The Fidelity Chessmaster 2100 – DOS Manual – English

_~HE FIDELIT'0~

HESS

ASTE

Table of Contents
1. Let's Play Chess ... ....... . .. .... ......... . 3
(Provided by t he U.S. Chess Federation. It's
your official Introduction to the play of the
gam e. If you a lready know how to play
chess. yo u may wan t to skip th is section .)

2 . A History of Chess . ........... .... ......... 9
(Everyth ing you ever wanted to know. a nd
more, about how the gam e came to be.)
3. World Champions and Their Play .... 12
(The inside story about the greatest "Wood
Pushers' in the world - and the n uttiest.)
4 . Chess and Machines ............ ......... 28
(Trace your chess-playin g computer's
antecedents back to Maelzel's Turk , a
famous trick Inven ted in 1763.)
5 . Library of Classic Games ........ ...... .33
(Here's a fascinating collection of 11 0 hardfo ught games as played by the greatest
masters in h istory. The Ch essm aster 2 100
will replay th em for you on comman d.)
6 . Bralnteasers .................... .. .... .. .... 51
(Some instructive problems th at may teach
you a few sneaky tricks.)
7 . Algebraic Notation .... ...... ........ ..... 53
(e4. Nxf3 ... what's it all about? Chess
shorthand explained.)

Copyright © 1988 The Software Toolworks.
All Righ ts Reserved.

Printed In U.S.A. by Priority Software
Packaging. Santa Ana, California.

3

Let's Play Chess

The Pieces

Chess is a game for two players. one with
the "White" pieces and one with the
"Black" - no matter what colors your set
actually u ses. At the beginning of the
game . the pieces are set up as pictured
below. (See the following diagrams to
Identify pieces.)
These hints will help you to
remember this setup:

White a lways moves first. and then the
players take turns movlng. Only one
piece may be moved at each turn (except
for "castling. " a special move that Is
explained later) . The Knight Is the only
piece that can jump over other pieces.
All other pieces move only along
unblocked lines. You may not move a
piece to a square already occupied by
one of your own pieces. But you can
capture an enemy piece that stands on a
square where one of your pieces can
move. Simply remove the enemy piece
from the board and put your own piece
in its place.

1. Opposing Ktngs and Queens go

directly opposite each oth er.
2. The square in the lower right
corner is a light one ("light on
right").
3. The While Queen goes on a light
square. the Black Queen on a dark
square ("Qu een on color").

The King

The main goal of chess Is to checkmate your opponent's King. The King is
not actually captured and removed
from the boa rd like other pieces. But if
th e King is attacked ("checked") and
threatened with capture. it must get out
of check immedia tely. If there is no
way to get out of check . the position is a
checkma te. and the side that is
checkmated loses.
The King Is the most Important piece.
When he is trapped. his whole army
loses.
The King can move one square in any
direction - for example. to any of the
squares with dots In this diagram . (An
exception is castling. which Is explained
la ter.)
The King may n ever m ove Into ch eck that Is . onto a squa re attacked by an
opponent's piece.

4

The Queen

The Bishop

•

•
The Queen is the most powerful piece.
She can move any number of squares in
any direction - horizontal. vertical or
diagonal - if her path is not blocked. She
can reach any of the squares with dots in
this diagram.

The Bishop can move any number of
squares diagonally if its path is not
blocked.
Note that this Bishop starts on a light
square and can reach only other light
squares. At the beginning of the game.
you have one "dark-square" Bishop
and one "light-square" Bishop.

The Rook

The Knight

The Rook is the second most powerful
piece.
The Rook can move any number of
squares vertically or horizontally if its
path is not blocked .

The Knight's move is special. It hops
directly from its old square to its new
square. The Knight can Jump over other
pieces between its old and new squares.

5

You can think of the Knight's move as
an "L." It moves two squares
horizontally or vertically and then
makes a right-angle tum for one more
square. The Knight always lands on a
square opposite In color from Its old
square.
Any pieces "hopped over" are not
captured by the Knight. The Knight can
capture only when "landing" on the
enemy piece.
The Pawn

If a pawn advances all the way to the
opposite end of the board. It Is
immediately "promoted" to another
piece. usually a Queen. It may not
remain a pawn or become a King.
Therefore. it is possible for each player to
have more than one Queen or more than
two Rooks. Bishops. or Knights on the
board at the same time.
As soon as a pawn is "promoted" it has
all the powers of Its new self (though It
may not move agaln on that tum). For
example. a pawn may become a Queen
that immediately "gives check" to the
opponent's King.

Special Moves

Th e Pawn moves straight ahead (never
backward) . but it captures diagonally. It
moves one square at a time, but on its
first move it has the option of moving
forward one or two squares. (This option
was introduced to speed up the gam e.)
In the diagram. the squares with dots
indicate possible destinations for the
pawns. The White pawn is on its anginal
square. so it may move ahead either one
or two squares. The Black pawn has
already moved. so it may move ahead
only one square now. The squares on
which these pawns may capture are
indicated by an *.

En Pa•• ant
This French phrase is used for a
special pawn capture. It means "in
passing." and it occurs when one player
moves a pawn two squares forward to
try to avoid capture by the opponent's
pawn. The capture is made exactly as if
the player had moved the pawn only
one square forward.
t

•

11 •

In the diagram above. the Black pawn
moves up two squares to the square
with the dot. On Its tum. the White
pawn may capture the Black one on the
square marked with the
If the White
player does not exercise this option
immediately - before playing some

*.

6
other move - the Black pawn is safe
from "en passant" capture for the rest
of the game. But new opportunities
arise with each other pawn in s imilar
circumstances.

Castling
Each player may "castl e" once during
a game if certain conditions are met.
Castling is a special move that lets a
player move two pieces at once - his
King and one Rook. In castling. the
player moves his King two s quares to
its left or right toward one of his
Rooks. At the same time. the Rook
involved goes to the square beside the
King and toward the center of the board
(see illustrations below).
I

I~

~

Kingslde Castling
Before

After

I

~

Queens ide Castling
Before
After

In order to castle. neith er the King
nor the Rook involved may have moved
before. Also. the King may not castle
out of check. into check. or through

check. Further. there m ay not be pieces
of eit her color between the King and the
Rook involved in castling.
Castling is often a very important
move because it allows you to place
your King in a safe location and a lso
allows the Rook to become more active.
When t he move is legal. each player
has the choice of castling Kingside or
Queenslde or not at all , no matter what
the other player chooses.

More About Check and
Checkmate
Now that you know how the pieces
move, you can understand more about
check and checkmate. Your opponent
is trying to ch eckmate your King. and
you must avoid this s ituation if
poss ible .
You may not move into check - for
example. move into a direct line with
your opponent's Rook if there are no
other pieces between th e Rook and your
King. Otherwise. the Rook could
"capture" the King. which is not
a llowed.
If you are in check. there are three
ways of getting out:
1. Capturing the attacking piece:
2. Placing one of your own pieces
between the attacker and your
King (unless the attacker is a
Knight):
3. Moving the King away from the
attack.
If a checked player can do none of
these. he is checkmated and loses the
game.

7

If a King is not in check, but that
player can make no legal move, the
position is called a stalemate and the
game is scored as a draw. or tie.

Some Hints to Get You
Started
Some pieces are more valuable than
others, because they are able to control
more squares on the board. Obviously,
for example. a Queen is more valuable
than a pawn.
The question of value Is important
every time there is a possibility of
capturing or exchanging pieces.
Following is a guide to the value of the
pieces other than the King:

Pawn
Knight
Bishop
Rook

Queen

1 point
3 points
3 points
5 points
9 points

There are also some general
prinCiples that will help you to win
games. After you practice for a few
games, you will find that you are
following these h ints naturally, and
th at you do not have to work at
remembering them .

• Tty to capture more valuable pieces
than your opponent does. The
player with stronger pieces has
better winning chances.
• Capture more valuable pieces with
less valuable ones.

• Don't try for a checkmate in the
first few moves - it probably won't
work.
• Control the center. Pieces in the
center have more mobility than
pieces on the wing. (Look back at
the Knight diagram and see how the
White Knight has more possible
moves than the Black one.) Move
your center pawns early, but not the
pawns on the side.
• Move your Knights and Bishops
early.
• Castle early.
• Every time your opponent moves.
stop and look carefully. Did he
attack one of your pieces? Can you
defend it or save it from capture?
Did he make a move that allows you
to capture something?
• Be alert. Your opponent has a plan
too!
• Get all your pieces into good
positions and protect your King
before trying to attack. It takes
more than one piece to checkmate.

Getting Better
These basic ru les and pOinters are
enough to get you started in chess. Now
you are ready to find partners among
the millions of chess lovers across the
country and around the world.
Practice will make you better and
better at the game and so will reading
some of the countless books about
chess. You can probably find some of ·
these books at your local library or

8
bookstore. They will tell you a lot
abou t various winnin g strategies.
Another source for a ll your ch ess
n eeds is the U.S. Chess Federation. a
not-for -profit educational and
in structiona l corporation a n d the
officia l organizing body for chess in the
country. U.S. Chess publish es the
m onth ly magazine Chess Life,
containing news, instru ction, other
articles about chess and a mon thly list
of tou rnaments th at even beginners
may play in .
U.S. Chess a lso offers a national
rating system, postal ch ess
competitions and a mail-order
department with a large selection of
ch ess books and equipmen t.
For more information about U.S.
Ch ess and h ow to Join, write to:
U,S, Chess Federation
186 Route 9W
New Windsor, NY 12550
Telephone: (914) 562-8350

9

A History of Chess
The invention of chess has bee n
vaIiously ascribed to the Arabians.
Babylonians. Castilians. Chinese.
Egyptians. Greeks. Hindus. Irish. Jews .
Persians. Romans. Scythtans and Welsh.
Specific individuals have sometimes been
credited - the Greeks claimed Aristotle
invented chess - but no invention stories
are reliable. We can make a few
deduc tions. however. from what is
known.
The oldest name for chess is
chatauranga. a Hindu word referring to
the four branches of the Indian army.
elephants. horses. chariots and foot
soldiers, which were not in existence
after the birth of Christ. Therefore. chess
is at least 2 .000 years old. Its exact age
can't be determined With a ny degree of
accuracy. because it was originally played
with dice and references to "ski1led dice
players" as long as 5.000 years ago may
or may not refer to early forms of chess.
The ambiguity is due at least in part to
the Indian ashtapada. the forerunner of
the modem chessboard, It has been used
for various games. most of which
involved dice, The Hindus didn't stop
with two-player chess. either, They even
developed a four-handed version, with
and Without dice. in which each player
had eight pieces, The dice less fourhanded version is still played in India.
Indian rules varied greatly from place to
place. and as the game spread eastward.
its rules were altered to suit local tastes.
The Burmese. for instance. start their
game With the Kingside pawns on the
third rank a nd the Queenside pawns on
the fourth rank. Before any movement

begins. the major pieces are located
anywhere behind the pawns according to
the tactical discretion of the indiv:idual
player. The actual moves are identical to
the original Hindu chess moves. The
Chinese place their pieces on the
intersections of the lines rather than on
the squares and add a celestial river, akin
to no-man's land. between halves of the
board. Their version has only five
pawns to a side, but adds two cannons
ahead of the Knights. and a counselor on
either side of the King. In China. the
King is called the general because a
Chinese emperor was so insulted at
seeing a figure of himself in a lowly game
that he had the players executed! In
order to play the game without undue
risk of life and limb. Chinese players
demoted the piece on the board - or so the
story goes. Interestingly. the Japanese

Children In Piraeus, Greece playing street chess at
Chrtstmastl me .

