Learn From Mark Dvoretsky Archives - Chessentials https://chessentials.com/category/chess-training/learn-from-mark-dvoretsky/ Chess blog about chess tactics, chess games and chess books Tue, 29 Jan 2019 22:28:12 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0 https://chessentials.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/cropped-vjeks2-2-1-32x32.png Learn From Mark Dvoretsky Archives - Chessentials https://chessentials.com/category/chess-training/learn-from-mark-dvoretsky/ 32 32 Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Seven – Irrational Complications https://chessentials.com/learn-mark-dvoretsky-part-seven-irrational-complications/ https://chessentials.com/learn-mark-dvoretsky-part-seven-irrational-complications/#respond Sun, 24 Dec 2017 20:59:31 +0000 https://chessentials.com/?p=2913 Irrational Complications The following piece of analysis is taken from chapter five of Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual. As customary, Dvoretksy’s introduction follows: This next game was commented upon (quite superficially) by Herman Pilnik in the weekly...

Read More

The post Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Seven – Irrational Complications appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> Irrational Complications

The following piece of analysis is taken from chapter five of Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual.

As customary, Dvoretksy’s introduction follows:

This next game was commented upon (quite superficially) by Herman Pilnik in the weekly 64 (which later became the monthly magazine, 64 – Chess Review), and by Petar Trifunovic in chess Informant #10. A few years later, Adrian Mikhalchishin published a more serious analysis of its short critical stage in Shakhmaty v SSSR, 12/77, but this, too, was far from perfect, which should be no surprisem since the game was clearly out of the control of both players; the outcome had become totally unpredictable. In the end, as they say, the stronger player won, but objectively speaking, the outcome could also have been reversed.

When I first set out to analyze this game, I did not yet employ computer programs. This article, with its analysis, was published on the site ChessCafe.com. As I was preparing this material for the book, I saw that, although I had given, by and large, a correct depiction of the battle, many of the variations required revisiting.

In the preceding chapters, we have dealth with problems having well-defined solutions, which could, in principle, be calculated to the end (although perhaps with great difficulty). But here, the answers to some of the questions could only be obtained by wide-ranging analysis employing computer pgorams – or else, much more quickly, by intuition.

The role played by intuition in chess is enormous. After all, human capacity is not unlimited; decisions must be made in the context of limited thinking time. Therefore, we constantly rely upon intuitive guesses and feelings.

The literature of teachings makes no serious study either of the forms in which intuition appears during the course of battle, or the methods of developing a chessplayer’s intuition. The author’s views on these problems are set out in the article The Development of Chess Intuition, published in SFC-5. Here I should only like to draw the readers’ attention to a few important points, which should help one’s thinking during some of the exercises in this and the following chapters.

1) To reach a decision intuitively does not at all mean working completely without calculation. The task is to analyze the minimum number of the most important variations, and thus to gain an idea of which continuation offers the best prospects. That minimum may vary widely, both in the size of the variations an in their quantity – not only depending on the peculiarities of the position, but also on a player’s personality, experience, playing leve, and calculative and evaluative abilities.
This is why, in my commentary, I rarely draw a sharp boundary between the minimum number of necessary variations and those analytical indicators that do not need studying before making a decision – for different players, that line sometimes turns up in different places. Nevertheless, I try to determine that line (for example, in the Simagin – Leonovich game from the previous chapter, it was the commentary after 29 Bf4! Ba6 30 Rf3!)

2) An intuitive decision must be based, not just on one’s supposiitons about the analytical superiority of this or that line, but also on one’s feelings about the purely practical chances: level of comfort, the complexity of deciding pending problems and the likelihood of making an error, the dangers ahead of both players, etc.

3) The area in which intuition may be useful in chess is a large one, but still not infinite. In many cases, we should not allow ourselves to be swayed by it and must calculate accurately. A chessplayer’s highest mastery consists of employing precisely that method of attaining the truth which is most closely attuned to the current situation – and, where necessary, of skillfully combining them together.

