Date added: 09.05.2009
Attack of Shatar - Alekhine in the French Defense on the example of the game aviktorov - Xoxol2008
The weakest point in the position of Black's king in the opening is the f7-square. And what else can explain the unconscious move of the pawn e6 in the opening in response to White's first move e4, if not by a healthy self-preservation instinct? « Achilles' heel" must be protected especially carefully and immediately!
And after the second move with the queen's pawns 2. d4 d5, a semi-closed opening appears on the board « French Defense. For novice players, this is the beautiful name of this opening, which was first put into practice at the beginning of the 19th century by French chess players and which you began to play, perhaps even unexpectedly for yourself.
1. e2 - e4 e7 - e6
2. d2-d4 d7-d5
I often had to play this opening for White. I consider it a rather difficult positional opening, but still everyone plays it - both beginners and experienced players.
There are several basic options for playing the French Defense. Anyone can find them on the Internet or in chess textbooks and books. Personally, I was interested in a variant called the Shatar-Alekhine attack. Having played several games inspired by this variation, I achieved very good results. I will present one of these games in this article.
I warn you right away - I do not follow the paths blindly laid by someone on the chessboard. And the opponent often does not know them, and if he does, he prevents him from following them. Naturally, I adhere to the basic principles of playing this or that opening. But most of all I like to invent something new myself, to experiment with ideas that I like. So in this game, events developed according to the original scenario.
(white) (black)
The party has begun.
1. e2-e4 Nb8-c6
2. Kb1-c3 e7-e6
3. d2-d4 Nf8-b4
4. Qd1 - d3 d7 - d5
The reader should not be misled by the non-standard order of opening moves. I warned above that I prefer to improvise. Although in this position you can apply the old mathematical rule « From the rearrangement of the places of the terms, the sum does not change. And the events on the board continue to develop according to their scenario.
5. e4-e5 Kg8-e7
6. Cc1-g5 Qd8-d7
7. Kg1-e2 0-0
If White developed the pieces on the queenside and prepared for long castling, then Black, on the contrary, brought the pieces of the kingside "into the battle" and made short castling. While there is a positional draw. This was a tournament game and I just needed a win. It was necessary to blow up the position somehow, to take risks. Having closed the center, White starts the game on the kingside, and Black starts the game on the queenside. This is typical of the French Defense.
8. g2-g4 Kc6-a5
9. a2-a3 Cb4: c3
10. Qd3: c3 Ka5-c4
There is a chess axiom - the opening is considered completed if the minor pieces are developed and the rooks are in contact with each other. Looking at the diagram, it can be argued that so far neither side has left the opening stage of the game. Although such a delay in the overall development is also characteristic of the French defense.
11. Ke2-g3 Kc4-b6
12. b2-b3 h7-h6
13.h2-h4 h6:g5
14.h4:g5 g7-g6
Experienced players may object - « And what about the attack of Shatar - Alekhine? And perhaps they will be right from the classical side of this option. But I warned you - adhering to the idea I like, I prefer to experiment.
The general idea for white is the queen on d3, the bishop on g5, supported by the pawn on h4, prepared long castling, and all this leads to a direct threat to black's short castle position. But in this game I played, perhaps, adventurously - for the sake of opening the h-file, I sacrificed a minor piece. Now you need to quickly "squeeze" the opponent until he comes to his senses and rebuilds his defensive formations. "Otherwise, we won't be successful."
15. Qc3 - d3 Qd7 - c6
16. Rh1-h6 Kg8-g7
17. Kg3-h5+ g6:h5
18. Qd3 - h7++ checkmate
The second victim is now a horse and a quick victorious spurt. Of course, Black could have played more reliably and “not eat everything they give”, but I had previously studied the opponent, his manner of play was known in general terms. And, in the end, "winners are not judged." I have understood one thought for myself - do not be afraid to experiment and lose - often defeats carry more information than victory.
P.S. you can find the classically played attack of Shatar - Alekhine of the French defense in Stetsko's book O.E. "French defense. Classical system", Moscow, AST 2004
difficulty: ★ ★
In a very popular pattern for the development of pieces: White brings the knights to f3 and c3, the bishop to c4, black - the knights to f6 and c6, the bishop to c5. This is pretty logical. The f3-knight attacks the e5-pawn, the c3-knight defends its own on e4, the c4-bishop shoots at the f7-pawn, protected by one king. The same goals are mirrored for black. With this arrangement of forces, there is one typical combination.
For example, the game began with the moves:
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Kc6 3. Kc3 Cc5
More precisely, Black should have played 3... Kf6. Now White has an interesting trick.
4. Nxe5! This is a temporary sacrifice of the figure. Nxe5 5. d4!.Black is forced to give up a piece back for a pawn. Bxd4 6. Qxd4 The material is equal, but White achieved better development and opening of lines for his pieces. Another way to return a figure: 5. ... Bd6 6. de Bxe5. Apparently, this is the lesser of the evils, but it also has its drawbacks. The bishop on e5 will hit the f4-pawn and White will be able to develop an attack on the kingside. Finally, you can give away a piece a move earlier: 4. ... Bxf2+ 5. Kxf2 Kxe5 Black with tempo escaped from the double blow and deprived the opponent of castling, but gave away the center and the advantage of two bishops, and is not able to take advantage of the temporary bad position of the king on f2. Whites play 6. d4 Kg6 7. Cc4 And then Rf1, Kg1, finishing the artificial castling and ideally positioning his pieces. No matter how Black plays after the attack on e5, White gets a positional advantage in all variations.