10
allow captured pieces to change sides and
rejoin the game against their old army at
any vacant place on the board.
The Persians learned chatauranga from
the Indians. corrupting the name of

chatrang. and codifying its rules. They
spread a consistent game to the rest of
the world. a long with the idea that the
rules ought to be uniform. Since the
Persians took up chess. there have been
rule changes, but each change was
adopted universally throughout the West.
Chess spread very rapidly in the Persian
Empire. The Persians never took to the
four-handed game. and looked down on

dice-chess. The latter did spread to
Europe via the Moslems, where it
perSisted until the 14th century. The
Moslems most likely learned dice-chess
direct from the Hindus.
The Persian Empire fell to the Moslems
tn the Seventh century, and chess became
very popular in the Moslem world. At
least, it did after their theologians
decided that chess playing wasn't
contrary to the teachings of Mohammed.
This decision took about one hundred
years and illustrates the cunous power a
simple game can have: four generations
of chess players weren't quite sure that
they were in good standing with their
religion because of a pastime. After the
official dec1sion that there was no harm
in chess, the Moslems created a greatly
detailed literature about it.
Chess may have arrived tn Russia as
early as the Eighth century, about a
hundred years before it reached Western
Europe. That Eighth century RUSSians
traded with the Arabs is not in dispute,
and people who traded with the Arabs
around that time tended to learn chess.

By 1000 A.D .. Christianity was
established in RUSSia, and the church
there immediately made a concerted and
unsuccessful effort to stamp out chess
playing. 16th century travelers to RUSSia
reported that people of all classes played
chess there. In the rest of Europe, chess
playing was confined to the nobility until
the 18th century. When the Mongols
invaded Russia , they brought their own
form of chess with them. The Mongols
had gotten chess via the Eastern route, so
they had a number of their own
vanations. As a result. in certain parts
of Russia, the modem rules did not take
hold until the 20th century.
It is through the Moslems that
Europeans learned chess and most chess
nomenclature. The Persian chatrang was
rendered by the Moslems as shatranj.
The Spanish names axedrez or qjedrez
(ah-hey-dresl, and Portuguese xadrez
(sha-dres). obviously d erive from
shatranj. ~Chess" in English conforms
to the pattern throughout the rest of
Europe: it is the vernacular corruption of
seae. the ninth century Latin rendering
of the Persian shah, or King. The King
itself is always a direct translation of
shah, and the pawn is invanably the
equivalent of the Arabic baidaq, or foot
soldier. ~Rook" is a direct corruption of
rukh, or chanot. Interestingly enough,
rukh was misinterpreted by the Bengalis
as the Sanskrit mea. or boat. As a
result. in certain parts of the East and
Russia, this piece is in the shape of a
boat. Our castle-shaped pieces come from
the Farsi Indian pieces which represented
the tower carried by an elephant. The
Knight was originally Jaras in Arabic,
meaning horse. the usual shape of the

11

piece. In Europe. the name of the horse
evolved to the name of Its rider. Knlght
In Engltsh .
The Bishop evolved from the Arabic aljll. or elephant. The Spanish sttll call
this piece a!fll. and the italians are close
with a!flere. standard-bearer. In
England. the spUt at the top of the piece.
intended to represent the elephant's
tusks. was probably mistaken for a
Blshop's miter. The French took the
same split as a fool's hat. so in France.
the piece Is jou. or Jester.
The present-day Queen. so called
throughout the West. started as the
counselor. or Jarz or flrz . The Spanish
rendered this as flrz or aUJerza. and the
italians as jarzla or jercla. The French
made that Into jlerce. jlerge and vierge
(virgin). which may be how the gender
change got started.
Europe's Introductton to chess probably
came In the Ninth century. first In Italy
and Spain. From Italy It spread to
southern Germany and Swttzerland.
From Spain tt went to France. The
EngUsh mayor may not have known
chess before the Norman Conquest.
Early references are confusing due to the
tendency of the chroniclers of the pertod
to refer to any and all games as "chess."
By the late Middle Ages. Europeans and
Moslems had started ttnkerlng with the
rules. In the 13th century. we find the
first known instance of the chessboard
with Its now-famtltar Ught and dark
squares. 15th century Mohammedan
documents note that the Great Mogul
Timor played "Great Chess." a version
which required a board measuring ten by
eleven squares.

Meanwhile. Europeans were frustrated
by the amount of ttme It took to complete
a game. and typically made some rule
changes designed to speed things up. In
shantraJ. the Bishop could Originally
move only two squares diagonally. but he
could leap over a piece blocking his pa th.
The Queen, or counselor at the time, was
easily the weakest ptece on the board,
moVing only one diagonal square per
turn. When a pawn reached the eighth
rank. It could only be promoted to
counselor. the lowest promotion possible
and the only way the former pawn could
remain in the game.
When the counselor became today's
Queen, an upsetting dilemma arose in the
mind of the 15th century nobles: aside
from the mental gymnasttcs required by
the pawn's sex-change. what If the
player's original Queen were sttll on the
board? Would the King be a bigamist?
When people took their royalty seriously
this was a real problem. So for a while. a
pawn could be promoted to a Queen only
If the original had been captured. Later.
of course, this solicttude on behalf of the
royal marttal status was abandoned: the
Queen was too powerful a piece to be lost
through fasttdlousness. The players.
however. did retain the optton of
promoting a pawn to any piece except a
King.
Given the offenSive might of the newly
strengthened Bishops and Queens.
something had to be done to heLp the
defense. The King had become too easy to
capture. The answer was castling. At
first. the move allowed some fiextbtllty.
A King could Jump two or three spaces, to
g2 If he chose. This somewhat unsettled

12
state of affairs finally became the
modem castling move.

When William Stelnitz beat Adolf
Anderssen in 1886. Steinitz deSignated
himself "World Champion." Since before
that time no one had thought of calltng
himself that. Stelnltz can. with some

At about this time, pawns were first

given the option of a two-square advance
for their initial move. So that this new
move could not be used to evade an
obvious loss. the en passant capture was
devised. With these rule changes. the
modem game of chess emerged. and there
have been no other alterations since the
16th century.
Interestingly. in the 20th century. when
Jose Capablanca was world champion, he
proposed the addition of two new pieces.
The chancellor would move like a Rook or
a Knight at the player's option. and the
archbishop would move like a Bishop or
Knight. These pieces would require two
more pawns and a larger board. but oddly
enough had the effect of cutting playing
time in. half. Capablanca's suggestions
were never acted upon.

Justification, be called the first world

World Champions and
Their Play

Jl\\\\\\\11
.

,., .

-"

II

- -,- - l
- -

World Chess Champion Gary Kasparov.

champion. However. most chess
authorities have traced the world
championship back at least to Francois
Philidor. the French champion regarded
In 1748 as the leading authority on chess.
Certainly one can follow a more-or-less
unbroken line of champions back to
Philidor. but why not go back a little
further - a chain of Munofficial"
champions can be traced back to the
beginnings of the game. Each of them
stood above his contemporaries. and in
some way added to our common store of
understanding.
There are a few breaks in the record.
but the first person to bestow upon
himself the mantle of unquestioned
master of the game of chess was the 10th
century Arab Grandee. al-Su li.
The extensive Arab chess literature
records four of the earliest known chess
masters. AI-Adli. from the Byzantine
Empire, was the first person reputed to be
able to beat anyone he played. a lthough
Just before his death. the champion lost
to a Persian known as al-Razi at the
court of Caliph al-Mutawakkil in 847
A.D.
Al-Suli entered the picture about 60
years later In Baghdad. He established
the first rating system for chess players.
Grandee was the highest position. which
al-Suli bestowed posthumously on alAdli and a l-Razl. and which he claimed
for himself. The next position was held
by players able to beat a Grandee In two

13
out of ten games when given the
advantage of a pawn. Below that were
grades which we re defined by the player's
ability to beat the Grandee with the
a dvantage of a Bishop. Knight and Rook,
respectively. Players who needed better
odds than that were ranked "ben eath
contempt."
AJ-Suli's writings on chess provide us
with some interesting ins ights as to wh at
champion-level play was like then. He
noted. for instance. that a Grandee could
calcu late ten moves a head. Modern chess
masters, relying on positional play. no
longer need to make such extenSive
calculations . AI-Suli a lso felt the need to
point out to his readers that while they
position their men for attack In the first
12 to 19 moves, they would do well to pay
attention to the disposition of their
opponent's forces and perhaps respond
accord ingly.
AI-Sul!'s play a nd reputation were so
overpowering they were honored through
six centuries of Arab chess literature.
One of his pupils, aI-Lajlaj, another
Grandee, was the first to note that the
fewer moves a player needs to complete
development of his pieces, the better off

With the development of the modem
game in the late 1400s, a new chess
literature arose. The first chess author of
whom we have a record is Luis Ramirez
de Lucena. whose name has rather
unfairly been attached to a dreadful
opening' (I. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6) which he
counseled against. In 1497, Lucena wrote
Repiticion de Amores e Arte de Axedres.
Lucena was far from a master; he appears
to have confused the new rules with some
of the old and had some Ideas on strategy
worthy of a Bobby Fischer. Lucena
suggested th at players position the board
so the ir opponent's eyes were in the sun
and try to arrange games after their
opponent had eaten a large meal and had
several drinks.
One of the first stron g European players
to emerge was the Spanish clergyman,
Ruy Lopez, after whom a still-popular
opening [J. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5) is
named . His matches with Giovanni
Leonardo and Paoli Boi In 1574-75
marked the first recorded serious chess
competition.
Lopez wrote a very influential book on
chess play, Libra de la invencion Liberal y

he is. Records from this period document

Liberal I nvention and Art oj Playing

the first instances of blindfold play.
Few games survive from this era, and
those that do are rather tedious. With the
lesser attackin g power of the "Queen" and
"Bishop: games were rare ly won by
checkmate; mOTe common was the old
rule of win by "baring" - capture of a ll
the opposing pieces. The most interesting
survivals from this era are problems and
s tudies. Those involving Rooks and
Knights, whose moves have not changed.
are still worth a look.

Chess). He is known to have travelled
extenSively, playing chess wherever he
went. His book remains valuable today.
After Ruy Lopez, relatively few new
chess books appeared for about 170 years.
This era is sometimes known as the
"Heroic Age" of chess, as the strongest
masters traveled about seeking the
sponsorship of wealthy patrons. It is

arte del Juega del Axedrez (Book oj the

lThe opening is the firsl few moves of the game. The
term a lso refers to a s pecific sequence of initial
moves whose consequences have been stud ied .

14
difficult to document this period: the
survi\1ng biographies of Leonardo and
Boi include a plethora of magical
charms. capture by pirates and
poisonings by Jealous rivals.
Leonardo. Boi and the next generation of
powerful Italian masters . Alessandro
Salvia. Giulio Polerto and Giacchino
Greco. had made a number of advances
over Lopez's work. However. because they
played chess for money. they were
understandably re lu ctant to give away
their secrets by publishing books. What
we know of their games comes from the
private manuscripts they wTote and sold
to wealthy patrons. Their games featured
fast attack and sacrifice : gambits 2 were
the preferred opening.
The culminating figure of this era was
Gioacchlno Greco of Calabria (I 600c . 1634). Greco's contribution to chess
literature lay in his inclusion of
complete games to ill ustrate his opening
variations. Although probably fictitious,
his games were lively and entertaining
and had much to do with the persistence
of his work s: for the next century. c h ess
books were often known generically as
~Ca l abrians." Greco's manuscripts were
written as notes for his studen t/patrons.
and without the master's instruction
made heavy s ledding for th e average
p layer. but nothing bette r was to be found
until Philidor,
Phillip Stamma, a Syri an, published
his Essay sur le Jeu des Echecs in PariS
in 1737. and a revised English version .
The Noble Game oj Chess, in 1745, the
first to feature a lgebraic notation. While
in London as Interpreter of Oriental
2 A 9ambil is an opening in which a pa wn or piece Is
sacrificed in an attempt to gain an advantage.