When considering such themes, I usually recall an old Western prayer, which deals with a considerably more widesprend and important problem, but one similarly structrued:

Lord grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.

We shall not be spending too much time on the first part of this game, immersing ourselves in the position only when the decisive events get underway.

Exercise 1

Irrational1

Black to play. What is the best continuation?

Exercise 2

Irrational2

Black to play. White has just sacrificed the rook on f7. Can you find the best continuation?

Exercise 3

Irrational3

Black to play. Decide between Ne6 and bxc4!

Exercise 4

Irrational4

In the game, Quinteros lost quickly after 26 Qh6+. How did Fischer refute this move and what was better alternative for White in the given position?

You will find your answers to the problems below. Due to the length of analysis, I have divided the solution in seven separate parts. Hope you will enjoy it and avoid getting confused.

Solution – part one

Solution – part two

Solution – part three

Solution – part four

Solution – part five

Solution – part six

Solution – part seven

Video of the solution:

The post Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Seven – Irrational Complications appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> https://chessentials.com/learn-mark-dvoretsky-part-seven-irrational-complications/feed/ 0 Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Six – The “Trunk” https://chessentials.com/learn-mark-dvoretsky-part-six-trunk/ https://chessentials.com/learn-mark-dvoretsky-part-six-trunk/#respond Sat, 09 Dec 2017 14:58:25 +0000 https://chessentials.com/?p=2876 The “Trunk” The following exercise is taken from chapter two of Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual. This is what Dvoretsky had to say about this chapter: From our search for brilliant combinations, we turn to the more prosaic, though...

Read More

The post Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Six – The “Trunk” appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> The “Trunk”

The following exercise is taken from chapter two of Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual.

This is what Dvoretsky had to say about this chapter:

From our search for brilliant combinations, we turn to the more prosaic, though no less important issue: calculating combinations accurately.

In his book Think Like a Grandmaster, Alexander Kotov introduced the concept of a “tree of variations”, that being the collection of variations which needs to be analyzed. He also enumerated three kinds of “trees” – the “bare trunk”, the “shrub”, and “variational debris.” In this and the chapters that follow, we will be looking at examples of each kind of tree.

The “bare trunk” is a long, forcing variation practically devoid of alternatives. (In point of fact, there are almost always alternatives; but if they are of little significance, we can honestly assign our calculations this kind of label.)

For less highly-skilled players, the main impediment is the need to accurately foresee each of the many positions that come up over the course of calculation. Over a lengthy calculation, they are prone to lose the threat, and find themselves unable to continue the variation.

But for trained chessplayers, too, there are difficulties – above all, psychological ones. The deeper one goes into the variation, the stronger grow the doubts: should I extend this line? Did I calculate everything corectly? Did I overlook something important?
You can increase your confidence in your calculating by moving down the line without haste, stopping at each step to check carefully whether or not there might be a strong alternative, either for yourself or your opponent.

Exercise 1

The game position is taken from Spragget – Browne, New York, 1987. Your task is to evaluate 32 Bxa5.

Even with the question phrased this way, focusing on analyzing one concrete continuation, it is still necessary to think, if only for a little while, about the starting position: who is better, and what will happen if White plays a quiet move.

For if White stands better, then we will not be satisfied if, for example, the sharp variation that we must calculate ends in a draw. We would also be justified in cutting our analysis short if we see that it would lead to a situation that would be difficult to evaluate, and involve considerable risk.
On the other hand, these circumstances do not require us to just give up on the main continuation, if we assess the starting position in our opponent’s favor.

Exercise 2

Evaluate the consequences of the bishop sacrifice on g6.

 

Exercise 3

Evaluate the consequence of sacrifice on g5!

Solution 1

Solution – Exercise 1 – extension

Solution – Exercise 2

Solution – Exercise 3

The post Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Six – The “Trunk” appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> https://chessentials.com/learn-mark-dvoretsky-part-six-trunk/feed/ 0 Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Five – The “Shrub” https://chessentials.com/learn-from-mark-dvoretsky-part-five-the-shrub/ https://chessentials.com/learn-from-mark-dvoretsky-part-five-the-shrub/#respond Thu, 07 Dec 2017 21:05:06 +0000 https://chessentials.com/?p=2869 The “Shrub” The following exercise is taken from chapter four of Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual. In this chapter, the reader’s goal is trying to find the best Candidate moves for the Black side of the two...

