There is in fact such an abundance of attacks against the castled king with a real or secondary focal-point at h7, and they differ so widely, that an attempt to systematize them would take us too far afield; let us be content with a few general examples, and then deal in more detail with ‘the classic bishop sacrifice on h7’, which in practice is the most important kind of attack on the focal-point h7.
This position arose in Szabo-Kotov, Groningen 1946. It is White’s move, and he effects the ‘clearing’ of focal-point h7 by eliminating the knight on f6:
1 Nd5! exd5 2 Bxf6 Bf5
The only reply, though an inadequate one.
3 Qxf5 g6
White now continued with 4 Qxg6+ fxg6 5 Bxd5+ Rf7 6 Bxe7
and won on the basis of his material advantage, but 4 Bxe7 gxf5 5 Bxf8 would have been even clearer.
Here we have a straightforward example of the creation of a mating position by directing the queen and a pawn against the focal-point h7, followed by a typical new mate after the black king has escaped.
1 Bxh7+ Kxh7 2 Qh5+ Kg8 3 g6 Re8 4 Qh7+ Kf8 5 Qh8+ Ke7 6 Qxg7#
In this position Black aims to drive White’s rook from f4 and then proceed with ... g3, creating a threat against h2. He plays:
1 ... Be5 2 Nxe5
If 2 d4 Bxf4 3 Bxf4, Black continues 3 ... g3 4 Qf3 Qh2+ 5 Kf1 Qh1+ 6 Ke2 Nf6 7 Qxg3 Bg4+ 8 Ke3 Qc1+ 9 Kd3 Qf1+ 10 Kc2 Qxc4 and wins.
If 2 Qf3 Bxf4 3 Qxf4 Qe1+ 4 Kh2 (both 4 Bf1 Rh7 and 4 Qf1 Qxf1+ 5 Kxf1 Rh7 are in Black’s favour) 4 ... Nf6! 5 Nxh8, Black wins by 5 ... g3+ 6 Qxg3 Ng4+.
2 ... dxe5 3 Rf7
If 3 Rf1 Black plays 3 ... 0-0-0 and then ... g3, forcing mate. At once 3 ... g3 would not be good because of 4 Bf7+ and 5 Qh5.
3 ... g3
This move is now playable; indeed, it is obligatory, since after 3 ... 0-0-0 4 d3 g3 Black is a tempo behind with his attack; White then has the following defence, a characteristic one in such positions: 5 Be3 Qh2+ 6 Kf1 Qh1+ 7 Bg1 and Black’s attack has come to nothing.
4 Qf3 Bg4!
A typical method of preparing the mating net; one should not check if this only simplifies the opponent’s defence. It should be noted that checking at 4 ... Qh2+ 5 Kf1 and then 5 ... Qh1+ loses a tempo. Black’s aim is to oblige the white king to move to fl of its own free will, and then give check with the queen directly at h1, without stopping at h2.
5 Rf8+ Kd7 6 Rf7+
If 6 Qf7+, then 6 ... Nge7, while 6 Be6+ is answered by 6 ... Bxe6! 7 Rxa8 Nf6! 8 Rxh8 Qh2+ 9 Kf1 Qh1+ 10 Ke2 Bg4 and wins. Lastly 6 Qd3+ is simply met by 6 ... Nd4.
6 ... Nge7 7 Qe3 Raf8 and Black wins easily, for example after 8 Kf1 Rxf7+ 9 Bxf7 Rf8.
For our final example in this section let us examine the main line of the Møller Attack in the Giuoco Piano. In this White’s attack, involving the sacrifice of a knight on h7, is so strong – or weak – that the game ends in a draw.
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 c3 Nf6 5 d4 exd4 6 cxd4 Bb4+ 7 Nc3 Nxe4 8 0-0 Bxc3 9 d5
Møller’s strengthening of the attack; 9 bxc3 used to be played, whereupon Black obtains the advantage by 9 ... d5.
9 ... Bf6!
The best reply.
10 Re1 Ne7 11 Rxe4 d6
If 11 ... 0-0, then 12 d6 is reckoned to give White good prospects.
12 Bg5 Bxg5 13 Nxg5 0-0
JN: Current theory reckons 13 ... h6 to be best, when White is struggling for equality.