Languages to the English government,
Stamma customarily played at
Slaughter's Coffeehouse. and it was there
that he lost a famous match to FrancoisAndre Danican Philidor (I 726-95), a
down-and-out French musician. As a
result of the notoriety he gained at
Slaughter's. Philidor became one of the
most influential players wh o eve r lived.
The scion of a musical family. Philidor
showed an early interest in chess, but his
serious involvement began in 1745, when
a concert tour with which he was
associated collapsed. leaving him
penniless in the Netherlands. For the
next few years he supported himself
playing and teaching, and in 1748 he
published his L 'analyse dujeu des Echecs.
This book was something new in chess
literature - an attempt to instruct the
student in strategy and planning, in how
to think rather than what to think.
Unlike his predecessors', Philidor's
illustrative games were selected not to
dazzle, but to instruct. He felt that the
greatest weakness of hi s con temporaries
was an ignorance of correct pawn play in his own phrase. "Les pions sont l'ame
dujeu," ("The pawns are the soul of the
game. ")
Another chess book, written in 1763 by
the Italian master Giambattista Lolli.
presented a view more concerned with
mobility. and therefore a more modern
app roach. It too featured extensive notes
on the play. Philidor's style held sway in
France and England. though , for a very
mundane reason - he cou ldn't be beaten.
Philidor's playing s trength is difficult
to Judge, for the re is no contemporary
yardstick with whi ch to measure him: he
stood h ead and shou lders above the

15
players of his time. and it Is hard to find
a record ed game at even odds. His ab1l1ty
to play two blindfold games s imul·
taneously caused astonishmen t at th e
time. It seems clea r that h e could h ave
achieved much more had he been
challenged. but few other figures in chess
history stood so fa r a h ead of their time.
After a long and successful career both a~

a chess master and a compose r (some of
his operas are still occasiona lly
performed). Philidor's life end ed on a
dark note . After 1789. his former roya l
patronage proved a n embarrassment. a nd
he died in exile in London In 1795.
The first of four consecutive French
champions . Philidor's play created
conSiderable interest in chess in France
and Engla nd. and the center of th e chess
world was undoubtedly the Cafe de la
Regen ce In Paris. Philidor was s ucceeded
by his pupil Legall de Kermeur. of whom
little is known. a nd h e by Alexand re
Deschapelles, whose repute as a great
player is la rgely based on his own
assertion.
Descha pelles was a domineering a nd
arrogant war hero whose play consisted
of nothing more th a n a sustained effort
to checkmate his opponent's King. He
was interested neither in oth er lines of
attack. nor in defense. Phrenology. a
pseudo -science in vogue a t the time.
attempted to explai n a ll huma n behavior
by the shape of the head . Phrenologists
believed th a t Descha pelles's high ly
developed prowess at ch ess was du e to
cranial saber wounds he had suffered in
battle. For whatever reasons.
Oescha pelles was overpowering. He gave

a pawn-and -two-moves advan tage 3 to
anyone who played him and liked to brag
th at he had n ever been beaten in an e\'en
game. While true as far as it goes. h is
statem ent is misleading: When his pupil.
Louis de la Bourdonnais. was finally a ble
to beat him with the customary odds.
Deschapelles gave up the game ral her
tha n risk losing a t no odds.
The third in line of French champions.
de la Bourdonnais was one of t hose
natural chess players whose moves came
afler only seconds of lhoughl. He had lhe
m isfortune to have as his principle
opponent Alexa nd er McDonnell . a n
Iris hma n . cha mpion of the Britis h Is les.
a nd a n ago ni zingly slow player.
The 1834 malch belween de la
Bourdonnais a nd McDonnell - really a
series of sLx matches encompassing 85
games - was a milestone in chess in more
ways th an one: a fonnal encou n ter
between two masters of comparable
strength. in which all the ga mes were
recorded. published and s tudied . (See
Classic Games number I and 2.) The
record indicates that de la Bourdonnais
was drh'en a lmost to distrac ti on by the
glac ia l pace of McDonnell's play. Neilher
man ga\'e a thought to defense: attack
was everything in their ga mes . The
Frenchman clearly prQ\'ed his s up eri ority with an on'ra ll score of -15 wins. 27
losses and 13 draws.
From a moden1 perspecth'e. McDonnell
was a strong player typical of his time . a
fierce a ttacker who somewhat Q\'erya lued
th e initiative. De la Bourdonnais. thou gh
3s Irong players ('a n handi('ap Ihelllsel\'es when
pl ayjn ~ wea ker OIlt"S. either by remO\'i n~ ont" or
m ore of their ple-('es at tilt" oulSt"1. or by I.!hing: Iht"
opponent olle or m ort~ frt"t" mo\'es. or bot)).

16

an equally gifted combinative player. had
a grasp of position play rather ahead of
his time; he valued central pawns, fought
for central squares, and understood play
both with and against an isolated central

pawn. concepts which were not to
resurface until the time of Steinitz.
After a long and successful career in
France as a composer of operas. de la
Bourdonnais moved back to England and
died there in 1840. He was buMed near
McDonnell. who died in 1835.
De la Bourdonnats's successor in

France was Pierre de Saint-Amant. the
last of the great French masters.
McDonnell's was Howard Staunton
(1810- 1874) . In 1843. Staunton. who had
lost a first match to Saint-Amant by one
game. won their second 11-6, with 4

draws. Taking his cue from
Deschapelles. Saint-Amant gave up chess
after this loss. Staunton declared
himself champion, and although he later
beat Daniel Hanwitz and Bernhard
Horwitz, two of Europe's strongest
players , he also began the now-familiar
champion's practice of avoiding anyone
appearing strong enough to beat him.
Staunton was a dominating figure in
chess. both on and off the board. Though
generally considered the best player in
the world after his victory over SalntAmant, his claim to fame does not really
rest on his games; creatively. h e was
surely not the equal of de la Bourdonnais
before him or Morphy after. But as a
journalist. promoter and patron, he
changed the image of chess from that of a
parlor game to that of a serious sporting
contest. His 1849 design for chess pieces
has been in use ever since for matches
and tournaments. It is the one most

familiar today. and the one you will see
on screen in your Chessmaster 2100. He
founded the first successful chess
magazine in English, The Chessplayer's
Chronicle, in 1841 . and wrote a chess
column for the Illustrated London News
from 1845 until his death. His books,
The Chess Player's Handbook (1847) and
The Chess Player·s Companion (1849) were
the primary sources of instruction for a
generation of British and American
players.
And in 1851 he organized the first
international chess tournament: the
Great Exhibition of London for chess
players. Each entrant had to pay his own
way there and put up a five pound entry
fee, but there was a £183 purse for the
winner.
This landmark event bore little
resemblance to the round-robin
tournaments of today. Sixteen players
representing most of the nations of
Europe. a t least 12 of whom were among
the best in the world. competed in a
series of knock-out matches. Of course,
this meant that two of the favorites
might meet early on, one of the reasons
why this system soon became obsolete.
Staunton himself was unexpectedly
knocked out in the third round by Adolf
Anderssen, a high school math teacher
from Breslau. (See Classic Games
number 3 and 4 for examples of
Anderssen's play.) He then suffered the
ignominy of losing a playoff match for
third place to his student. Elija h
Williams. In writing about his loss to
Anderssen, Staunton blamed the
demands of organizing the affair and
poor hea lth. thereby setting another
precedent. that of a champion blaming a

17
loss on anything but the supertor
abilities of his opponent. Another of
Staunton's excuses, physical exhaustion,
did have at least a grain of truth In It.
There was no time limit In effect then.
and some games In the exhibition lasted
longer than 10 hours. However.
Staunton's comments on anyone's play
but his own were unsportsmanlike to say
the least. and h e was not shy about
voicing his complaints In his vartous
press forums. For all his contrtbutlons
to chess, Howard Staunt,o n was not a very
nice man.

The Hungartan chess-playing Polgar sisters attract
attention In tournaments around the world.

In any event. a fter the London 1851
tournament. Adolf Anderssen was
generally acknowledged as the best player
in the world (except perhaps by

Staunton). He was challenged - and
surpassed - only by the brtef
phenomenon of Paul Morphy.
Morphy (1837-84) is Justly known as
"the prtde and sorrow of chess ." He
showed an early precocity for the game.
allegedly learning by watching his father
and uncle play.
Morphy was raised in New Orleans
(which had a n active chess club. thanks
to Benjamin Franklin. who populartzed
the game in North Amertca. founded the
Philadelphia Chess Society and wrote an
Influential essay Morals oj Chess in
1779). From the age of eight. Morphy
played many games against the best
players of New Orleans. and by the age of
13. he was clearly stronger than any of
them.
At age 13. Morphy played two games
with the expatrta te Hungarian master.
Johann Lowenthal. winning one game
and drawing the second. Lowenthal
wrote about the event. complimenting the
youngster a nd predicting a great future in
chess for him. Obtaining a law degree in
1857. Morphy found that he was not yet
old enou gh to take the bar examination.
Instead. he devoted himself to ch ess and
walked away with the First American
Ch ess Congress. held in New York. (See
Classic Game number 5.)
Morphy dominated his opponents for
reasons they themselves did not fully
understand. In calculating and
combinative ability. he was at least the
equ a l of the best of his riva ls. but he had
something more as well: an instinctive
grasp of positional principles which
would not be elucidated for a nother
generation. Unlike his contempora ries.
Morphy knew not only how to attack. but

18
when as well. Anderssen commented,
"There is no hope of catching Morphy in
a trap." Morphy's attacks were more
than traps. His style had a great effect on
many later players who would sometimes
ignore an easy advantage in favor of
Morphyesque maneuvering. (See Classic
Game number 6 for another example of
Morphy's style of play.)
Shortly after Morphy won the New
York tournament (the only tournament,
by the way, in which he ever competed),
the New Orleans Chess Club offered to
pay Howard Staunton's expenses to come
to America if he would play Morphy in a
winner-take-all match with stakes of
$5,000 a side. Staunton was his usual
insulting self in refusing the offer, citing
the amount of time a trip to the United
States would take, the exhaustion the trip
would entail and his own recent lack of
play. Not only did he decline for himself,
he also turned down the club on behalf of
all Europe. Stung by Staunton's
belittling of his abilities, and especially
by an implication that he played chess
professionally, Morphy sailed for
England.
Although Staunton kept saying he
looked forward to a match with Morphy,
in fact. he found excuse after excuse for
not playing him. Morphy played
Lowenthal again, while in England, this
time beating him 9-3, with 2 ties.
Morphy finally tired of waiting for
Staunton and travelled to Paris. There.
in a highly publicized match, he beat
Daniel Harrwltz, a great German
champion who was very unpopular in
France. The public was delighted by
Morphy, who used the prize money from
the Hanw1tz match to pay Anderssen's

fare from Breslau. While he waited for
Ancterssen to arrive, Morphy received a
letter from Staunton. Essentially an
admission that he couldn't beat the
American. Staunton's letter was never
made public. In fact. in his columns
Staunton continued to claim that he was
anxious to play Morphy, and that
Morphy was avoiding him. When
Anderssen arrived in Paris, Morphy beat
him 7 -2, with I draw. Anderssen
actually complimented Morphy's
ab1l1ties. (Staunton's notes on the
match. played for no stakes, are
incredibly boorish.)
After a grand farewell banquet in
London. which Staunton missed, Morphy
returned to New Orleans. For a year he
wrote a chess column for a New York
newspaper, but aside from a few private

games with friends, he never played
serious chess again. He apparently felt
that chess was not a suitable career for a
professional man. But his legal practice
failed - in pari because of his fame as a
chess player. in part because of outside
events (his support of the union in the
Civil War was not popular in Louisiana),
and in part because of his psychological
problems which, while exaggerated in
popular literature. were certainly real.
He gradually became a recluse and died of
a stroke in 1884.
In the 1860s and 70s, chess gradually
assumed the form it has largely kept to
this day. Tournaments were held
regularly, and the introduction of the
chess clock ended the interminable
ponderings of such players as WllIiams
and Paulsen.
Because Morphy hadn't claimed the
championship. Anderssen remained the

