Now let’s look at our first diagram showing a foolproof checkmate: (D)
Final position
As in the previous diagrams, Black is in check. He cannot capture the checking queen; he cannot interpose to cut off the line of attack; his king has no flight square to escape to.
Of the five “possible” squares to which the black king might still move, two – directly to the right or left – are still in the checking range of White’s queen. The other three squares – on the seventh rank – are all commanded by White’s king. These conditions fill the requirements for checkmate!
More Checkmates (D)
Final position
Here’s another mate in which the white king is the victim. (Remember as you study the diagrams, that black pawns move toward the white side, or down the page; also, that pawns move straight ahead but capture diagonally.)
Black you will note is giving check with his rook at c3. White cannot capture this rook, which is guarded by the black pawn at b4. Remember, you can never make a move which exposes your king to capture!
What other possibilities does White have? He cannot capture the checking rook. He cannot interpose to the check. Can he move his king out of danger?
The answer is still no. It is impossible for the king to move one square diagonally up to the left – king to c4 (Kc4) – as that would expose the king to capture by the black rook or black queen pawn at d5.
Likewise, to move one square diagonally to the right – king to e4 (Ke4) – would expose the king to capture by Black’s d5-pawn.
Two other possible moves remain. A move to the square to the right – king to e3 (Ke3) – is ruled out because it still leaves the white king in check to Black’s rook. It also exposes the white king to attack by Black’s bishop.
Nor will a move one square backward do – king to d2 (Kd2) – for that would still leave White’s king attacked by Black’s long-range bishop. Thus White’s king has no way out.
Then...this is checkmate? Yes, for White’s king is in check, and no matter what he does, he will still be in check. The diagram is a perfect example of checkmate.
So too is the next diagram except that the checkmate hasn’t happened yet.
It is Black’s move and he is about to give checkmate on his very next move: (D)
In the diagram Black plays ...knight to g3 check (...Ng3+). It may come as a shock to you to be told this is a checkmate position. (D)
Checkmate after ...Nh5-g3
True, White cannot capture the obstreperous knight. But the square to the immediate left of the king, g1, seems available. Unfortunately it isn’t! See that black bishop lurking all the way at the end of the diagonal at the upper lefthand corner of the diagram (at a7)? That bishop controls every square on the diagonal. Since White’s king cannot walk into the black bishop’s jurisdiction, king to g1 (Kg1) is ruled out. So White is checkmated.
In out next diagram we have another position in which checkmate on the move is possible. (D)
White to move
The position is taken from a real game in which only a few moves have been played. And yet, believe it or not, White can force checkmate right off by playing bishop to b5 check (Bb5+).
After Bf1-b5, checkmate
This is checkmate because the attacking bishop cannot be captured; because Black has no interposing move to save his king; and finally, because his king cannot move out of check.
Thus, a move of the king one space diagonally, ...king to d7 (...Kd7), still leaves the black king exposed to attack from the checking bishop.
Likewise ...king to e7 (...Ke7) or ...king to d8 (...Kd8) is impossible. Either of those moves would expose the black king to attack by the other white bishop – the one at g5 that travels on the black squares.
Again we have a case of checkmate – Black’s king has no escape.
The basic idea in a game of chess, then, is to enforce checkmate on your opponent’s king and to avoid getting checkmated yourself. The last series of diagrams show you how it’s done.
Remember, you can avoid a checkmate if you can make any one of these three moves:
Capture the checking piece.
Interpose a piece between the checking piece and your king.
Move the checked king out of the line of attack.
Chapter Two
Don’t Give Up the Ship!
Resigning
As you’ve just seen, checkmate is the objective in every game of chess. This doesn’t mean, however, that every won game winds up with checkmate. Very often a player “resigns” – concedes his opponent’s victory before checkmate actually takes place.
Now why in the world, you may wonder, should a player surrender before he is actually beaten? What kind of position does he have that makes him feel his “resignation” is in order?
A player resigns when he feels his position is hopeless.
Our next diagram (page 21) is a good example. Black resigns because he cannot avoid checkmate on the very next move. Some players feels they have to “save face” by resigning instead of submitting to checkmate.
The other main reason for resigning is a crushing loss of material. In an upcoming diagram Black loses his queen, by far the most powerful piece on the board. There is no hope for him now, and no fun in dragging out the game.
When to resign
There are some quirks to resigning that you need to know about. Some players are very stubborn and play on long after all hope is gone. Thus they waste their opponent’s time and their own.
Others are all too faint-hearted and resign too readily. This is just as great a fault.
Of course there is a golden mean between these two extremes. It is pointless to resign too quickly. No general ever won a battle by surrendering, and no chess player ever won a game by resigning.