14 Nxh7 Kxh7 15 Qh5+ Kg8 16 Rh4 f5
Instead of 16 ... f5 Bogoljubow suggested and experimented with 16 ... f6, which is weaker.
In the position after 16 ... f5, White must try to justify the sacrifice of the knight. Admittedly, he controls the square h7, but, at the same time, he cannot prevent the black king from escaping via f7 when it is checked. If the game is continued correctly, White can only obtain perpetual check, not mate. Both 17 Qh7+ (variation A) and 17 Rh3 (B) lead to a draw, while the rest end in a win for Black. These other, poorer, continuations are given under (C) and (D).
A) 17 Qh7+
This is the oldest method, tried out in innumerable games and ending in a draw.
17 ... Kf7 18 Rh6
18 Re1 is not good because of 18 ... Ng6 19 Rh6 Qg5, etc.
18 ... Rg8 19 Re1 Qf8
Maróczy, and later Bogoljubow, tried to find a win for Black at this point with 19 ... Kf8 but further analyses have shown that White has a draw by 20 Rh3! Bd7 (if 20 ... f4 then 21 Rh4 is in White’s favour) 21 Rhe3 Nc8 22 Bd3 g6 (if 22 ... Nb6, White wins by 23 Bxf5 Nxd5 24 Bxd7! Nxe3 25 Be6 Ke7 26 Rxe3 or 24 ... Qxd7 25 Rf3+) 23 h4 Rg7 24 Qh8+ Rg8 25 Qh7, repeating moves. Possibly one could also play for a win here with 25 Qh6+ Kf7 26 Re6.
20 Bb5
20 Be2 is weaker, since after 20 ... Ke8 Black’s king escapes to d8.
20 ... Rh8
20 ... c6? is bad because of 21 dxc6, while if 20 ... a6?, then 21 Ree6 axb5 22 Rhf6+ with advantage to White.
21 Qxh8 gxh6 22 Qh7+ Kf6 23 Rxe7! Qxe7 24 Qxh6+, and White forces perpetual check.
B) 17 Rh3
White’s other sound continuation, discovered by Keres.
17 ... f4!
According to Keres, all other moves give White the advantage.
18 g4 fxg3 19 Qh7+ Kf7 20 Qh5+ Kg8 21 Qh7+ with perpetual check.
Against 20 ... g6 Keres gives 21 Qh7+ Ke8 22 Rxg3 and White stands better, but Black can improve by 21 ... Kf6 22 Qh4+ Kf7 and draws. Black would probably not be able to venture on 22 ... g5 23 Qh6+ Ng6 24 Rh5 gxf2+ 25 Kxf2 since if 25 ... Ke5+ White can boldly play 26 Ke3.
Now we examine White’s weaker continuations.
C) 17 Be2? Re8! 18 Re1
18 Qh8+ Kf7 19 Bh5+ is not sufficient for a draw on account of 19 ... Ng6.
18 ... Kf8 19 Bb5
Or 19 Qh8+ Ng8!.
19 ... Bd7 20 Re6 Ng8! and White’s attack is driven back.
JN: At the end of this line 20 ... Ng8 21 Qxf5+ Nf6 22 Bxd7 Qxd7 23 Rxf6+ wins for White, so Black must search for an improvement earlier. 17 ... Ng6 18 Qh7+ Kf7 19 Rh6 Nf4 20 Bh5+ Nxh5 21 Qg6+ Kg8 22 Qxh5 gxh6 23 Qg6+ with a draw may well be Black’s best, so 17 Be2 probably doesn’t deserve a question mark.
D) 17 Re1? Ng6! 18 Rh3
18 ... Rf6!
18 ... f4 is weaker because of 19 Re6, and so is 18 ... Nf4?, e.g. 19 Qh7+ Kf7 20 Rhe3 Ng6 21 Qh5 followed by Re7+, etc.
JN: However 21 ... Qf6 seems to defend, e.g. 22 Re7+ Kg8 or 22 Re6 Bxe6 23 Rxe6 Qxb2 24 Qxg6+ Kg8. Therefore White should prefer 21 Rg3! Qf6 22 Re6! Bxe6 23 dxe6+ Ke8 24 Rxg6 with advantage.
19 Rg3
This is relatively the best way out for White. 19 Re6 Bxe6 20 Qh7+ Kf8 21 dxe6 d5 is inadequate for White, and he loses.
