. Qb2+ Kd1 (35... Ke3 $2 36. Re7+) (35... Ke1 36. Re7+ Kd1 37. Bf1 $1  $18 {is the same as in the game.}) 36. Bf1 $1 Rd2 $8 37. Rd7 $1 {Ftacnik: 'The  final trick, but white is completely right, the game is finally over.'} Rxd7  38. Bxc4 bxc4 $8 39. Qxh8 Rd3 (39... Rb7+ 40. Ka2 Kc2 41. Qd4 $18) 40. Qa8 c3  41. Qa4+ Ke1 (41... Kd2 42. Qc2+) 42. f4 f5 43. Kc1 Rd2 44. Qa7 1-0   

Famous Chess Books

Question 1: a) My Great Predecessors, b) 5

Question 2: Tal – Botvinnik, 1960, World Championship: Petrosian vs Spassky, The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal, Study Chess with Tal, Tal’s Winning Chess Combinations, Montreal 1979: The tournament of stars, Attack with Mikhail Tal, The Chess Calculator’s confession, Chess Scandals: The 1978 World Chess Championship

Question 3: a) My 60 Memorable Games; b) Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess

Question 4: a) Yaasser Seirawan; b) Genna Sosonko

Question 5: a)David Bronstein; b) 1951

Who Said It?

Quote 1: Siegbert Tarrasch

Quote 2: Rudolf Spielmann

Quote 3: Mikhail Tal

Quote 4: Marcel Duchamp

Quote 5: Yasser Seirawan

Quote 6: William “Bill” Hartston

In Chronological Order

Chronology #1:

Botvinnik (1948-1957)
Smyslov (1957-1958)
Tal (1960-1961)
Petrossian (1962-1969)
Spassky (1969-1972)

Chronology #2:

Karpov (1993-1999)
Khalifman (1999-2000)
Anand (2000-2002)
Ponomariov (2002-2004)
Kasimdzhanov (2004-2005)

Chronology #3:

Lyudmila Rudenko (1950-1953)
Nona Gaprindashvili (1962-1975)
Maia Chiburdanidze (1978-1988)
Xie Jun (1991 – 1996)

Guess The Player

1. Humphy Koneru

2. Jennifer Shahade

3. Peter Svidler

4. Efim Geller

5. Gata Kamsky

6. Alex Yermolinsky

7. Samuel Sevian

8. Greg Shahade

9. Akiba Rubinstein

10. Leonid Stein

Standings

VOD

The post Chessentials Chess Quiz #2 appeared first on Chessentials.

A couple of weeks ago, I stumbled upon a very interesting Quora question titled: “Why has Russian chess faded so badly? They haven’t held the world title for over a dozen years and have only 3 players in the candidates tournament.”

I embarked on writing an answer to it, in which I disputed the very premise of this question, but also tried to offer an explanation why Russia hasn’t had a World Champion for more than a decade.

I was really happy with the final result and considering I am completely incapable of creating novel blog content these days, I’ve decided to replicate yet another Quora answer here, as well

So without further ado, here it comes copy-pasted

Hope you will enjoy it

Warning: Long read about chess history incoming. Read at your own risk!

I have actually made a meme tightly connected to this question quite some time ago – allow me to post it to get everyone’s attention before answering it:

In Soviet Russia, we didn’t have any Norwegian wunderkinds beating our boyz!

Now for real…

This is a great and interesting question, which is very difficult to answer because it is hard to pinpoint one exact reason why Russian/Soviet chessplayers don’t dominate the top of the chess world as they used to in the 2nd half of the 20th century.

Historical events such as the fall of the USSR and the major technological changes that brought to the availability of information (and increased speed of sharing) have had a dramatic impact on the chess world.

It is impossible to talk about Russian chess (or chess of any nation) without taking these social, cultural and technological factors into consideration. Which makes analysis rather complex and demanding.

Even so, I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t at least try. In the course of this answer, I will share some of my own insights and thoughts about how and why Russian/Soviet chess changed in the last 50 years.

I hope you will enjoy it as much as I enjoyed making that meme you can see above.

First of all, I think the premise of the question is too harsh. I wouldn’t say that Russian chess has faded BADLY. According to the federation rankings on the FIDE website, Russia is the country with most Grandmasters, International Masters and Titled players (not to mention those who emigrated to other countries and are still playing).

It is also ranked first by the average rating of the top 10 players.

Therefore, it can still be regarded as the leading chess country in the world.

Also, when you write Russia only has “3 players” in the Candidates tournament, I think you underestimate how tremendous achievement that is (even if one spot was awarded via wildcard).

The qualification process, the level of the opposition and the number of people playing chess have increased exponentially since the 50s and the 60s. 3 players who qualified for the Candidates are in a much higher percentile of best chess players than 3 players who qualified some 50 years ago.

Even if we compare the number of Russian players in 2020 (or 2018) Candidates tournament – 3 – with the number of Soviet players in Candidates tournaments in the past, the difference is not so huge. As an example, I have singled out three editions:

• Budapest 1950

7 Soviet players out of 10 participants (Bronstein, Boleslavsky, Smyslov, Keres, Kotov, Lilienthal, Flohr).¹

Probably not the best argument in my favour, Besides, immediately after the Second World War the hegemony of Soviet players was at its peak.

Probably because Soviet Russia was the winner of the WWII and also the only country which had some sort of “chess scene” developed between the two wars (I read a saying somewhere that Soviet people played chess because they didn’t have anything else to do)

• Curacao 1962

5 Soviet players out of 8 participants (Petrosian, Geller, Keres, Korchnoi, Tal)²

• Candidates Cycle 1970–1972

Additionally, it has to be emphasized that there are major differences between the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation (quite shocking, I know). The majority of the “Soviet” players from the USSR era were not actually Russian players.