19
man to beat. The "romantic" players of
this era played a wide-open game
featuring sacrifices. and Anderssen was
particularly adept at spotting his
opponent's weaknesses and then using a
sacrifice to win. He successfully defended
his championship two more times (his
1861 defense was the first to feature time
limits on the moves). before losing to
William Steinitz 8-6 in 1866.
Steinitz. a native of Prague living in
London. lost no time in claiming to be
the world champion. He emigrated to the
United States in 1883. and two years
later founded International Chess
magazine. which lasted until 1891. In
his highly entertaining book.
Grandmasters oj Chess. Harold
Schonberg calls Steinitz "the most
unpopular chess player who ever lived."
which is quite an accomplishment
considering Staunton's record. Steinitz
richly deserved the deSCription. however.
In addition to writing excellent
commentaries on games. Steinitz used
his magazine to indulge in the most vile
mud-slinging imaginable against other
masters. readers who had the misfortune
to write to him and anyone else who
managed to upset him. His repellent
disposition aside. Steinitz. who had
begun playing in the romantic style.
made several important theoretical
advances.
After a careful study of many games.
Steinitz concluded that combinations did
not arise from thin air - or. as his
contemporaries might have said. from
the genius of the master. Trained
originally as an engineer. Steinitz
reasoned. as Morphy had instinctively
known a generation before. that

combinations must arise from a
positional advantage. Thus. an
insuffiCiently prepared combination 4
must be unsound. and it should be
possible to win by defense as well as
attack. Steinitz also developed the
theory of strong and weak squares. From
these discoveIies came the beginning of
the scientific era of chess and the
foundation of his 20-year reign. (See
Classic Games number 9 and 14 for
examples of Steinitz's play.)
Although he invariably took a high
place when he competed. Steinitz played
in few tournaments until 1894. Unlike
most of his successors. however. he
sought out and challenged his most
dangerous Iivals to matches. defeating
Blackburne. Chigorin and Gunsberg. In
1886. playing Zukertort in 1886 "for the
World Chess Championship." according
to the match contract. Steinitz fell four
pOints behind before winning 10 games to
5. with 5 draws.
By 1894. Steinitz was getting on a bit in
years. and with a new generation of
players came a less exciting style of play.
The strongest players had aSSimilated the
Steinitz principles. and found it easiest
to win against a weaker opponent by
waiting for a positional error - a
premature attack. surrender of the two
Bishops or creation of a pawn weakness.
for example. Among themselves. the top
masters played "correctly" and usually
drew.
Emanuel Lasker (1868-1941) took
another path. He recognized that error
was an integral part of the game and
played always to maintain the tension
4A comb ination is a series or interrelated moves
aimed a t producing an advantage.

20
and place new problems before his
opponent. He played a pa rticularly
psychological game. often Ignonng the
best objective move to make the one most
disturbing to his opponen t. His attack
featured incredible complications which
most players found impossible to
comprehend. (For examples of Lasker's
play, see Classic Games number 12, 16.
20. and 27.)

Lasker. a native of Germany who had
moved to the United States in 1890.
finally defeated Steinitz in 1894. The
match was played In New York for $2.000
a side. the winner being lhe first to take
10 games. When Lasker won 10-5. with 4
draws. there was not too much surprise at
his defeat of a player 32 years his senior.

Steinitz wanted a rematch at once, but
Lasker made him wait two years. When
they met again in Moscow. Lasker won
decisively 10-2. with 5 draws.
Lasker was the first champion to
demand what were regarded at the time
as astronomical stakes for a title match.
Again, he drew a lot of criticism. but he
usually held firm. Lasker did relent
when he played Frank Marshall in 1907.
halving his demand for $2.000 when
Marshall was unable to raise it. Lasker

won easily. beating Marshall 8-0. with 7
draws.

Lasker was a formidable player in
to urnaments. finishing below third place
only once at the beginning and tw1ce at
the end of his career. His 78 percent

I S-year-old Bobby Fischer. then U.S. Chess Champion. plays chess with a polio patient at a charily beneOt.

21
score. s pread over 3 0 years. was by far
the best tournament record of his time.
Defeating Marshall. Tarrasch and
Janowski. he was held to a draw only by
the "drawing m aster" Carl Schlechter.
Lasker was continually criticized for
his infreque n t title defenses. but in all
fairness. if the war years of 19 14-19 18
are omItted. he did defend his title an
average of almost once every three years.
the interval required by present-day
international rules. He might have
played more often ha d he not
championed the unpopular opinion that
a chess master s hould be well pa id for his
labors - an argument that continues
today.
Lasker held the World Cha mpion s hip
for 27 years. By 1921. though still in
love with chess and with the struggle. he
seemed tired of the title. and at last lost a
match to a player as unlike him as any
could be . the invincible Cuban. Jose Raul
Capablanca [J 888- 1942).
Capablanca was a prodigy in the
Morphy mold . He learned the game at
th e age of four. and in 190 1 was s trong
enough to defeat Cuban champion Juan
Corzo in a match. While a ttending
univers ity in New York. he often played
at the Manhattan Chess Club. but his
match against Frank Marsha ll in 1909
was expected to be something of a
mismatch . And so it proved. but in th e
other direc tion. as the Cuban defeated
one of t h e best players in the wo rld by a
score of 8 wins to 1. with 14 draws. In
19 11. he entered his first international
tournament in San Sebastian (to which
he was admitted only at Marsha ll's
ins istence). a nd finished a head of every

top player except Lasker. (See Classic
Game number 23.)
Capablanca tned for year s to get a
match with Lasker. and in 1921 Lasker
knew he h a d to give in . Dreading the
humiliation of losing publicly. Lasker
considered resigning the championShip
in Capablanca's favor. but Capablanca
ha d ra ised su ch high stakes that Lasker
couldn't tum him down. They played in
Havana. and after Capablanca had won 4
games. lost none and drawn 10. Lasker
resigned the match . In his notes. Lasker
reported that he had been fa tigu ed by the
climate. but was gracious enough to
admit that Capa bla nca proba bly could
have beaten him no matter where th ey
played .
Capabla nca had long deserved the
ma tch; he had been unbeatable for yea rs .
When he lost a game to Richa rd Reti of
Vienna in a New York tournament in
1924 it was t he subject of a New York
Times headline. An employee of the
Cuban foreign ministry. Capablanca had
the advantage of being assigned to a ny
city in which h e had to playa game. Like
Morphy. he was a fast and intuitive
player. fond of Simple. direc t lines of
attack. (See Classic Games number 24.
27.30.47.49 and 55.)
Capablanca symbolized t he postSteinitz .. technical" era; he did little that
was new. but he did everything extremely
well. Unlike his predecessor or his
successor. he lacked the driving ambition
to create something new. or to
accomplis h more than his natural gifts
could ach ieve so effortlessly. At his best.
though . his games are as close to
perfection as any ever played. Capa's
greates t tri umph was perhaps New York.

22
1927 (see Classic Game number 42), where
he finished 3 112 points ahead of a field
including Alekhine. Nirnzovich. Vidmar.
Spielmann and Marshall. His greatest
disaster came only a few months later.
Like many champions, Capablanca was
accused of avoiding matches. and when
he finally did defend his crown in Buenos
Aires against Alexander Alekhine in
1927. the match took several months.
A1ekhine (1892-1946) was born in
Russia. but after the Revolution his
Czarist sympathies eventually resulted In
his settling in France. From 1914 until
1927. he was at the top of the "second
tier" masters. behind Lasker and
CapabJanca. but few observers gave him a
serious chance to defeat the great Cuban.
Certainly Capablanca did not. But
Alekhine was quite a different sort of
player than his rival. It was said that
"chess was the breath of life to him," and
that he "would rather die than not Win."
He was a man of fulious energy who
constantly studied games. openings and
his opponents. In 1926. already known
as a brilliant combinative player and
attacker, he resolved to equal Capablanca
at his own game of positional play and
maneuveling. He succeeded and won the
Buenos Aires match 6--3. wtth 25 draws.
(For examples of Alekhine's play, see
Classic Games number 32. 33. 34. 37. 40.
43. 45 and 46.)
For the next eight years. Alekhine
dominated the tournament scene to a far
greater extent than any of his predecessors, but he played few matches. His
lesser livals were unable to raise an
adequate stake, and it proved impossible
to negotiate a rematch wtth Capablanca.
The question of who is to blame can still

arouse fevered arguments; it is safe to say
;that neither was a man of small ego.
~ Alekhine made his first title defense in
1929 when he beat a RUSSian named
Bogolyubov. knowing that Bogolyubov
would be easy to beat. A rematch wtth
Capablanca was announced. but the
prospect of beating Bogolyubov again
proved to be too a lluring. and Alekhine
trounced him in a rematch in 1934. In
1935. A1ekhine lost the c hampionship
unexpectedly to Dr. Max Euwe of the
Netherlands (see ClaSSic Game number
50) in a match for which he had not
prepared. and during which he r eportedly
drank heavily.
Dr. Euwe. obviously unaware of how a
chess champion behaves, offered
Alekhine an immediate rematch. It took
place in 1937. and A1ekhine got the
crown back. Equally unaware of how an
ex-champion behaves, Dr. Euwe failed to
blame his loss on poor hea1th. (See
ClassiC Game number 52 for another
Euwe game.) Discussion of a match wtth
one of Alekhine's younger rivals - Fine.
Keres or Botvinnik - was halted by the
second World War.
When A1ekhlne died In 1946. the World
Championship was le ft vacant for the
first time since 1886. The International
Chess Federation (usually known by Its
French acronym FIDE) had been founded
in 1924. but, ignored by successive world
champions, had done little other than to
organize the world team championships
("Olympiads"). Now. strengthened by a
postwar influx of member nations.
including the Soviet Union and its
satellites. FIDE proposed a six-player
m atch tournament to select a new
champion.

23

A game played with living chessmen is the finale to a chess tournament tn Ebersburg. Germany.

The event was finally held in Hague
and Moscow in 1948 b etween Mikha il
Botvtnnik. Vasslly Smyslov. Paul Keres .
Samuel Resch evsky and Max Euwe.
Reuben Fine had also been invited. but he
gave up the game around this time to
purs ue a career in psychoanalysis.
Botvinnik. who h ad been engaged in
negotiations for a m a tch with Alekhine
at the time of the latter's death. scored an
overwhelming victory. finishing thr ee
pOints ahead of his n earest rival.
Along with his tactical gifts and
strategic depth. what Botvinnik brought
to the game was the concept of scientific

preparation. Alekhine indeed had
studied constantly and prepared for each
opponent. but few could match the
inhuma n self-discipline of Botvinnik.
On one occasion. he ordered his second to
blow smoke in his face during a training
game to prepare for a tournament. On
another. he h a d Flohr. one of his aides.
collect every example of an endgame with
a Rook plus pa wns on the f and h mes 5
versus Rook. a difficult ending that is
sometimes drawn. "But Mischa: Flohr

5See the explanation of algebra ic notation on page
53.