I once saw Reuben Fine, one of the world’s greatest players resign a very important match game because he thought that checkmate was unavoidable.
He was wrong! As soon as the game was over, he was shown a perfectly adequate defense that would have saved his position from defeat. But it was too late – he’d already resigned. The game was over.
When it comes to resigning, then, don’t be too sure that the situation is hopeless. A bit of skepticism, a bit of “I’m from Missouri” is in order. Maybe you don’t see all there is in the position. Maybe you give your opponent too much credit.
On that score, here’s a useful point to keep in mind: If your opponent is a much better player than you are, a hopeless position is really hopeless.
But suppose the two of you are about equally matched. Suppose, you’re much the better player? What then?
When not to resign
If you and your opponent are about equally matched, a hopeless position may not be so hopeless, after all!
Does your opponent have weak spots in his play? Is he prone to overconfidence or carelessness in winning positions? Perhaps he scares easily, so that a sham threat on your part may throw him off balance.
On the other hand, if your opponent is much weaker than you, then even a serious oversight on your part may not justify your resigning the game. Why give him credit for a degree of ability he hasn’t demonstrated in the past?
Loss of the queen – which is fatal against a good player – may be quite bearable against a duffer. This is a principle which I learned the hard way.
When I was about fourteen years old I often used to play in the ten-second tournaments at the Marshall Chess Club. (In such events the rule is that you can take no more than ten seconds on any move!)
Very often I would be required to give queen odds – that is, start the game with my queen removed from the board – against dignified, elderly opponents who had been playing chess before I was born.
I was always appalled to have to spot these players such an enormous handicap. The fact was, though, that they were not very good players. They had no notion of how to exploit their overwhelming material advantage.
After a few
moves they would overlook the loss of a piece. Naturally I would capture it and feel a bit relieved. Then another oversight – I’d be almost even in material. Then still another blunder, and I’d actually be ahead.
This process happens time and again when we blunder away an important piece against a very weak player. Keep on playing, and you will regain the lost material with interest.
Ripe for resigning
Now let’s see two situations where resignation is called for: (D)
Black to play
Black is in check by White’s queen. His king cannot capture the white queen, as she is guarded by White’s rook. Black, in fact, has only one move: ...king to h8 (...Kh8). But in this case White forces checkmate by queen to h7 (Qh7) or queen to g7 (Qg7).
All this, you see, is absolutely forced. Black has no way to avoid checkmate. If he is matched with a strong opponent, resignation is in order.
If White were a weak player, Black might just as well try ...king to h8 (...Kh8). The chance that White will miss the checkmate is a microscopically small one, but it can be tried.
In the next diagram it is Black’s move. Note that his queen is attacked: (D)
White has played out a knight to attack Black’s queen. Black should of course move his queen out of harm’s way. Instead, overlooking the attack on his queen, he plays ...pawn to e5?? (D)
After 3...e7-e5??
As you’ve probably guessed, those question marks tell us that Black has just played a very bad move. White naturally captures the black queen with his knight, (N×d5), remaining with an overwhelming material advantage.
The game has gone only four moves, and Black is a queen down! Not much point in playing out this one.
By now you probably realize that to enforce checkmate or bring about your opponent’s resignation, you will generally have to be considerably ahead in material.
You must therefore be familiar with the values of the different pieces in relation to each other. What those values are, and why they are important, will be shown in the next chapter.
Meanwhile, remember these rules about resigning:
Hold out against weak players!
Don’t delay unduly in resigning a hopeless game against a good player!
Chapter Three
What’s It Worth?
The Values of the Pieces
There is one type of question which turns up repeatedly in my chess classes. A student will say, “Why not play here?” indicating a move that gives up a piece with little or no compensation.
I look puzzled. No matter how often I have this experience, I am never prepared for the thought that a player does not know the value of each piece – or else does not realize that loss of material should lead to loss of the game.
“Why,” I answer finally, “your opponent just captures the piece – like this – and you have nothing to show for it but a check or two.”
“Oh well, I don’t mind losing the bishop; it’s a lot of fun to see what will happen.”
At this stage I have to explain that each of the pieces in a game of chess has a certain value. You cannot afford to lose one of these pieces. You cannot make a gift of a piece to your opponent. If you violate this rule you ought to lose the game – and very likely you will!
Which brings us to the point of this chapter:
What value do you place on each piece, and what do you have to get in return if you part with one of your units.