Let's say black played correctly - 3. ... Nf6. appeared on the board debut of four knights. White played 4. Bc4 Better 4. Bb5 or 4. d4.
Now black has exactly the same combination. 4. ... Nxe4! Followed by 5. ... d5. All options are absolutely similar to the previous example. Thanks to the advantage of the first move, White does not get into a too bad position, but at least Black gets the initiative.
Suppose black didn't use the chance and answered symmetrically: 4. ... Bc5.
In this situation, the tactic does not work! 5. Nxe5?? Nxe5 6. d4 Nxc4! The elephant is without protection. 7.dc. Black has more pieces.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4
Scottish Party
The name of this opening goes back to 1824, when the famous correspondence game between the two cities of Edinburgh and London took place. Scottish chess players successfully carried out an early advance of the pawn in the center. The very first mention of this beginning dates back to 1750, it occurs in the “Experience chess game”, the manuscripts of the Italian master Ercole del Rio, and the first analyzes are found in 1763, in the treatise of another Italian J. Lolli “Observations on theory and practice chess game". In the 19th century to the development of " Scottish party G. Staunton, V. Steinitz, L. Paulsen had a hand in it. And a little later, the great A. Alekhine and S. Tartakover. A huge contribution to the modern theory of the beginning was made by Garry Kasparov, who played him twice in the match for the world title against Anatoly Karpov (1990). The main idea behind 3. d2-d4 is to try to gain an advantage in the center. In batches where applied Scottish Party a lively piece struggle ensues, in which, nevertheless, black has equal chances.
As we shall see in a moment, Black allows the enemy to destroy the e-pawn, but after that White's center becomes mobile. Therefore, it would have been more careful now to shout an energetic “stop” to the possible white pawn avalanche by making the move 4…d6.
D4 ed 6.cd Bb6.
The absence of a check on b4 weakens Black's defenses. The fact is that thanks to this check (we assume that the pawn is on a2), Black would have time to capture the e4-pawn. And this would give them an excellent chance to stop the movement of the enemy pawns, because long-term (!) experience, as I always say with joking pathos, proves that a captured pawn is not able to advance any further. Now, after 6…Bb6, the pawn mass starts to move.
D5 Ke7.
Based on the game under consideration, we are not only able to identify the aforementioned desire of pawns to increase their value, but we are also able to understand what is the meaning of such a forward movement.
If the knight retreated to b8 or a5, it would be thrown back or displaced. So: a) the tendency to move the pawns forward is based to a certain extent on the desire to demobilize the enemy; b) White rapidly advances the pawns with the intention of getting rid of them. Quite a suicidal trend, isn't it? No, not at all, because by its very nature the pawn at the same time locks up its own pieces, prevents them from moving and closes their way to enemy territory. Therefore, the tendency of self-destruction of the pawns associated with such an advance of the pawns is, in essence, full of force and speaks in its own favor. Consequently, everything that was said under the heading "b" was the desire, by means of moving the pawns forward and breaking through the front, to occupy lines for an operation against the pieces located behind enemy lines (his rooks!). Finally, forward movement may mean the formation of a wedge ("in").
This desire of pawns (especially the central ones) to increase their value is so strong that it completely drowns out another, also very strong tendency, namely the desire of the player to develop the game (for example, by Nc3)! The move 8.Nc3 would of course be weak in view of 8…d6, after which White's center would be retarded. At the most, they might have succeeded sometime later in doing the work indicated in the heading "b"; but this would not be enough, since White has the right to play for the formation of a wedge (“c”), which would create a cramped position for Black.
Black is playing to win material, while White is pursuing rather ideal goals, namely: he wants to prevent the opponent from deploying his forces with d5-d6 in order (and this is the main thing) to morally kill the c8-bishop. In the struggle that has now begun between the two "world views" - "materialistic" and "idealistic" - the latter has won. Quite strange, but, as I say jokingly, it is still understandable, since the game was played ... before the war! (referring to the First World War 1914-1918 - Note. ed.)
9.d6 cd 10.ed Kxf2. A critical situation has arisen.
11.Qb3! K:h1 12.C:f7+ Kf8 13.Bg5. Black resigned.
From the consideration that pawn moves in the opening only help development, it follows that they make sense only if they contribute to the occupation of the center or are in some logical connection with this process. To these we include, for example, moves that defend their own center or attack the enemy's. In the position of the open game after 1. e4 e5 the moves d2-d3 and d2-d4 (now or later) are always equally solid continuations from this point of view.
From the expediency of the moves just mentioned, it follows that all moves by the extreme (that is, knight or rook) pawns, so beloved at the present time, are nothing but a waste of time. (In closed parties this rule has no general significance; in them contact with the enemy is not so complete and development proceeds at a slower pace.)
Summarizing, let us say: in open parties, speed of development is the highest law; each piece should be developed in one move; every pawn move, except for creating a center, or defending it, or attacking an enemy center, is a waste of time. So, as Lasker rightly points out, one or two pawn moves in the opening, but no more.
3. Advantage in development - ideal.
In a race, it would be at least inopportune to lose even a fraction of precious time to satisfy such, say, an incredible desire as “to trample on the spot”: this would give the opponent a fair advantage. In chess, such "running in place" is the repeated movement of the same piece in the opening. In some cases, you can make the opponent lose time in this way, for example, if you exchange your pieces while simultaneously attacking already developed enemy pieces.
Typical tempo gain
This is such a typical situation after the moves 1.e4 d5 2.ed Qxd5 3.Kc3.