24
objected, Mthose positions occur once in
nfty years!"
"No. no," replied Botvlnnlk. "there Is
no point In playing for the World
Championship unless 1 understand that
ending." (See Classic Games number 53.
55. 57. 59 and 62 for examples of
Botvlnnlk's play.)
Since Botvinnik's victory, save for one
notable interruption. the Soviets have
dominated international chess. Chess is
officially encouraged and controlled by
the government in the Soviet Union. At
the Third All Union Congress In 1924.
chess was declared a political instrument. and subsequent government
programs sought to encourage chess play,
and to discover and foster chess talent programs which produced a great number
of strong Soviet Grandmasters. Western
players from Fine to Fischer have
acc u sed SOviet masters of colluding to
insure the victory of one of their own in

Botvinnlk was ab le to get his crown back
In 1958.
Throughout this period. the World
Champion was. in Botvtnnik's phrase.
"first among equals." There were
perhaps half a dozen players - Botvlnnlk.
Smyslov, Bronstein, Keres. Reschevsky who could legitimately h ave held the
title. Bronstein's strength was in
originality and imagination, while
Smyslov was an intuitive player
somewhat Similar to Capablanca: at his
peak it seemed that his judgement was
nearly Infallible. (For examples of
Smyslov's play. see Classic Games 64. 70.
77 and 103.)

major tournaments.
At the time of the 1948 Hague-Moscow
tournament. FIDE set up a program of

qualifying tournaments to produce a
challenger for the World Championship
every three years.

Botvinnik's first

challenger was David Bronstein. who in
1951 drew a hard-fought match.
permitting the champion to retain his
title. (See Classic Games number 61, 71,
75 and 76 for examples of Bronstein's
play.)
The result was the same in 1954 when
Botvinnik faced VassUy Smyslov. but In
1957 Smyslov not only again topped the
Candidates' cycle - a remarkable feat but beat Botvinnik as well. At the time.
FIDE rules permitted an ex-champion to
demand a rematch after only one year. so

1957 World Chess Champion Vassily Smyslov.

A certain professional courtesy
developed among the top players: win
with White. draw with Black. draw with
one another and beat the back-rankers.
Then Tal arrived on the scene,
From 1958 to 1961. the Latvian.
MikhaU Tal (b. 1936) equaled and
surpassed his Grandmaster colleagues.
He brought to the game a furiOUS energy.
tremendous calculating ability and a
willingness to take risks not seen Since

25

Alekhlne's heyday. His piratical style
and ebullient personality endeared him
to the chess public far more than his
reserved predecessors. Confounding the
experts, who had predicted a prolonged
duel between Botvinnik and Smyslov
until the older man at last succumbed.
Tal decisively won the Bled 1959
Candidates' Tournament (See Classic
Game number 70) . In the process he
administered a 4-0 drubbing to the 16year-old Bobby Fischer, who already felt
that he should be Champion. The
"magician from Riga" went on to defeat
Botvlnnlk In 1960, 12 112-8 112. Soviet
chess authorities were quite upset by this
tum of events. because Tal plays a very
unorthodox game by Soviet standards.
(See Classic Games number 81 and 110
for other examples of Tal's play.)
The SOviets were able to relax the next
year when Botvlnnlk. again taking
advantage of his "divine right" to a
rematch, prepared carefully and
recaptured the title 12-8. Though a
strong and dangerous Grandmaster even
today, Tal was plagued in the next few
years by h ealth problems, a nd never
again succeeded in reaching the summit.
Botvinnik's next challenger was
another countryman . Tigran Petrosian.
whose game conSisted mostly of waiting
for his opponent to do something. (See
Classic Games number 72, 79 and 83.)
Botvtnntk must have done something
wrong, for Petroslan beat him In 1963,
winning 5-2, with 15 draws. By this
time. FIDE had abandoned its one year
rematch rule. and rather than wait three
years to get another shot at the championship, Botvlnnlk retired from world
championship competition . though he

continued to play with success in
tournaments for another seven years.
In his first defense. Petrosian sat back
and allowed Boris Spassky to make the
mistakes. The young and outgOing
Spassky, an aggressive and well-rounded
player. had scored a string of tournament
victories far more Impressive than
Petrosian·s. But he made just enough
mistakes for Petrosian to win 4-3. with
17 draws. thus becoming the first

. _.... - .....Barts Spassky. World Chess Champion 1969-72 .

26
incumbent World Champion to win a
match in 32 years. Spassky apparently
learned something from experience,
because in 1969 he beat Petrosian 6-4,
with 13 draws. (See Classic Games
number 71. 82, 89 and 94 for examples of
Spassky's play.)
This circ ulation of the title among
strong and approximately equa l
Grandmasters might have continued
indefinitely h ad it not been for Bobby
Fischer.
Though he has not played since 1972,
Fischer remains a controverSial figure in
th e chess world. From the time of his
brilliant victory over Donald Byrne at
the age of 13 (Classic Game number 65),

Fischer was recognized as one of the
strongest players in the world by many and ceriainly by himself, as he developed
a Messianic conviction that he would
become World Champion. Though
supremely objective in his approach to
chess . his behavior otherwise did not
endear him to his colleagues. It did,
however. create extensive publicity for
chess. (See Classic Games number 69.
and 74 for other examples of Fischer's
style of play.)
At t he Sousse In terzonal of 1967, he
withdrew while leading, after a dispute
with the organizers over the playing
schedule. (Fischer had by that time
joined a reHgious sect which forbade

Former World Chess Champion Bobby Fischer (I.) enJoys a floating chess game against
three-time U.S. Champion Larry Evans.

27
playing on its Sabba th .) He refused to
compete In the U.S. Championship in
1969. apparently excluding himself yet
again from the cha mpionship cycle. But
negotiations by the U.S . Chess Federa tion
[USCF) enabled him to play in the 1979
Interzonal in Palma de Majorca. His
time had come.

After winning the Interzonal by 3 112
points. he proceed ed to sweep his
Candidates' Matches against M ark

Taimanov and Bent Larsen with
unprecedented 6-0 scores. Fischer then
beat Tigran Petrosian. There remained

only Boris Spassky.
The off-the-board maneuvering
surrounding the 1972 Spassky-Fischer
match in Reykj avik filled the n ews
media. For a long time it seemed that
Fischer would not play for reasons which
he considered matters of principle.
though few objective observers agreed.
But a last-minute offer by British
industrialist. James Slater. raised the
prize fund to an unprecedented (this word
occurs often when discussing Fischer)
$250.000. and Fischer a t last a rrived.
When he finally sat down at the
chessboard. the result was never in doubt.
Despite a blunder in the first game a nd a
forfeit loss in the third. he won by a
score of 12 112-8 112. [See Classic Game
number 85.) For the first and last time
since the death of Alekhine. someone
outside the Soviet bloc was chess
champion.
In 1975. Ana toly Karpov un expectedly
rose to the top of the Candidates· cycle.
defeating Lev Polugaevsky. Boris Spassky
and Viktor Korchnoi. [See ClaSSic Game
number 89.) Karpov thus won the right to
challenge Fischer for the title.

But Fischer proposed a new set of
match rules. and when FIDE declined to
accept one of them. he resigned his title
and withdrew from the chess world .
Karpov became champion.
Fischer never played again.
Throughout the 1970s, Ka rpov played
frequ ently. Apparently he felt the sting
of being an ··accidental"· champion and
sought to prove that he deserved the title.
His play. while not overpowenng. was
just that much better tha n anyone else.
[For other examples of Karpov·s play, see
Classic Games number 91. 100 and 105.)
HiS first title defense came in 1978
against Viktor Korchnoi (see Classic

World Champion Gary Kasparov (I .) and
former Champion Anatoly Karpov.

28
Game number 93). who had by now
defected to the West. This naturaliy did
not endear Korchnoi to the SOviet chess
establishment. Soviet players boycotted
tournaments in which he played. his
family was not permitted to e migrate.
and the match with Karpov saw a degree
of personal animosity unknown since
Alekhine and Capablanca. Despite these
handicaps, Korchnoi was only narrowly
defeated. Korchnoi was again the
challenger in 1981 but this time Karpov
won easily With 6 Wins. 2 iosses and 10
draws. It was time for a n ew challenger.
(For another Korchnoi game. see Classic
Game number !O I.)
The rising star now was Gary Kasparov.
something of an outsider in Soviet chess

circles. Afte r some early e rratic results.
Kasparov in the early 80s began to win
consistently. in a style reminiscent of
Tal and Alekhine. Kasparov took the
world title in 1985. defeating Karpov by a
score of 13-1 1. (See Classic Game number
105 for Kasparov vs. Karpov and Classic
Games number 97, 98 and 101 for
Kasparov against other opponents.)
Karpov and Kasparov have played four
matches between 1984 and 1988. Their
overall score: Kasparov 60 1/2 - Karpov
59 112. The two stand well ahead of their
nearest rivals on the international rating
list at present, and it see ms likely that
they Wili meet again In 1990.

Chess and Machines
~Even if we could teach a computer to play
chess merely as well as a - to use Norbert
Wiener's simtle - majority of the human
race (no offense meant), we would be
furnishing definite proof that a machine
can solve problems of sufficient complexity
to defy the reasoning ability of millions of
people throughout their lives. ~

-Edward Lasker.
The Aduenture oj Chess,

World Champion Gary Kasparov plays a
simu ltaneous match with New York schoolchildren.

In 1769. a Viennese expert in
hydraulics and acoustics, Wolfgang von
Kempelen, exhibited an interesting
conj urer's trick to the Imperial Court of
King Joseph II . It was a life-sized figure
of a Turk seated behind a chessboard on
top of a chest. The chest appeared to be
filled With cogs and gears. which von
Kempelen wou ld demonstrate in the
course of a game of chess against a
human challenger. The Turk would
invariably win, and its entertainment

29
value was the same as any magic act:
how did he do that? It was obvious to all
that no machine could possibly play
chess.
After von Kempelen's death. the Turk
was bought by a Bavarian mUSician and
showman. Johann Maelzel. Maelzel had
already built and exhibited mechanical
devices of his own: a mechanical
trumpet player. and the Panharmonicum.
which played a variety of orchestral
instruments. (Beethoven composed pieces
specifically for both devices.) Maelzel
took over the Turk and was successful far
beyond anything he could have imagined.
making huge amounts of money. Never
claiming that lhe device itself actually
played chess. he made it part of the show
to demonstrate the impossibtlity of
hiding a human inside the Turk.
Even today we are not sure how the
Turk actually operated. We know there
was a man hidden inside the device. and
that he used an arrangement of levers
called a pantograph to make the Turk's
ann move his pieces. but beyond that. we
have only guesses. We will never know
for certain because the Turk was
destroyed by a fire in 1854.
Anolher device. called Ajeeb and
dressed as an Egyptian. was built in 1868
and had a similar career. Ajeeb also beal
all comers, and at one time the "inside
man" was the American master Harry
Pillsbury. AJeeb. too. was destroyed in a
fire, this one at Coney Island in 1929.
However. in the late 19th century,
something much more interesting and
more directly related to computer chess
was happening at the Escuela Technica
Superior de lngenieros de Carninos (The
School of Road Works) at Spaln's