Read More

The post Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Five – The “Shrub” appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> The “Shrub”

The following exercise is taken from chapter four of Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual.

In this chapter, the reader’s goal is trying to find the best Candidate moves for the Black side of the two positions. The positions and the solutions are given below.

Position 1

Analysis – Part One

Position two

Analysis – Part two

The post Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Five – The “Shrub” appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> https://chessentials.com/learn-from-mark-dvoretsky-part-five-the-shrub/feed/ 0 Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Four – Combinative Fireworks https://chessentials.com/learn-from-mark-dvoretsky-part-four-combinative-fireworks/ https://chessentials.com/learn-from-mark-dvoretsky-part-four-combinative-fireworks/#respond Sun, 29 Oct 2017 22:26:10 +0000 https://chessentials.com/?p=2682 Combinative Fireworks The following exercise is chapter one from the famous book, Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual. This is what Dvoretsky had to say about this position: Not long ago, I reexamined an exercise from my notebook, in which White...

Read More

The post Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Four – Combinative Fireworks appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> Combinative Fireworks

The following exercise is chapter one from the famous book, Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual.

This is what Dvoretsky had to say about this position:

Not long ago, I reexamined an exercise from my notebook, in which White won thanks to a beautiful attack. I ran it past “Fritz”, which told me the attack was refuted – several different ways. I could not believe that – Black’s king position looked much too dangerous. And in fact, soon the computer went from dour to smiley-face, showing equality in lines that it had previously considered won for Black. This was more believable; but I am not a fan of situations in which there are a number of equivalent ways to play (even though, in practice, such situations occur all the time). I continued searching; and finally,a ll the efensive tries went down, save one – now this result, could live with. And in the end, we found a difficult win here, as well.

The course of analysis uncovered more and more subteties, some of them utterly fantastic, “non-human.” People cannot play chess at this level yet – in fact, I hardly think they will ever be capable of learning how, especially taking into account the current tendency toward faster time-controlls and the ever-growing predominance of sporting (or should I say, “financial”) aspects over the creative side of chess life.
For the top-class player, it might prove an even more effective form of training to play out the starting position against a strong opponent. Play several such games, alternating white and black, allowing yourself and your opponent enough thinking time (not less than an hour apiece), and only afterwards, begin your acquaintance with my analysis.

Analysis – part one

Analysis – part two

Analysis – part three

Analysis – postscript

The post Learn From Mark Dvoretsky – Part Four – Combinative Fireworks appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> https://chessentials.com/learn-from-mark-dvoretsky-part-four-combinative-fireworks/feed/ 0 Learn from Mark Dvoretsky – Part Three – Surprises in calculating variations https://chessentials.com/surprises-calculating-variations/ https://chessentials.com/surprises-calculating-variations/#respond Sun, 10 Sep 2017 21:01:27 +0000 https://chessentials.com/?p=2638 Surprises in Calculating Variations The following endgame is chapter six from the famous book, Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual. This is what Dvoretsky has to say about this position: The diagrammed position, taken from a game plaed in the English...

Read More

The post Learn from Mark Dvoretsky – Part Three – Surprises in calculating variations appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> Surprises in Calculating Variations

The following endgame is chapter six from the famous book, Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual.

This is what Dvoretsky has to say about this position:

The diagrammed position, taken from a game plaed in the English League, has already been published twice on ChessCafe.com, in Tony Miles’ column, in 2001. The grandmaster got it from a friend of his, who played White (it is a shame that the names of the players have remained anonymous).