Keres played 19 Qh7+ Kf7 20 Re6 in several correspondence games and he gives this continuation in his handbook Theorie der Schacheroffnungen. Nevertheless, Black can then win by 20 ... Nf8 21 Qh5+ g6, etc. This simple continuation was, strangely enough, not noticed by Keres’s ‘correspondence customers’, and Euwe also fails to record it in his opening works, giving instead a draw by 20 ... Bxe6? 21 dxe6+ Rxe6 22 Bxe6+ Kxe6 23 Qxg6+ Qf6 24 Re3+, etc.
19 ... Ne5
The only reply. 19 ... Kf7? 20 Re6! is in White’s favour, for he wins back his sacrificed piece and keeps up his attack.
20 f4
Neither 20 Rxe5 dxe5 21 d6+ Be6 nor 20 Qg5 Qf8 leads anywhere.
20 ... Nf7 21 Rge3 Bd7
White’s attack has come to a halt and Black has an adequate defence, for example if 22 Re7, then 22 ... Nh6 followed by 23 ... Rf7.
The reader will find further examples concerning the focal-point h7 in the next chapter, which deals with the classic bishop sacrifice. These examples provide a typical illustration of the part played by the square h7 as a mating and secondary focal-point.
The auxiliary focal-point f7
Mention has already been made of the vulnerability of the square f7 before castling, and now we shall examine the part played by an assault on that square after the king has castled. First of all, it should be remarked
that the square f7 is only in exceptional cases the focal-point in the true sense, i.e. the square from which mate is effected. However, it is very often an auxiliary focal-point, which is attacked either in order to drive the king away from g8 or, by means of a sacrifice, to draw the king on to the actual square itself.
The following position from the game Tylor-Koltanowski, Hastings 1930, arose after the moves 1 d4 Nf6 2 Nf3 d6 3 Nc3 Nbd7 4 e4 e5 5 Bc4 Be7 6 0-0 0-0 7 Qe2 exd4 8 Nxd4 Re8
White, by attacking f7, drew Black’s king out from the safety of its castled position.
9 Bxf7+! Kxf7 10 Ne6
Making use of the familiar feature of the hemmed-in queen.
10 ... Kxe6 11 Qc4+ d5 12 exd5+ Kf7
The king cannot advance to 12 ... Ke5 because of 13 Qf4#, nor to 12 ... Kf5 because of 13 Qd3+ with a mating attack, while if 12 ... Kd6, there follows 13 Nb5+ Ke5 14 Re1+ Kf5 15 Qd3+ Kg4 16 Qh3#.
13 d6+
After 13 ... Kf8 king has returned to its shelter, but now the trouble over the hemmed-in queen reappears: 14 dxc7 and Black loses, since after 14 ... Nb6 15 cxd8Q Nxc4 16 Qd4 the old white queen dies but a new one comes to life.
Black therefore played 13 ... Nd5, but after 14 dxe7 Rxe7 15 Nxd5 his position was hopeless.
The following position from the game
Burn-E. Cohn, Breslau 1912 , illustrates a faulty attack on f7.
It was White’s move and he played:
1 Nxf7!?
Malicious old men said that this was the only sacrifice ever risked by the cautious master Burn in his whole chess career. To this observation one might add, ‘and even then it wasn’t correct’, as will shortly be seen.
1 ... Kxf7 2 Qh5+ Kg8?
This presents White with a tempo, which is decisive. After the correct 2 ... Kf8! one cannot see how White’s attack can succeed, for example 3 Bxf6 Bxf6 4 Qxh7 Rac8! 5 d5 Ng5 6 Qh8+ Ke7, and Black can defend himself satisfactorily.
3 Bxf6 Bxf6 4 Qxh7+ Kf8 5 d5
Black now loses, since if he moves his knight, White plays 6 Rxe6+.
5 ... Qe5 6 dxe6 Qxe3+ 7 Kh1 Qxe6 8 Bg6 1-0, for at the very least Black loses the exchange, e.g. 8 Bg6 after 8 ... Qg8. The alternatives 8 Bg6 Rec8 9 Rde1, 8 Bg6 Re7 9 Rde1! Qg8 10 Rxf6+ gxf6 11 Qxe7#, and 8 Bg6 Qc6 9 Qh8+ Ke7 10 Rfe1+ are even worse for Black.