Polytechnic University. Leonardo Torres
y Quevedo had devised a pressure sensor
connected to a rudder which would keep
torpedoes at a constanl depth. Torres y
Quevedo was impressed by the ~inte l ­
IIgence" of the sensor in performing ils
limi ted task. It functioned much more
effiCiently than any human could . and
Torres y Quevedo wondered if there might
be more things a device might be "taught"
to do. So, in 1890 he built a prototype
device which wou ld play the chess ending
of White King and Rook againsl a human
with the Black King. Not only did the
device win. it also said "check" and
"mate." A fmal version was exhibited at
the Paris World Fair in 1914. but the
World War prevented any further work.
In 1939. the British Foreign Office
established lhe Department of
Communications at Bletchley. 50 miles
north of London. Their purpose was to
build a device which wou ld crack German
coded messages no matter how the
ingenious German encoding device
known as "Enigma" was set. In order to
accomplish this task, lhe Foreign office
had to go beyond cryptanalysis experls,
so they also employed mathematicians,
electronic engineers. linguistics.
crossword puzzle buffs and chess players.
The man most responsible for the
success of the project was Alan Turing. a
prominent and eccentric mathematician
and a chess buff. Earlier. Turning had
proposed a theoretical computing
machine which wou ld simulate lhe
operation of any other machine. This
"Turing machine" became part of the
foundation of modem computer theory.
At Bletchley, Turing built a device to
decode Enigma messages. Known as ~the

30
bomb" or "Ultra ." Turing's machine

worked so well that Allied leaders
frequently had Gennan messages
decrypted and translated before their
intended recipients got them.
Turing's device was not a com puter.
however. After the war, Turing got a
large grant from the British government
to buIld a general purpose electronic
compu ter. Although he had established
the mathematical concept for such a
machine in 1936. buIlding a working
model was not easy. Turing talked to
reporters about it in 1946. calling it an
"automatic computing engine, n and in the
same interview discussed the possibilities
of computer chess. He was quoted as
saying "That is a question we may be
able to settle experimentally in about 100
years time,"

But Turing had worked out the
formulas necessary for a chess program.
and in 195 1 or 1952 he used it in an
actual game. Working his program from
notes on paper. Turing played Alick
Glennie. who was an admitted ly weak
player . Glennie reporled t hat Turing had
trouble operatin g his own program
because it often c hose moves that Turing
knew were wrong. The game took about
two or three hours. and ended when
Turlng's program lost its Queen. Turing
was quoted as saying the program has
resigned "on the advice of his trainer."
In his spare time. Turing began programming the Manchester University
computer to play chess. but died before he
cou ld complete his work,
In the United States. Dr. Claude E.
Shannon of Bell Labs described in March
of 1949 how an e lectronic computer cou ld
be programmed to play chess. Shannon

was interested In computer c hess only
because most people felt that c hess
required "thought." If a comp uter could
be programmed to play chess. Shannon
felt . that would hold great theoretical
implications for the future of computers,
Two of Shannon's proposals are still of
interest. He defined the two schools of
chess programs. brute force (rapidly
looking at all possible moves) vs:
heuristic programming (choosing moves
based on some set of rules), Shannon
favored brute force because that approach
takes advantage of the computer's
obvious strengths. He a lso suggested t hat
machines be programmed to learn
directly from th e ir mistakes. a
refinement that in the main has thus far
eluded programmers.
In Los Alamos. New MexiCO in 1956.
Ulam and Stein actually programmed a
computer to playa simplified version of
chess (a six by six square board. leaving
out the Bishops. limiting pawns to a one
square advance on opening and omitting
castling). They wanted to know whether
a computer cou ld make reasonable moves
sole ly on the basis of material gain and
Increased mobility. The computer played
itse lf first. revealing an inordinate fear
of being In check. After a few improvements. the program. MANIAC I, became
the first computer program to win a game
against a human - an unnamed volunteer
who had learned the game only a week
before. Capable of 11 .000 operations per
second. MANIAC 1 used exhaustive search
to look ahead four plies6 in 12 minutes
per move.
6A ply Is a half move. Thu s. a four ply search would
examine all the computer's possible moves, all

31
In an article in the June 1958 Scientific
American. Alex Bernstein. a

mathematician and a very strong chess
player. and Michael Roberts described
how they. Timothy Arbuckle and M.A.
Belsky had programmed an IBM 704 to
play chess. Their program ran on 8.000
punch cards. and required that its
opponent punch his moves into a card
and then feed it into a reader. The
machine conducted a 4 -ply search like
the Alamos program. but a lso added two
new considerations. King defense and
area control. Bernstein's program also
used a ratio to consider material
evaluation. which was an advance over
the simple point system used previously.
Running at about 42.000 operations per
second. this program was able to playa
fair amateur game a t the rate of a move
every eight minutes.
The next year. Herbert Simon. Allen
Newell and Clifford Shaw of the Rand
Corporation and the Carnegie Institute of
Technology came up with a very complex
program that could play at the medium
amateur level. It took about an hour per
move, but because it represented such a
huge leap in computer chess technology.
it led Herbert Simon to predict that
within 10 years a computer would be the
world chess champion.
In 1965. Professor Hubert L. Dreyfus
evaluated the play of MANIAC II ( an
improved MANIAC which played on a
full eight by eight board), Bernstein's
program for the IBM 704. and a program
of his own, and announced. "Still no
chess program can play even amateur
possible replies by the opponent. all the computer's
responses to those. and all the opponent's respons es.

chess." By December of that year. Dr.
Dreyfus had lost a game to MAC HACK.
developed by Richard Greenblatt and
Donald Eastlake of M.l.T. MAC HACK
was another breakthrough. ab le to defeat
about 80 percent of non-tournament level
players. Greenblatt and Eastlake were
good programmers with a very fast
computer for the time. the PDP-6. Their
"plaUSible move generator," with 50
criteria for a move, cut down on the
number of moves the machine had to
consider. And there was one other
important factor: most opponents
resigned too soon. Believing that MAC
HACK's strong opening and middle game
represented its ability. few humans got as
far as MAC HACK's dreadful endgame.
By 1968. when MAC HACK VI was
demonstrated at the International
Federation of Information Processing
([FIPS) meeting in Edinburgh. its rating
was 1500 El07.
After this. things began happening very
qUickly. Between 1967 and 1970. eight
new programs appeared in the United
States alone. and in 1970. the first U.S.
Computer Chess Championship took
place. CHESS 3.0. created by David Slate.
Larry Atkin and Keith Gorlen of
Northwestern University. swept the
tournament. winning all three of its
games. The CHESS program as version
3.5 in 1971 and 3 .6 in 1972 also won a ll
of its games in the next two U.S.
championships. The 1972 contest
featured notes on the games by Samuel
Reshevsky. a master player and ex-U.S.
champion.
7The system developed by Arpad Elo aSSigns a
player a numertcal rating based on his (or its)
record against other rated players.

32
In 1974. CHESS 4.0 appeared. a
completely new version which marked a
switch from selective search to full-width
search . in keeping with Dr. Shannon's
predictions of the greater suitabiJity of
the brute-force approach. Unfortunately.
this was the version that lost the first
World Computer Chess Championship in
Stockholm. It placed second to KAlSSA
from the Soviet Union. a program on
which Mikhail Botvinnik. the ex-World
Champion, had worked.

In all fairness,

it should be pOinted out that CHESS did
not play KAJSSA in the tournament. and
in an unofficial game played after the
event. the outcome was adjudicated a
draw after the 65th move. In the second
World Computer Championship held in
Toronto in 1977. CHESS 4.6 won in a
clean sweep. although again, it did not
meet KAlSSA during the match. This
time. however. when they played
afterwards. CHESS beat KAlSSA in 44

moves.
In 1978. it was time to play the "Levy
challenge." Ten years earlier. the
International Master David Levy had bet
two computer scientists £500 that no
computer chess program wou ld be able to
beat him in ten years' time. When the
match came around . the bets had
increased to £1.250. and Levy played a
series of matches against CHESS 4.5.
KAlSSA. MAC HACK VI and CHESS 4.7.
Levy won every match. and only CHESS
4.7 was able to score a point against him.
While disappointing to its programmers.
its one win against Levy represented the
first time a computer had won a game
against an International Master.
Omni Magazine then offered $4.000 to
the first program to beat Levy. Levy

increased the stakes to $5.000. and in
1983. he was challenged by the creators
of CRAY BLITZ. the winner of the 1983
World Computer Chess Championship.
Levy played CRAY BLITZ in April of
1984. and although he did not lose a
game. Levy did compliment the
programmers by studying CRAY BLITZ's
games in detail.
CRAY BLITZ was a lso beaten as North
American Computer Champion in
October of 1985 by HITECH. designed by
Hans Berliner. Carl Ebeling and Murray
Campbell of Carnegie-Mellon University.
Berliner designed a unique processor he
called the searcher which employs 64
chips. one for each square on the board.
Each chip examines the entire board for
moves and detennines the best one. The
searcher then ranks the 64 choices, and
the game tree is searched as deep as 14
plies based on the searcher's ranking. So
far. HITECH has had an easy time
playing computer opponents.
Earlier, we quoted from Edward
Lasker's The Adventure oJChess. Lasker
slated that If a computer could play chess
merely as well as the vast majority of the
human race. "we would be furnishing
definite proof that a machine can solve
problems of sufficient complexity to defy
the reasoning ability of millions of
people throughout their lives." Your
Chessmaster 2100 far exceeds Lasker's
requirement. The creators of The
Chessmaster 2100 gratefully acknowledge
the pioneering efforts of those
programmers whose earlier chess
programs paved the way for the state-of·
the-art program you now own.

33

The Chessmaster's Library of Classic Games
1. De la Bourdonnals -McDonnell .

21st Match Game. 1834
A wild attacking game where both sides
play for mate. This game has an
incredible and amusing finish .
2 . McDonnell-De la Bourdonnais.
62nd Match Game. 1834
In a sense. the McDonnell-de la
Bourdonnais encounters marked the
beginning of modern chess - a set match
of serious games between recognized
champions . in which a ll the games were
recorded and published . This was the
Fren chman's most famou s win of the

match (really a series of six matches.
won by de la Bourdonnais +45= 13-271). in
which we have t he unus ual spectacle of a
mass of pawns overcoming a Queen.
3. Anderssen-Kleserltsky. London.
1851
Anderssen sacrifices a Bishop for a
handful of tempos2 and an attack on
Black's Queen. Later he saCrifices both
Rooks to continu e his assa ult on the
Black King. Finally. Anderssen parts
with his Queen for a pretty mate with his
two Knights an d Bishop . Hence. the
"Immor ta l Game."
4. Anderssen-Dufresne. Berlin. 1853
White sacrifices a piece to open the
central files against the un castled Black
1+45: 13-27 Is shorthand for 47 wins. 13 draws a nd
27 losses.
2 A tempo Is the effective loss (or gain) of a move by a
player who arrives at a position or situation that he
would nomla lly get to in fewer (or more) moves.