Miles’ commentary seemed insufficient to me, so I soon published my own treatment in the Russian – language newspaper, Shakhnatnaya Nedelya. Since then, I have often employed this exercise in workshops, while touching up and filling out my analysis. In 2006, I published a new and considerably wider-ranging version of my article on various chess websites.
For those unfaimiliar with this position, I recommend using it as a training exercise – and ideally, following the approach I have used more than once in my own lessons, thus:

Imagine that you are playing the fame yourself; and that, as white, you have to make your last move before time-constrol, with only three minutes left on the clock. You will not be able to calculate everything. It is more important to sense correctly the ideas in the position, to see a few of the possibilities, and then to make an intuitive decision. Write down the move you would have played, and perhaps a few of the ideas underlying your choice (so as not to froget what they were).
And then, follow the same procedure – but this time, give yourself ten minutes. That is hardly time-pressure. Now you will have time for a bit of calculation. Write down your new choice (it might be the same decision you made earlier, or something different).
And finally, on the third try, add twenty more minutes to study the position. Perhaps you will not needs this much time (or only a part of it) if you selected a quiet continuation, one that does not require, analysis, and you have no intention of second-guessing your choice (I remind you that we are imitating your behaviour in a practical game, under the given conditions). Otherwsie, if you were unable to caclulate fully the complex lines you enter into, now you can accurately support or refute the line that interested you.

Once the results of this training have been fixed either in your memory or on paper, you may begin to acquaint yourself with the analysis itself. Comparing the course of your own thinking (with three minutes to think, and then with the longer time allotment) with the variations and assessments offered here, you can assess the quality of your intuitive guesses, your ability to find all the resources contained in the position (or “candidate-moves”), the depth and accruacy of your calculation, and the rationality of your time-expenditure (whether or not you wasted precious minutes on variations that really did not need to be examined at all), etc.
The main outcome of all this will be either a small step or a giant leap forward in the process of self-understanding, without which any truly effective work on self-realization is unthinkable.

Solution – Part one

Since the solution offered by Dvoretsky is quite lengthy, I have decided to split it in two parts. First, let us take a look at the variation revolving around the idea of the queen capture.

Solution – Part two

Now when we have discarded the lengthy combination analyzed above, let us look at the alternatives on White’s first move.

The post Learn from Mark Dvoretsky – Part Three – Surprises in calculating variations appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> https://chessentials.com/surprises-calculating-variations/feed/ 0 Learn from Mark Dvoretsky – Part Two – Play Like a Computer https://chessentials.com/learn-mark-dvoretsky-part-two-play-like-computer/ https://chessentials.com/learn-mark-dvoretsky-part-two-play-like-computer/#respond Mon, 04 Sep 2017 16:00:05 +0000 https://chessentials.com/?p=2615 Play Like a Computer The following endgame is chapter ten from the famous book, Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual. This is what Dvoretsky has to say about this position: The complex ending we are about to study is a...

Read More

The post Learn from Mark Dvoretsky – Part Two – Play Like a Computer appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> Play Like a Computer

The following endgame is chapter ten from the famous book, Dvoretsky’s Analytical Manual.

This is what Dvoretsky has to say about this position:

The complex ending we are about to study is a good one for training play. You may take White and find Black’s replies in the text, or, better still, you may play it against a friend, at a time control of not less than an hour each.
White is a pawn up and if he likess, he can attack either of his opponent’s remaining pawns right away. But Black is not helpless either. Depending on the circumstances, he may either capture the f3-pawn and advance his own f-pawn, or send his king over to c3, in order both to attack the b4-pawn and create threats to the white king which is pinned against the edge of the board.
The first task is to choose from among several possible moves, the one that keeps the best chances of success. We certainly will not be able to calculate it all the way to the end (in fact, we do not even know yet if White has a win). To save time, in such situations chessplayers often operate by the “exclusionary method.”, that is, they throw out all continuations where the opponent has a straightforward path to the draw, and follow the one line where the struggle continues.

Solution:

The post Learn from Mark Dvoretsky – Part Two – Play Like a Computer appeared first on Chessentials.

]]> https://chessentials.com/learn-mark-dvoretsky-part-two-play-like-computer/feed/ 0