Even Exchanges
Common sense tells you that you can exchange your queen for the opponent’s queen, your bishop for the opponent’s bishop, etc., without losing any material. Take our next diagram as an example: (D)
Black to play
Black’s bishop captures White’s bishop (...B×b3), and White recaptures with his c2-pawn, (c×b3). This is an even exchange: bishop for bishop. (D)
After c2×b3
Again it is Black’s move, and now his rook on the c-file captures White’s rook on that file (...R×c1). White recaptures with his other rook (R×c1). (D)
This is another even exchange: rook for rook. Neither side has gained or lost material by these swaps.
After Rd1×c1
Our next diagram shows a number of exchanging possibilities. Let’s look at two even exchanges here: (D)
White to play
White starts off by capturing Black’s e5-pawn with his d4-pawn (d×e5). Black replies by recapturing with his d6-pawn (...d×e5). First an even exchange: pawn for pawn.
Now it is White’s turn again and he plays queen takes queen check (Q×d8+), and Black retakes, either with the knight on c6 (...N×d8) or with his king (...K×d8). Another even exchange: queen for queen. (D)
So much for even exchanges. But what about all those puzzling questions like:
After ...Nc6×d8
Can I swap my queen for his rook?
Is a bishop stronger than a knight?
Is a rook more valuable than a bishop?
Is a knight worth three pawns?
Relative Values
In order to provide you with a roughand-ready answer to all such question, here is a table of standard values:
Queen – 9 points
Rook – 5 points
Bishop – 3 points
Knight – 3 points
Pawn – 1 point
What about the king? We don’t assign him any value in this table because checkmate automatically ends the game. If you want to be mathematical about it, you might say the king’s value is equal to infinity! And if you’re checkmated, your king’s value is equal to zero.
By looking at this table we can answer the questions that baffle many players.
For example:
The queen (value – 9 points) should not be swapped for a rook (value – 5 points).
A bishop (value – 3 points) and a knight (value – 3 points) are equal in value.
A rook (value – 5 points) is worth more than a bishop (value – 3 points).
A knight (value – 3 points) is worth three pawns (value – 3 points).
In the overwhelming majority of cases you will find this table a highly dependable guide. You can apply it successfully even if you have no idea how these values were derived. But if you are curious about this, here’s one way to get an insight into the values of the pieces.
Cruising Range
Using an empty board, place the queen on one of the four center squares. How many squares can the queen move to? (D)
Count them up and you will find that she has a choice of moving to no less than 27 of the 63 empty squares. This is a phenomenal range, and shows what the queen can accomplish with its power of moving horizontally, vertically, and diagonally.
Now place a rook anywhere on an empty board. (D)
No matter where the rook is posted, it has a choice of 14 possible squares to move to. This adds up to a lot of power – even if it is only about half of what the queen can accomplish. The rook cannot move diagonally, but it can move horizontally and vertically, and it reaches squares of both colors.
How about the bishop? On the empty board, the bishop has a maximum of 13 squares it can reach, and a minimum of 7. It all depends on where you place the bishop. (D)
The knight is quite effective in the center zone having a choice of 8 moves there. On the side squares at the edge of the board its mobility is radically scaled down. In fact, a knight on a corner square can make only two moves. Try it and see. (D)
The “Lowly” Pawn
The pawn has the least value of all the chessmen. It can move only one square at a time (except when it is still on its home square). It has no backward-moving power. It has only two capturing possibilities.
These factors explain why the pawn is rated the humblest of the chess units – and why inexperienced players despise the pawn.
This is a pity. Most players are apt to throw away a pawn or two – or three – without a care. But this is poor policy, because the pawn has the remarkable power possessed by no other chess unit. The p
awn is able in certain cases to promote to a queen or rook or bishop or knight. More about this in chapter six.
Because every pawn is a potential queen, you should treat it with more respect than you have probably done in the past. Proper attention to the pawn’s promotion powers can make you a much stronger player.
Another valuable aspect of pawn play is this: the very weakness of the pawn is sometimes a paradoxical element of strength! Because the pawn is worth less than any of the other units, they have to run away from the pawn’s attack, unless they can capture it at once.
More Comparative Values
Now let’s draw some more useful conclusions from the table of values. The queen (value – 9 points) is worth more than a rook plus bishop or knight (total value – 8 points). Queen against rook plus bishop or knight plus pawn (total value – 9 points) is about an equal fight.
Two rooks are definitely worth more than the queen. However, inexperienced players may have trouble maneuvering the rooks for combined operations. It takes skill and experience to make the rooks work together.
Bishop vs. Knight
What about the age-old question of bishop vs. knight?
The average player fears the knight’s hopping powers, which seem to promise ugly surprises. On the other hand, masters will often tell you that the bishop is more effective than the knight.
How to Be a Winner at Chess Page 2