1 Qd1
The queen, on its way to d3, gains a tempo by attacking the knight. The alternative 1 Qb1 h6 2 Qd1 b5 3 Qd3 g6 is inferior. Here, besides the essential weakness at g6, White has also extracted a ‘secondary’ one at h6, but in fact this is not a weakness at all, since it simplifies Black’s defence of the focal-point g7. For example, after 4 Bf6 Bd8 5 Qh3 Bxf6 6 exf6 Kh7 7 Rf1 Rh8! 8 Rf3 Kg8 Black has defended himself against White’s main threat of Qxh6+, and consequently the situation is no longer clear.
1 ... b5 2 Qd3 g6 3 Bf6 Bd8
Now 3 ... h6 proves too late, e.g. 4 Qh3 Kh7 5 Rf1 Bd8 6 Rf3 Bxf6 7 exf6 e5 (if 7 ... Rh8, then 8 Qxh6+) 8 g4 exf4 9 Qh5 Rh8 10 Nxf4 Kg8 11 Bxg6 fxg6 12 Qxg6+ Kf8 13 Re2, and White wins.
4 Qh3 Bxf6 5 exf6 h5 6 Ng3 e5 7 Qh4 Bg4 8 Nxh5! Bxh5 9 Qg5 Kh7 10 Qxh5+ followed by Qh6 and Qg7#.
The next three examples are concerned with cases where the creation of the preconditions for the attack on the king demands the removal of the opponent’s pieces from defensive positions or their displacement in some way.
This position is taken from the game O’Kelly-Castaldi, Hilversum 1947. Here Black’s king position has already been weakened, White’s pieces are all well posted, and there is no danger of counterplay in the centre or, indeed, anywhere; the only real obstacle is Black’s queen, which is defending the kingside well at the moment, e.g. if 1 Qh6, then 1 ... Qg7. So the action White takes has the aim of inveigling Black’s queen to as far away as b8!
1 Qc5!
Threatening to win Black’s a-pawn by 2 Qa5.
1 ... Qd6
If 1 ... Rd7, then 2 Re8 after which 2 ... Rd6 and 2 ... Qg7 are answered by 3 Qa5.
2 Qa5 Qb8 3 Qg5 Nd5 4 Qh6 1-0
There is no defence against Ng5, e.g. 4 ... Qf4 5 Ng5 Nf6 6 Bxf7+ Kh8 7 Bxg6.
Actions of this type might be called indirect attacks on the castled king.
In the following diagram, some of the preconditions for an attack on Black’s king position are already present.
White’s pieces are fairly well placed, and the blocked centre makes it difficult for Black to counterattack. A breakthrough by ... b5-b4 would require rather lengthy preparation, while the other possibility – capturing White’s a-pawn – would bring him too little in return for the tempi spent on it. On the other hand, there are Black’s unweakened king position and White’s weakness on the light squares. The latter makes itself felt if the position is opened up. But how is White to progress, if he is not to play f5, i.e. if he does not loosen up the situation on the light squares a little? Surely not by 1 Ng5, which clearly involves a doubtful sacrifice. Nor by 1 g4 Nc6 2 Nh4, on which Black plays 2 ... f5; for while, logically, the blocked position should then be overcome by 3 exf6, in fact the reply 3 ... gxf6 opens up the prospect of counterplay for Black by ... e5.
There is no doubt about it: the position is not yet ripe for an attack on the king; it needs to be strengthened still further, or more exactly, the black pieces need to be driven further away. This can be done by playing the dark-squared bishop, with gain of tempo, on to the diagonal a3-f8, where it will settle.
1 Bc1 Re8 2 Ba3 Qd7
The defence is even more difficult after 2 ... Qc7.
3 Qh4 Nc6
If 3 ... Qxa4?, then 4 Be7 Qd7 5 Bf6, when Black is without resource.
4 Ng5 h6 5 Nh3
Sacrificing the knight would be not only unclear but also superfluous. The more expendable pawns will now have their say and so bring about the weakening of Black’s king position.
5 ... Qd8 6 Qh5 Ne7 7 g4 Ng6 8 g5 Bd7 9 Rf2!
The pawn on a4 does not count, but the one on c2 must be kept alive.
9 ... Bxa4 10 Rg2 Kh8
Otherwise White plays 11 gxh6 Qh4 12 Qxh4, followed by 13 Rxg7+ and 14 Ng5.