King. an d d espite his seemingly adequate
deve lopment a nd counterattacking
cha n ces. Black comes out a tempo s h ort
in one of the finest combinations on
record, justly known as the ·'Evergreen
Game."
5 . Paulsen-Morphy. New York. 1857
Paul Morphy competed in only one
tournament in his short career. the First
American Chess Congress in 1857. In th e
final round of the knock-out event. he
defeated German master Louis Paulsen by
a score of +5=2- 1. In this game he
demonstrates both his better grasp of
positional play - Blac k's control of the
center files makes a marked contrast to
White's flailing on the fla nks - and his
combin a tive a bility, as h e finishes t he
game with a startling a nd brilliant Queen
sacrifice.
6 . Morphy-A1l1es. Paris. 1858
Morphy develops his pieces quickly and
effectively while his opponenfs
development is hindered by his own
pieces. Morphy is rewarded fo r his better
development by a beautiful attack.
crowned with a Queen saCrifice and a
pretty checkm ate.
7 . G.A. MacDonneJl-Boden. London.
1861
Once dubbed the "Koh+Noor" of chess.
this game is qUite typi cal of the period a s lashing attack appears out of nowh ere.
for defensive techn ique was little
understood even by the best players . The
winner should not be confused with de la

34
Bourdonnals's opponent, Alexander
McDonnell.
8 . Matchego-Falkbeer. London, 1869
In playing over these old games , It Is best
not to ask too many questtons about the
defender's play - the gap In strength
between master and amateur was often
enormous. Instead, relax and enjoy the
tragicomic pUght of the White King, as h e
Is drtven across the board and mated
with his pieces still at home.
9 . Rosenthal-Stelnltz, Vienna, 1873
Stelnltz began the era of "scientific" play,
as his games and writings demonstrated
that games were won or lost for objective
reasons. Here he provldes a (then
startling) example of the proper use of
two Bishops agalnst a Bishop and Knight.
10. Zukertort-Blackburne, London,
1883
A striking combination by Zukertort,
perhaps the last of the "old school"
masters. After his defeat by Stelnltz In
1886, It became clear that Stelnltz's
positional theortes had brought a new
aspect to the game.
11. Blackbume-Llpschiitz, New York,
1889
White allows his opponent to obtain two
passed pawns on th e Queenslde In
exchange for posting a Rook on the
seventh rank. The game was adjourned
at move 31, and not only Lipschutz, but
the spectators - Including Stelnltz - were
certain that Black must win. The
combination initiated by White's 32nd
move brought a rude awakening.

12. Lasker-Bauer, Amsterdam, 1889
An early example of the double Bishop
sacrtfice, the "chess mtll" theme, and the
skill of the then-young Emanuel Lasker,
who only five years later would challenge
Stelnltz for the world championship.
13. Chlgorln-Pollock, New York, 1889
Though he demonstrated many Ideas well
a h ead of his ttme, Chigortn was best
known in his own era as a fierce
attacker. Here, he makes good use of one
of his favortte weapons, the Evans
Gambit.
14, Stelnltz-von Bardeleben,
Hastings, 1895
Stelnltz takes advantage of his lead In
development and his opponent's King
being stuck In the center by playing one
of the most remarkable Rook sacrtfices
of all time.
15, Plllsbury-Tarrasch, Hastings,
1895
Pillsbury, a virtual unknown, comes to
Hastings, England in 1895 and wins one
of the strongest tournaments of all time.
Here, he shows that the Queen's Gambit
Declined opening can lead to a strong
attacking position. Note Ptllsbury's
beautiful 44th and 45th moves.
16, Pillsbury-Lasker, St. Petersburg,
1896
Lasker scores a brtlliant combinative
vlctory over a rch-rival Ptllsbury. The
players castle on opposite wings, but
White loses time with his prematurely
developed Queen - time which Black uses
to make a truly profound Rook sacrtfice.

35
17. Tarrasch-Marco. Vienna. 1898
Siegbert Tarrasch was the great
explicator of Steinitz's theories. but the
dogmatic certainty with which he
expounded them in t h e end provoked t he
Hypennodem reaction 3 of the 1920s.
Tarrasch ignored those aspects of
Steinitz uncongenial to his style (such as
defense of cramped positions). but in the
exploita tion of a space advantage and the
use of active pieces he had few peers.
18. Pillsbury-Marco. Paris. 1900
Harry Nelson Pillsbury's record is
perhaps less well known than it s hould
be; his illness and premature death in
1906 deprived the world of the match
against Lask er he had long sought. Here.
he scores another fine victory with the
Queen's Gambit. as Marco thinks to
improve on the Pillsbury-Tarrasch game
(Classic Game number 15).
19. Marshall-Burn. Paris. 1900
In his autobiography, Marshall, perhaps
tongu e in ch eek. attributes his victory in
this game to the fact that it didn't last
long enou gh for Bum to light his pipe.
20. Lasker-Napier. Cambridge
Springs. 1904
Napier plays his best game of chess
against Lasker, but loses in this tru ly
remarkable game.

3nte Hypermodern movement was a group of
masters who rebelled against the dogmatism of
Tarrasch (wh o claimed that the center must be
occupied by pawns) and demonstrated the power of
counterattack against an immobile center.

21. Schlechter-Marco. Monte Carlo.
1904
The post·Steinitz era was thought by
many to be a time of dull play in
comparison to the previous century,
culminating in Capablanca's prediction
of a "draw death." But the greatest
masters of the period were still able to
rise above the uniformity of style and
produce such sprightly games as this.
22. Rotlewi-Rubinstein. Lodz. 1907
In contrast to his great rival, Lasker,
Akiba Rubinstein was a player of
calmness and simplicity; at his best, his
victOries seem as inevitable as the tide.
Here, h e demonstrates the value of time.
in a symmetrical position. White's first
loss of tempo pennits Black equality; the
second invites a brilliant. devastating
and logical attack.
23. Capablanca-Bernstein. San
Sebastian. 1911
The young CapabJanca was admitted to
this event, intended to be limited to those
who h ad taken at least two third prizes
in international tournaments. only at
the insistence of Frank Marshall, whom
Capa had beaten in a match two years
before. The Cuban won the event
convincingly, losing only one game to
Rubinstein. Ossip BeITlstein had been
one of the most vocal opponents of
Capabla n ca's admission to the
tournament. and by ch ance they met in
the first round .
24. Capablanca-Molina. Buenos Aires.
1911
A famous example of th e Bish op saCrifice
at h7. The unusual feature of this game

36
is that the sacrifice does not lead d irectly
to mate, but rather to a sustained
initiative from w hi ch Black is unable to
escape.

25. Ed. Lasker-Thomas. London. 1912
The noted chess author Edward Lasker
should not be confused with his distant
cousin Emanuel. The young German
player visited a London chess club in
1912 and was invited to playa game with
the club champion Sir George Thomas.
The result was a brilliancy which has
graced the anthologies ever since.
26. Lewltzky-Marshall. Breslau. 1912
Though he was not quite the equal of
Lasker or Capablanca. Frank Marshall
was for many years one of the top halfdozen players in the world . and a
formidable tournament competitor. His
aggressive attitude, combinational flair
and imagination produced an amazing
number of brilliant games like this one .
It is said that after the startling
conclusion . the spectators s h owered the
board with gold coins.
27 . Lasker-Capablanca. St .
Petersburg. 1914
At the end of the first half of this double·
round tournament, Capablanca stood a
point and a half ahead of his nearest
rivals, Lasker and Tarrasch. When he
met Lask er again in the seventh of the
ten final rounds. even a draw would
virtually assure the Cuban of first place.
But Lasker. ever the chess psychologist.
adopted an opening in which Black may
indeed try for the advantage, but cannot
readily obtain a draw. The result was a
great victory over a great opponent.

28. Nlmzovlch-Tarrasch. St.
Petersburg. 1914
Tarrasch. a master of the use of active
pieces (see the description of Classic
Game number 17). here gives us another
example of the double· Bishop sacrifice.
as in Lasker-Bauer (Classic Game number
12).
29. Splelmann-Flamberg. Mannhelm.
1914
Rudolph Spielmann was in many ways a
man out of his proper time. Dubbed "th e
last Knight of the King's Gambit:' he
sought a return to the swashbuckling
style of Morphy and Andersson.
30. Capablanca-Marshall. New York.
1918
Marshall launches a fierce counterattack
by means of a subtle opening novelty
(now known as the Marshall Gambit). but
Capablanca's chess instinct enables him
to thread his way through the pitfalls.
31. Rubinstein-Vidmar. Berlin. 1918
During the second and third decades of
the century. dissatisfaction grew with the
correct but colorless play of the postSteinitz era, in which masters scored
against opponents who had not
aSSimilated t h e "new" principles of
positional play. but generally drew with
one another. One of the attempts to
enliven Black's play was the Budapest
Gambit. a sharp pawn sacrifice which
Vidmar here uses to score an upset of the
mighty Rubinstein.
32. Alekhlne-Sterk. Budapest. 1921
Alekhine considered this game very
characteristic of his style. Maneuvers on

37
the Queenside divert the Black pieces.
setting the stage for a surprising mating
attack with threats on both s ides of th e
board .
33. Alekhlne-Yates, London, 1921
An extreme example of the "weak square
complex." Alekhine so thoroughly
dominates the d ark s quares that in the
end even his King can m a rch across the
board to complete the mating net.
34. Bogolyubov-Alekhlne , Hastings,
1922
A remarka ble game. in which Black
gradu a lly takes control of th e whole
board. A recurring combinative theme is
the strength of an advanced passed pawn.
which m ay create mating t hreats or
sneak through to its Queening square.
35. Maroczy-Tartakower, TeplltzSchonau, 1922
A marvelous intuitive sacrifice. When
offering the Rook at move 17. Tartakower's Judgement told him that White
wou ld h ave no way to secure his King or
ob ta in a cou nterattack . so th at Black
would be able to bring up the reserves
at leis ure .
36. Rublnsteln-Hromadka, MahrlschOstrau, 1923
Rubinstein's lucid play demonstrates the
positiona l basis of the King's Gambit. as
his diversion ary threats on the open [fIl e prove a prelude to the decisive
combinative blow against the Black King
on the other flank.

37. Griinfeld-Alekhlne, Carlsbad,
1923
Another superb Alekhine combina tion.
as he outplays opening expert Grunfeld in
the midd legame.
38. Saemlsch-Nlmzovlch, Copenhagen,
1923
This gam e is known as the -Immortal
Zu gzwan g" Game" - as soon as his pawn
m oves run out in t h e fina l position.
White will h ave to fall on his sword.
39. Retl-Bogolyubov, New York, 1924
Ema nuel Lasker won this great
tourna ment. a point and a half a head of
Capablanca. who in turn finished two
and a h a lf pOints ahead of Alekh lne. But
Richard Reti had the d istinction of
d efeating Capablan ca - his first loss in
nine years - and he won the first
brilliancy prlze 5 for this game against
Efim Bogoly ubov.
40.Retl-Alekhlne, Baden-Baden, 1925
Reti was one of the lead ers of the
"Hypermod ern" movement. Here Reti
obtains a fine strategic position from his
opening experiment. but is ensna red by
Alekhine in a whirlwind of
combination s 6 .

4zugzwang refers to a situation In which a player
would be ali ri~ht If he could M
pass. but any move
he ma kes wili Tead to disaster.
5 In m ost tournaments . a brilliancy prize is awarded
for the most spectacular win.
6A combination is a series of interrelated moves
aimed at producing an advantage .
M

38
41 . P . Johner-Nimzovich. Dresden.
1926
Nirnzovich's m aneuvers puzzled his
contemporaries. a nd this game is a case
in point (Qd7-I5- h7) , The justification
lies in the importa n ce of the Blac k pawn
on e4 . which cramps the White position.
It must be "overp rotected,~ and any pieces
engaged in such activity find themselves
well-posted for later attack.
42, Capablanca-Splelmann. New York.
1927
New York. 1927 was Capablanca's
greates t triumph. and may h ave
contributed to overconfidence in his
subsequent m atch with Alekhine - h e
won this quadruple round -robin by 2 1/2

pOints, ahead of Alekhine. Nirnzovich.
Spielmann. Vidmar and Marshall. He
a lso received the first brilliancy prize for

his victory over Spielmann, as he
elegan tly refutes Black's tactical defense
at move 17.
43. Capablanca-Aiekhlne . 210t Match
Game . Buenos Aires. 1927
When Alexander Alekhine challenged
Capablanca for the World Championship.
few observers gave him a serious chance
to win. Capablanca had dominated some
of the best players in the world at the
New York 1927 tournament. and he
rarely lost six games in a year, let a lone
in a s ingle match. But Alekhine. of
whom his contemporaries said "Ch ess
was t h e breath of life to him," had
subjected both Capablanca's games and
his own to careful study, and h e set out to
surpass the Cuban in those aspects of the
gam e in which h e was strongest.
maneuvering in s implified positions.