For example, in the Budapest Candidates 1950, out of 7 Soviet participants, only Smyslov and Kotov were born in Russia. As for the rest:

• David Bronstein (Ukraine)
• Isaac Boleslavsky (Ukraine)
• Paul Keres (Estonia)
• Andor Lillienthal (Hungary)
• Salo Flohr (CzechoSlovakia)

It was not particularly different in Curacao 1962 – out of 5 Soviet players, only Korchnoi was born in Russia. As for the rest:

• Tigran Petrosian (Armenia)
• Paul Keres (Estonia)
• Efim Geller (Ukraine)
• Mikhail Tal (Latvia)

Finally, the 1970-1972 Candidates matches are not different – once again Korchnoi was the only “pure Russian”, while Petrosian, Geller and Mark Taimainov (born in Kharkiv, Ukraine) were not.

Therefore, there is a major difference in the counting of the Candidates participants because we are basically comparing two different entities – USSR and Russian Federation.

If you applied the same principle to 2018 Candidates, you would get 5 “Soviet” players (Kramnik, Grischuk, Karjakin as pure Russians, Aronian as the Armenian and Mamedyarov as Azeri). ⁴

while in 2020 Candidates, the number would be 4 (Alekseenko, Nepomniachtchi, Grischuk as Russians and Radjabov as Azeri, if you want to count him). ⁵

So long story short, I think it is very debatable whether Russian chess has really declined so badly. However, everything I have written above doesn’t really answer (or explain) the final part of the question – how come we haven’t had a Russian World Chess Champion for more than a decade?

I think it is impossible to answer that question only with facts, so I have to resort to some speculation and qualitative analysis in order to try to explain it.

So first of all, in order to become a World Chess Champion, both hard work and talent are necessary. In my opinion, one of the main reasons why Soviet players were so successful in the past was precisely the “hard work” area.

As mentioned earlier, “chess” was sort of a national sport in the USSR (both before and especially after WWII). Clubs were organized, lectures were held, tournaments were played and the country had a developed chess culture.

More importantly, in an era where it was difficult to obtain information, chess knowledge was available. While other countries haven’t even heard of chess notation, Soviets were printing tournament bulletins’, chess magazines and chess books. It was possible to have a chess coach when the words “chess coach” didn’t even exist in the English language.

Naturally, when such a huge country gets infected by the chess virus and has a large pool of players, talents are bound to come out of the mass. (A similar effect can be observed in table tennis with China). And even if some champions lacked in “hard work” category (Tal, Spassky) or “talent” category (Botvinnik) they were still able to beat their contemporaries.

Put simply, Soviet Russia was much ahead of the rest of the chess world chess wise.

The only one who was able to break their hegemony was Fischer. Even though I often like to (semi-jokingly) bash him, but his legendary dedication, work-ethic and talent managed to surpass the efforts of an enormous collective (even though he was not without any support in later stages of his career, as well).

In a way, Fischer announced what will happen at the turn of the millennium.

Which leads me to the next point.

What changed in the 90s and especially in the 2000s? Well, due to the advance in technology, the world has changed significantly and the playing field has been leveled due to the following:

• Availability and accessibility of knowledge and information – it became easier than ever before to find good resources that help you study the game
• Online playing – in the past, it was very difficult to find an opponent of your own strength (or even someone to play against). Today, it is just a couple of clicks away.
• Online coaching – in the past, it was very difficult to find a competent chess coach (especially for non-USSR citizens). Today with Skype/Zoom and video conferencing, it is not a problem.
• Chess engines – Today every patzer is able to find the objective truth in a certain position. And even though there are dangers of getting too “hooked” on the engine, it has certainly accelerated the progress of players who use them as a proper tool.
• Chess tournaments – In order to improve, it is important to play regularly. Nowadays every “village” has its own Open and one does not need to make a round-trip around Russia to practice the art of playing.

Suddenly, it became possible for highly motivated and talented individuals to “overcame” the system (while being more balanced and less extreme than Fischer). Vishy Anand appeared in the 90s, Veselin Topalov can also arguable be put into this category, while the reigning World Champion – Magnus Carlsen – is probably the best example.

Of course, that is not to say that Russia doesn’t have a system any longer. Due to the heritage and long-standing tradition, they have managed to retain the world number one spot as a country in terms of factors mentioned earlier.

However, it seems to me that the system is only able to take you so far in the modern era where competition is tighter than ever. It seems to me that the system can produce average or even above—average chess players (I am talking 2700-2750 level), but that it is unable to provide that “factor X” required for the World Champion.

Since the world is so fast these days any prodigies keep pushing the boundaries and gaining the GM title at a very young age, I think many other things have to click – how they parents raise them, how they emotionally mature, how they seek and find balance out of chess (and of course, how talented they are), etc.

I think these factors are outside of the system’s reach and that it can only create a nice ground for an individual to prosper.

Not prosper the individual.

(A similar effect can be seen in India, which is able to produce a mass of strong GMs, but only a few of them able to get to the 2700-2750 levels)

To conclude, I’d say that Russian chess has by no means faded so badly, that having 3 Candidates out of 8 in a Candidates tournament is a tremendous achievement and that other factors rather than your nationality are more relevant in order to win the World Chess Championship title.

P.S. Phew, it was a long one. Let me know what you think in the comments – I would like to hear your thoughts on this interesting and complex topic.

The post The Rise and Fall of Soviet Chess? appeared first on Chessentials.