11 Rf1 Bd7 12 Rg4 Nf8 13 gxh6 g6 14 Ng5 gxh5 15 Nxf7+ Kh7 16 Rg7#
This position is from the game Yates-Takacs, Kecskemet 1927. The preconditions for an attack on Black’s king position have been only partially fulfilled; White is hindered particularly by the possibility of a counterattack by Black in the centre or down the c-file. White’s prospects would be better if he could succeed in driving away the f6-knight by e5 and then play Ne4. To manage this he must first repulse the black knight from c4, which means sacrificing a pawn. That was just the sort of thing Yates was in the mood for.
1 b3! Nxa3
Black falls in with White’s plan and imperils his knight on a3. In taking on this commitment he enables White to acquire additional preconditions for an attack on the king. If Black had played 1 ... Nb6, which would have been better, White would have had to build up more slowly with 2 Bb2.
2 e5! Ne8?
Relatively the best solution for Black would have been to sacrifice a piece for three pawns by 2 ... Nxc2 3 exf6 Bxf6 4 Nxc2 Qxc3, although even then the advantage lies with White after 5 Bd3.
2 ... dxe5 3 fxe5 Qxc3 leads to interesting possibilities, for example 4 Rd3! Ne4 (or 4 ... Qc7 5 exf6 Qxg3 6 Rxg3, when Black’s knight at a3 and his bishop at e7 are both hanging) 5 Qf4 Qb4 (alternatively, 5 ... Qc5 6 b4 Qd5 7 Bxa3, and White’s threats are just too strong) 6 Qxe4 Nxc2 7 Rh3 g6 8 Qf4, and White wins.
3 Ne4
Now the preconditions for an attack on the king are suddenly fulfilled. One black knight has been driven back to e8 and the other deflected to a3; while White’s pawn on e5, supported by two good knights, provides a wedge in the centre. All this has cost only one pawn.
3 ... d5 4 Nf6+!?
Although an interesting move, this is nevertheless not the strongest. Correct was 4 Ng5 followed by Bd3; for example, if 4 ... h6, then 5 Nxf7 Kxf7 6 Bh5+ Kg8 7 Qg6 Qd8 8 f5 exf5 9 e6 Bc6 10 Nxf5 wins for White.
4 ... Kh8
4 ... Bxf6 5 Bxa3 Bd8 would have been rather unpleasant for Black; however, White’s attack would not have been so strong in that case on account of the defensive possibility ... f5.
5 Qh4 Nxf6 6 Bd3 g6?
The decisive mistake. Black ought not to weaken his dark squares, particularly in view of the commitment of his dark-squared bishop to cover a3, as a result of which it is only half at the disposal of the defence. The right course to take was 6 ... h6! 7 Bxa3 Bxa3 8 exf6 Bf8, for after 9 Nf3 Qd8 10 Ne5 Be8 Black has a complete defence.
7 exf6 Bf8 8 Nf3 Kg8 9 Ng5 h6 10 Bxa3
White captures the knight at precisely the most inconvenient moment for Black.
10 ... hxg5
11 fxg5
White can also win simply by 11 Qxg5 Bxa3 12 Bxg6 Kf8 13 Bxf7 Kxf7 14 Qg7+ Ke8 15 f7+ Kd8 16 Qf6+ with a quick mate.
11 ... Bxa3 12 Bxg6
If 12 Rf3 e5, White must still play 13 Bxg6.
12 ... fxg6 13 Rd3
Not 13 f7+, since 13 ... Kf8 14 Qh8+ Ke7 15 Qf6+ sees Black’s king wriggling out to d6.
13 ... Rf8
If Black meets the threat of 14 Rh3 by 13 ... e5, his king would not have found refuge on d6. After the text move, Black hopes to meet 14 Qh6 by 14 ... Kf7, heading for e8, but Yates now finds a new point at which to trouble him!
14 b4! Bxb4 15 Rh3! 1-0
If 15 ... Kf7, then 16 Qxb4, and Black is either mated or loses his queen.
Of the cases where the opponent himself creates a precondition for an attack on the castled king the most important is that which involves the release of tension in the centre. The next diagram provides a good example.
This position is from the game Euwe-Maróczy, Zandvoort 1936. It is Black’s move.