This position arose in the game Capablanca-R. Illa, Buenos Aires 1911. White’s combination contains a thrust against the focal-point f7 as a preparation for the decisive action based on the real focal-point at h7.
1 Bxf6!
Interesting, though inadequate, is the alternative possibility 1 Nxf6+? gxf6 2 Qh5 fxg5 3 Qh6 d4! 4 Bxd4 e5 5 Bxe5 f6 6 Bxg6 Qd7, and White loses a piece without getting enough in return.
JN: In fact this line is also winning for White, since at the end White can continue 7 Bxf6 Rxf6 (7 ... hxg6 8 Qxg6+) 8 Bxh7+ Kf7 9 Bg8+ Kxg8 10 Qxf6 with the decisive material advantage of R+4P v 2B.
1 ... gxf6 2 Nh6+ Kg7 3 Nhxf7
Gaining an important tempo by the attack on the e-pawn.
3 ... Qe8 4 Qh5
The capture on f7 has helped to weaken the b1-h7 diagonal, on which lies the real focal-point at h7.
4 ... fxg5 5 Qh6+! Kg8
If 5 ... Kxf7, then 6 Qxh7+ Kf6 7 Bxg6 Qxg6 8 fxg5+ Ke5 (or 8 ... Kxg5 9 h4+!) 9 Qc7+ Ke4 10 Rxf8 and White wins.
6 Nxg5 1-0
Black presumably saw 6 Nxg5 Qe7 7 Bxg6 hxg6 8 Qxg6+ Qg7 9 Qxe6+ Kh8 10 Rf3, and decided to abandon resistance.
Black might have tried to continue with 6 Nxg5 Rf7 7 Bxg6 hxg6 8 Qxg6+ Kf8 9 Nxe6+ Ke7, admittedly without any real prospects of survival, e.g. 10 Rc1! Bd6 11 Ng5, etc.
JN: Vuković overlooks the mate in two by 10 ... Qa1+, but of course White had several genuine winning lines, e.g. 10 Qh3+ Kg8 11 Ne6.
This position occurred in the game Najdorf-Ivkov from the last round of the tournament at Mar del Plata 1955.
Black, to move, correctly decided to sacrifice his knight on f2, obtaining two pawns and a powerful attack against the exposed white king:
16 ... Nxf2! 17 Kxf2 Rxe4 18 Bb2 Nc5 19 Kg1!
White finds the best defence and withdraws his king to h1. If White had tried to retain his material advantage with 19 Kf3?, the answer would have been 19 ... Ne6 20 Nc2 Ng5+ 21 Kg3 Bxb2 22 Rxb2 Qc5! with a decisive attack.
19 ... Ne6 20 Kh1 Nxd4 21 Nxd4 Rxd4!
Not 21 ... Rxe1? 22 Qxe1 Bxd4 because of 23 Qe8+ Kg7 24 Qe3! c5 25 Qe7+ Kg8 26 Bxd4 cxd4 27 c5 followed by 28 Bc4+ and White wins.
22 Bxd4 Qxd4 23 Qxd4 Bxd4
Black has re-established the material balance and is rather the better placed; after a few more moves he settled for a draw, since that was all he needed for first place.
Janowski and Soldatenkov - Lasker and Taubenhaus
Consultation Game, Paris 1909
Danish Gambit
1 e4 e5 2 d4 exd4 3 c3 dxc3 4 Bc4 cxb2 5 Bxb2 Nf6?!
Better is 5 ... d5 6 Bxd5 Nf6 and if 7 Bxf7+ then 7 ... Kxf7 8 Qxd8 Bb4+, etc.
6 e5 Bb4+ 7 Nc3 Qe7 8 Ne2 Ne4?
This leads to the exchange of the only two minor pieces Black has developed, which inevitably adds to White’s advantage in development. 8 ... Ng4 was worth considering, and even 8 ... Qxe5 would have been better than the move played.
9 0-0 Nxc3 10 Bxc3 Bxc3 11 Nxc3 0-0 12 Nd5! Qxe5
Black would also be in difficulties after 12 ... Qd8 13 Qh5 d6 14 f4 but there would at least be a hope of recovery then, whereas the course actually taken holds no prospects whatever.