1 ... c4?
This releases the tension in the centre and so creates the one precondition which White still lacked before he could embark on an attack against the enemy king. Maróczy, a great expert on defence, is playing here under the influence of the thinking of the old school, which paid insufficient attention to the problems of the centre. In the Orthodox Defence to the Queen’s Gambit, resolving the central tension by ... c4 generally gives White a powerful attack on the king, for a counterattack based on a pawn majority on the wing is much slower than that which takes place in the
centre.
The thematic move for Black here would be 1 ... Qb6, but that entails the danger of his knight being diverted from the defence of the square h7; e.g., 2 Nxd7 Nxd7 3 dxc5 Nxc5 4 Bb1, threatening 5 Qc2. Sounder, therefore, is 1 ... Rc8.
2 Bb1 Re8
After 2 ... Nd5 3 Nxd5 exd5 4 Qc2 Nf6 5 Ng4 Re8 6 Be5 Black’s position would be most uncomfortable.
3 Qe2 Nxe5?
Black’s position is too weak for this method of defence; it allows White to get his rooks into active play via d1 and d4. He should have preferred 3 ... Nf8, although even then White would have retained the advantage.
4 dxe5 Nh7 5 Qh5 Nf8 6 Rcd1 Qc7 7 Bxh6!
Since Black abandoned the centre, the preconditions for a successful attack on his king have increased with every move. Now the situation is even ripe for a sacrifice.
7 ... gxh6 8 Rd4 f5 9 exf6 Bxf6 10 Rg4+ Bg7 11 Qxh6 Rad8
While would have faced a harder task after 11 ... Re7 12 Ne2 e5, since he could not then have played 13 Ng3 because of 13 ... Qc6, forcing the exchange of queens. White would have had to play 13 Bf5 Qc6 14 Qg5.
12 Ne2 e5
If 12 ... Rd7, then the manoeuvre Ng3-h5-f6+ is decisive.
13 Ng3 Re6 14 Qh4 Rd3
14 ... Qe7 would not have worked because of 15 Rxg7+!, but 14 ... e4 would have offered a little more resistance.
15 Nf5 Ng6 16 Qh5 Qf7 17 h4! Bf8 18 Nh6+ Bxh6 19 Qxh6 Qh7 20 Qg5 Kf7 21 Bxd3 cxd3 22 Qf5+ 1-0
Old and modern styles in building up an attack on the king
The following three games reflect the differences of two periods and three individual styles in preparing and conducting attacks on the king. The first is a sample of old-time brilliance, showing the unfolding of an overwhelming attack resulting from feeble opening play by the opponent. In the second Black makes a risky experiment, and one of his pawns, wandering lonely among the white pieces on the kingside, remains as a consolation and the germ of the subsequent attack. In the third game the underlying conception of the attack is quite different, its main feature being Capablanca’s rational and cautious method of ensuring that every possible means of counterplay on the part of his opponent is first suppressed.
Pillsbury - Wolf
Monte Carlo, 1903
Queen’s Gambit Declined, Orthodox Defence
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Bg5 Nbd7 5 Nf3 Be7 6 e3 0-0 7 Rc1 b6 8 cxd5 exd5 9 Ne5
This is not the best. The normal way of building up the formation known as the Pillsbury Attack is 9 Bd3 followed by 0-0 and Ne5. However, even in this improved version, Pillsbury’s entrenched knight is by no means as great an asset for White as it seemed to Pillsbury’s contemporaries.
9 ... Bb7 10 f4 a6?
The right procedure was 10 ... Ne8 11 Bxe7 Qxe7 12 Qf3 Nxe5 13 fxe5 Rd8 14 Bd3 f6, which shows up White’s attack to be premature.
11 Bd3 c5 12 0-0 c4?
We have censured this move in similar positions in the games Pillsbury-Tarrasch and Euwe-Maróczy. It was an error of judgement of a bygone period to abandon the important central tension for the sake of the dim chance of a slowly-advancing queenside pawn majority. It may be said here that modern knowledge of the importance of tension in the centre is the main deterrent against kingside attacks nowadays.
13 Bf5 b5 14 Rf3
A rook manoeuvre characteristic of the Pillsbury Attack. Its first aim is to provoke a weakening of the enemy king position in the shape of either ... g6 or ... h6.
14 ... Re8
The feebleness of Black’s defensive resources – a consequence of his earlier failure to play 12 ... Re8 instead of 12 ... c4? – is shown in the alternative line 14 ... b4 15 Na4 h6 16 Bxh6 gxh6 17 Rg3+ Kh8 18 Nxd7 Nxd7 19 Qh5 and White wins. Therefore, Black cannot appease his opponent with the somewhat lesser evil of ... h6 but will be forced to play ... g6.
15 Rh3 g6
If 15 ... h6 then 16 Bxh6 gxh6 17 Rg3+ Kf8 18 Bxd7 Nxd7 19 Qh5 and mates, while 15 ... Nf8 is answered by 16 Bxf6 Bxf6 17 Bxh7+ Nxh7 18 Qh5.
16 Bb1 Nxe5
From bad to worse; 16 ... Nf8 offered a better chance of resistance.
17 fxe5 Nd7 18 Bxe7 Rxe7 19 Qf3 Nf8 20 Rf1 Qd7 21 Qf6 b4
22 Na4
White has a won game anyway, but this is not the best move. Correct was 22 Ne2 followed by either Nf4-h5 or Ng3-f5. Sacrificing the knight is the typical way to exploit positions of this kind; one of the critical variations runs 22 ... Qc7 (or 22 ... Qd8 23 Qh4 Rc7 24 Rf6) 23 Nf4 Rd8 24 Nh5! gxh5 (or 24 ... Ne6 25 Qh4 gxh5 26 Qf6! and wins) 25 Bxh7+ Nxh7 26 Rg3+ Kf8 27 Qh8#.
22 ... Qc7 23 Nc5 Bc8 24 Rh6 a5
Unaware of the approaching trap, Black proceeds on his slow way. The immediate 24 ... Rb8 was more resourceful, for then 25 Rf4 (25 Nxa6 Bxa6 26 Qxa6 c3 yields good chances for Black) 25 ... Rb6 26 e6 Rbxe6! (not 26 ... Bxe6? 27 Bxg6!) 27 Nxe6 Rxe6 28 Qg5 allows Black the chance to fight back by 28 ... c3 29 bxc3 Qxc3. The best move for White after 24 ... Rb8 is 25 e4!.
25 Rf4 Rb8?
The final blunder; 25 ... Be6 was the only move.
26 Bxg6! Rb6
The coup de grâce. If now 26 ... Nxg6, then 27 Rxg6+ hxg6 28 Rh4.
27 Qxb6 Nxg6
Or 27 ... Qxb6 28 Bxf7+ and 29 Rxb6.
28 Qf6 Re8 29 Rf1 Be6 30 Qg5 Kh8 31 Qh5 Nf8 32 Nxe6 Rxe6 33 Rxe6 1-0
Rauzer - Botvinnik
Leningrad, 1933
Sicilian Defence, Dragon Variation
1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 d6 6 Be2 g6 7 Be3 Bg7 8 Nb3 Be6 9 f4 0-0 10 0-0 Na5 11 Nxa5
Nowadays this whole line is reckoned to be harmless for Black.
11 ... Qxa5 12 Bf3 Bc4 13 Re1 Rfd8 14 Qd2 Qc7
Black withdraws his queen in order not to have constantly to reckon with Nd5, which is admittedly not threatened at the moment but which may become a nuisance later.
15 Rac1?
The beginning of a faulty plan. White is preparing for b3 followed by c4, but he does not have the time to carry it out. Correct was 15 Qf2, whereupon Black has nothing better than 15 ... Qa5.
15 ... e5 16 b3?
White keeps to his faulty plan. A sounder line was 16 fxe5 dxe5 17 Qf2, though Black would still have somewhat the superior game.
16 ... d5!?
A reckless conception, which has a flaw. The right way to continue was 16 ... Ba6 17 Nd5 Nxd5 18 Qxd5 (if 18 exd5 then 18 ... e4 followed by ... Bc3) 18 ... exf4 19 Bxf4 Bc3! 20 Red1 Bb2 21 Rb1 Be5 22 g3 Qc3! with advantage to Black.
17 exd5!
After 17 bxc4 dxe4 Black would win back the piece with the better game; 17 Nxd5 Bxd5 18 exd5 e4 and 17 fxe5 Nxe4 18 Bxe4 dxe4 19 Qf2 Qxe5! are also favourable for Black.