13 Re1 Qd6 14 Qh5 c6
White threatened 15 Nxc7 Qxc7 16 Qxf7+ Rxf7 17 Re8#. Both 14 ... h6 15 Rad1! and 14 ... Nc6 15 Re4! were bad for Black, while if 14 ... g6, then 15 Qh6 Nc6 16 Re4 with an irresistible attack.
15 Nc7 g6
15 ... Qxc7 provokes a catastrophe on the focal-point f7, i.e. 16 Qxf7+ and 17 Re8#.
16 Qh6 Qxc7
17 Bxf7+!
The assault on f7 is now carried out as effectively by the bishop as it was by the queen in the variation above.
17 ... Kxf7 18 Qxh7+ Kf6
The partnership finished off the game as follows:
19 Qh4+
JN: 19 Qe7+ Kf5 20 Qxf8+ mates more quickly.
19 ... Kg7 20 Re7+ Rf7 21 Qd4+ Kf8
JN: Or 21 ... Kg8 22 Re8+ Rf8 23 Rxf8+ Kxf8 24 Qf6+ Kg8 25 Re1, etc.
22 Qh8+ Kxe7 23 Re1+ Kd6 24 Qe5#
Lasker came to grief in several games against Janowski through accepting sacrifices against his own principles. It is possible that Lasker was riled by the touch of impudence which can be seen in Janowski’s moves and of which there was even more in his behaviour as a whole.
Complex focal-points
Just as a successful combination derives essentially from the multiple effects of single moves, so attacks on the castled king are also more likely to succeed if they are built up with the assistance of threats against a number of different squares. We shall find that in many attacks of this kind the attacker tries to corner the king by creating a second or even a third focal-point. There have already been cases of such complex focal-points in previous examples, but we shall now examine the matter more closely.
We have already mentioned the part played by secondary focal-points and by the combination of this kind of focal-point with a real one. However, here we will examine only the combining of two or more real focal-points, i.e. squares from which a player either actually mates or could do so in a variation. These real complex focal-points can be divided up as follows:
1) The focal-points are adjacent squares of different colours (e.g. g7 and h7).
2) The focal-points are nearby squares of the same colour (e.g. h7 and f7).
3) The focal-points are of the same colour and make up a whole complex or network of squares (e.g. f6, g7 and h8).
In general, one or more of the attacker’s pieces control both focal-points, while the rest, in the course of the attack, transfer their influence from one focal point to the other, preferably in the shortest time possible (i.e. one move). As far as simultaneous influ
ence over two squares of different colours is concerned, for practical purposes only the queen comes into consideration, and in exceptional cases the rook; but if the focal-points are of the same colour, both the knight and, in particular, the bishop are effective. All the pieces are capable of transferring the attack from one focal-point to the other, though the bishop is unable to do this if the focal-points are of different colours. The bishop is, however, well suited to the case of focal-points of the same colour, while when the focal-points belong to the third group, it is indeed the classic piece by which the whole network is dominated.
When play is based on focal-points of different colours, the attack may be switched rapidly from one of the squares to the other. However, the commoner and more important cases are those in which there are two separate stages, the attack on the first focal-point being exhausted before the player transfers it decisively to the second. This transfer is often combined with a transformation of the mating pattern. An example of this is given in the following diagram.
White, to move, begins with a sharp threat against the focal-point g7.
1 f6 Kh8
In order to be able to meet 2 Qh6 by 2 ... Rg8. 1 ... Qc6 is weaker because of 2 Rf3 and Black has only made his position worse.
JN: 1 ... Qc6 2 Qh6 forces immediate mate.
2 Qh6 Rg8
White can clearly go no further in his threats against g7, but a new opportunity now offers itself – a rapid preparation for mate on h7, for which the queen is already excellently placed; all that is needed is to bring a rook on to the h-file.
3 Rf3! Bxf3
Forced, since there was a threat not only of 4 Rh3 (against which, for example, 4 ... Qc6 would have helped [JN: I cannot see why it would have helped]), but also of 4 Qxh7+ Kxh7 and 5 Rh3#.
4 gxf3 d5
The new threat of a queen sacrifice followed by Rh2# wipes out Black’s defence. White does not play 5 Rh2 now, in which case Black would give up his queen for the rook, but 5 f4, when Black can only stave off mate for a move or two by sacrificing his queen at f4.
Art of Attack in Chess Page 8