17 ... e4 18 bxc4
After 18 Nxe4 Nxd5 Black retains the initiative without giving up any material, thanks to the threat of ... Nxe3 followed by ... Bd4.
18 ... exf3 19 c5!
19 gxf3? Qxc4 20 Red1 Rac8 21 Bd4 is unsatisfactory on account of 21 ... Nxd5 22 Bxg7 Nxc3 23 Qxc3 Rxd1+, after which Black exchanges queens and reaches a won ending. Thus the pawn on f3 is left alive for the time being.
19 ... Qa5 20 Red1?
White failed to find an answer to Black’s double threat (... Nxd5 and ... Ng4) and instead of discovering the flaw in his opponent’s bold plan, he gets himself into a difficult position.
Ragozin pointed out the continuation 20 Qd3! Ng4 21 Ne4 f5 22 Ng5 f2+ 23 Bxf2 Nxf2 24 Kxf2 (if 24 Qc4 then 24 ... Qc3, while if 24 Qb3 Black plays 24 ... Bd4 25 d6+ Kh8, and White has no more than a draw) 24 ... Qxc5+ 25 Kg3. If Black were then to take the d-pawn, the material balance would be restored but at the cost of allowing White to assume the initiative. For example, after 25 ... Rxd5 (not 25 ... Qxd5 because of 26 Re8+) 26 Qb3, Black is suddenly in difficulties owing to the threat of 27 Rcd1 which is decisive even against 27 ... Kh8; consequently, he is forced to play 26 ... Qb5 () 27 Rcd1 Qxb3+ 28 cxb3 Rxd1 29 Rxd1 and go into an unfavourable ending with the white rook on the seventh rank. It is interesting that H. Muller, in his book on Botvinnik, ends the analysis at White’s twenty-sixth move, sta
ting that he will have to fight for a draw!
JN: Many years later Botvinnik published some new analysis of this game, in which he claimed that after 20 Qd3, 20 ... b6! gives Black a satisfactory position.
20 ... Ng4 21 Bd4
21 ... f2+!
The pawn virus begins to take effect. 22 Bxf2 does not work on account of 22 ... Bxc3, while 22 Kh1 is defeated by 22 ... Rxd5! 23 Nxd5 f1Q+, and White loses his queen.
22 Kf1 Qa6+
Now the black queen hastens across to h4 via f6; out of the one small pawn there has grown a real kingside attack, which requires the assistance of the queen.
23 Qe2
If 23 Ne2 then 23 ... Bxd4 24 Qxd4 Rxd5, while 23 Qd3 is met by 23 ... Bxd4 24 Qxa6 Ne3+ 25 Ke2 f1Q+ 26 Rxf1 bxa6.
23 ... Bxd4 24 Rxd4 Qf6 25 Rcd1
25 Qd3 would have posed Black a more difficult, though still soluble, task. 25 ... Qh4? is not good because of 26 Qg3 Nxh2+ 27 Kxf2, when Black can only obtain perpetual check with his knight. Instead, Black would have to play 25 ... Re8 26 d6 Qh4 (not 26 ... Re3? on account of 27 Nd5) 27 Re4 Nxh2+ 28 Ke2 f5 29 Qc4+ Kf8 30 Re7 Rxe7+ 31 dxe7+ Qxe7+ 32 Kxf2 Ng4+ picking up the rook.
25 ... Qh4 26 Qd3 Re8 27 Re4 f5 28 Re6 Nxh2+ 29 Ke2 Qxf4 0-1
If 30 Rf1, then 30 ... Rad8 31 Rxf2 Rxe6+ 32 dxe6 Qg4+ wins.
Capablanca - Kan
Moscow, 1935
Queen’s Gambit Declined, Orthodox Defence
1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 d5 4 Nf3 Nbd7 5 Bg5 Be7 6 e3 0-0 7 Rc1 c6 8 Bd3 dxc4 9 Bxc4 Nd5 10 Bxe7 Qxe7 11 0-0 N5b6?
The main line of this variation is 11 ... Nxc3 12 Rxc3 e5. Moving the knight to b6 is not good, since it neglects to give proper consideration to the central squares; the result is that White’s knights can now become very active there.
Art of Attack in Chess Page 27