44. Flohr-Lustig. Prague. 1928
In the 1930s. Salo Flohr was the most
successful t ournament player after
Alekhine. and in 1938 negotiations we re
under way for a world c h ampionship
match, The events of the n ext few years the collapse of Czechoslovakia. where h e
was virtually a national hero, and the
s u spension of international chess for
nearly a decade - relegated him, like
Rubinstein a generation before. to the
realm of might-have-heens. Here, he
systematically demolishes the Black
King's position, sacrificing a piece for
each pawn, and slaughte rs the denuded
monarch. This gam e was included by
Hans Kmoch in his classic Pawn Power in
Chess to illustrate the "sweeper-sealer."
White's 23rd move simultaneou s ly frees a
square for his pieces and denies one to
Black by forcing him to occupy it with a
pawn,
45. Aiekhlne-Nlmzovlch. San Remo.
1930
In the years followin g his match with
Capablanca, Alexander Alekhine
dominated the international chess scene.
He was not satisfied with winning a
tournament by a small margin, but
played every game with a fierce will to
win. San Remo, 1930 was one of his
greatest triumphs, as he won by a margin
of 3 112 pOints a nd would not agree to
draws even in the final rounds. Here his
a rtful u se of pins reduces Nimzovich. who
finished second. to virtual zugzwang in
only 30 moves.

39
46.Stahlberg-Alekhlne. Hamburg.
i930
A brilliancy prize game. in which White's
seemingly well-founded maneuvers on
the Queenside are refuted by the opening
of a file n ear the White King. For the
serious student. it is notable that Black's
combination centers on the apparently
impregnable f3 pawn. at the intersection
of the forces on the f-file and a8-h l
diagonal.
47. LllIenthal-Capablanca. Hastings.
1934-35
A rare tactical oversight by Capablanca.
There is a (perhaps apocryphal) story
that Lilienthal played Capa in a
simultaneous exhibition as a boy. When
he asked the great master for his
autograph. Capablanca refused. and
Lilienthal vowed to beat him one day
with a Queen saCrifice.
48. Glucksberg-Najdorf. Warsaw. 1935
Polish-Argentinian Grandmaster Miguel
NaJdorf has had a long and remarkable
career. Never lacking in self-confidence.
he declared in 1947 that h e would soon
become world champion. Though his
natural abiltty was perhaps the equal of
tha t of any player in the world. he lacked
the discipline and perSistence requ ired in
the age of Botvinnik to reach the highest
level. In this game. sometimes called the
"Polish Immortal," Black strips bare the
enemy King. finally sacrificing four
pieces to drive it into a mating net.
49. Alatortsev-Capablanca. Moscow.
1935
At th eir best. Capablanca's games are
models of clarity and precision. His

instinct for proper placement of his
pieces is most clearly demonstrated in
his mastery of the endgame. but in the
middle game as well . he proves here the
maxim that combinations flow from a
superior pos ition.
50. Euwe-Alekhlne. 26th Match
Game. 1935
The "Pearl of Zandvoort" was
undoubtedly the most striking game of
the 1935 World Championship Match. in
which Max Euwe unexpectedly took the
title from Alekhine. When White
sacrifices a piece for three central pawns.
Black must play for counterattack . but
his own King proves to be too exposed.
51. Flne-Grunfeld. Amsterdam. 1936
Reuben Fine was one of the strongest
players in the world in the 1930s; his
best result was undoubtedly his tie for
first with Paul Keres in the great AVRO
tournament of 1938. in a field of the
eight best players in the world. Unfortunately. h e gave up serious play after
World Wa r II to pursue a career in
psychoanalysis. Here h e defeats opening
theoretician Ernst Grunfeld at his own
game. refuting a system then considered
favo rab le for Blac k.
52. Keres-Euwe. Zandvoort. 1936
Max Euwe held the World Championship
for only a year - his good sportsmanship
in granting his rival so early a rematch
was widely admired at the time - a nd he
has a lways been overshadowed by the
towering figures of Alekh ine and
Botvinnik. But at his peak he was a very
strong player indeed. and his best games
are models of logic and precision. Here.

40

he thoroughly outplays Paul Keres. whose
nervous attempt to break open the
position is calmly refuted.

opponent to capture an Irrelevant flank
pawn. He caps his play with a brilllant
"diverting" sacrlflce at move 30.

53. Botvlnnlk-Tartakower.
Nottingham. 1936
Future World Champion Botvinnik wins
a brilliancy prize game against the
imaginative but erratic Tartakower. The
attack beginning at move 20 is notable
for the manner in which White closes the
mating net with a series of "quiet" (nonchecking) moves.

56. Plecl-Endzellns. Buenos Aires.
1939
A lesser-known masterpiece from the last
pre-war Olympiad. With a flurry of
sacrifices. White demonstrates that an
advantage in development remains of
decisive importance even after the
exchange of Queens.

54. Keres-Hromadka. Prague. 1937
Hromadka pioneered the system of
defense now known as the Modem
Benoni, though it did not achieve real
respectability until Tal took it up 20
years later. Here Keres demonstrates the
danger of exchanging the Bg7 - even if
Black wins material in the process, his
King position is not easy to defend.
55. Botvlnnlk-Capablanca. AVRO.
1938
The AVRO tournament of 1938. sponsored
by a Dutch radio network, was a doubleround affair among eight of the strongest
players in the world. It was widely
considered a tournament to chose the
next challenger for the world championship. though it is not clear that
Alekhine would have agreed. and in any
case the European war soon made the
question moot. The young masters Fine
and Keres tied for first. well ahead of the
"old guard" AIekhine and Capablanca.
The most memorable game of the event
was Botvinnik's victory over Capablanca.
The "iron logician" systematically
advances in the center. inviting his

57.Keres-Botvlnnlk. USSR Absolute
Championship. 1941
This event, a quadruple round-robin of
the six best Soviet players. was held only
once. and Botvinnik's triumph. 2 1/2
paints ahead of Keres, would surely have
established him as a prime challenger for
the world championship had the war not
suspended International chess activity.
Here he scores a lightning victory over
Keres. who puts too much faith in t he
result of an earlier game.
58. Reshevsky-Vasconcellos. Boston.
1944
By no means a typical game by
Reshevsky. a player noted for dour
maneuvering and resourceful defense.
The explanation: Reshevsky had
clinched first place in the U.S. Open with
a round to spare. and was detennined to
have fun in his last game. When Black
wastes time capturing the worthless b2
pawn. White saCrifices a Knight to rip
open the center and checkmates the
defenseless Black King.

41
59. Denk er-Botvl nnlk. USA-USSR
Radio Matc h. 1945
The U.S. had d ominated interna tiona l
team competi tion in th e 1930s. and t his
postwar match was expected to be onesided. So it proved . but in the other
direction. as the Soviet team won 15 112 4 1/2 . This was the first boa rd 7 encounter
between the U.S. and Soviet c h a mpions.

the myriad tactical possibilities as Black
and White attack on opposite wings. a nd
drives the Black King across the board
with a rele ntless attack .
61. Zlta-Br onst eln , Prague-MOSCOW,
194 6
The long-term impact of the post-war
Soviet m asters lies in their explora tion
of unba lanced positions - how mu ch
piece activity is worth a s tru ctura l
weakn ess? This period saw a
re naissan ce of the King's Indian Defen se ,
in which Black accepts a s pace disa d vantage for tactical counterchances.
62. Stelne r-Botvlnnlk, Gronl ngen ,
1946
Another example of the Stonewall
Variation of the Dutc h Defense. long a
favorite of Botvinnik's. It is notable how
quickly White is reduced to complete
passivity a fte r adopting a n inferior pla n
a t moves II a nd 12.

Former U.

.

Samuel Reshevsky.

60. Ge ller-E. Kogan. Ode s s a , 194 6
Even at the beginning of his career . it
was evident that Efim Geller was a playe r
of grea t potentia l. He correctly assesses
71n a team match , players a re paired In order of
strength . The firs t board Is the game between the

strongest player on each team .

63. Keres-Talmanov, USSR
Championship, 195 1
In a critical last- round game. Keres
selects a n old -fashion ed opening setup in
which Judgment and expe rie n ce are more
important than pre p a ration , and h e
converts his space advantage into a
slashing attack on the poorly defended
Black King.
64. Ke res-Smyslov, Zuric h, 1953
This was a game of great sporting
importa n ce. Ke res despera tely need ed a
win to retain any hope of overhauling the
tourname nt leader Smyslov. White finds
an aggreSSive a nd original means of
bringing both Rooks into the attack. but
Black's careful defe n se a nd ce ntra l

42
counterattack carry th e d ay. Smyslov
went on to win the tournament and the
right to challenge Botvinnlk for the
world c hampionship in 1954.
65. D. Byrne-Fischer, New York, 1956
Known as "the gam e of the century" until
tha t title was u s urped by a la ter Fischer
brttliancy. this game saw the 13-year-old
Bobby Fischer defeat one of the strongest
American players with a startling Queen
sacrifice that man y players would not
have considered. It was a lready clear
that Fisch er was far a head of his
contempora ries. and he wou ld soon
overtake even the resilient Resh evsky.
66. Tolush-Talmanov, Riga, 1958
Alexander Talus h was one of those
players who. though not qui te of top
rank. produced a s lew of brillia nt a nd
original games in his car eer. In this
game. the players a ttack on oppos ite
wings. and it seems that Black's attack is
quite as strong as White's. B ut Talush

nonchalantly sacrifices t he Exc hangeS to
eliminate Black's best attacking piece.
and threa ds hts way through a maze of
complications to take the win.
67. Polugaevsky-Nezhmetdlnov, Sochl,
1958
Black drives the White King into a
mating net in th e center of the board
with an amazing intuitive Queen
sacrifice. The game is far more
impressive than Similar examples from
th e 19th cen t ury. for Whlte's d efense Is by
no means weak.
B-rhe Exchange Is the trade of a Rook fo r a minor
piece (a Knight or Bishop). The Rook Is more
valuable (see p. 7J .

68. Holmov-Keres, Tblllsl, 1959
When Black a dopts a provocative defense
that leaves his pieces scattered, White
essays a long-tenn piece sacrifice to
confine the Black King to the centra l
files. The game is particula rly
impressive because of several variations
In which White ha d to judge t hat his
initiative would persist even after th e
exchange of Queens.
69. Fischer-Benko, Bled, 1959
A vintage Fischer brilliancy, as he m akes
the demolition of a top Grandmaster look
easy with a preCisely calculated Kingside
attack.
70. Tal-Smyslov, Bled, 1959
Throughout th e 1950s It seem ed that the
duel between Botvinnik an d Smyslov
would continue until the years took their
toll on the older player. But th en Tal
arrived on the scene. and his
imagina tion . d a ring an d calculating
ability brought him to the World
Championship in 1960. In this gam e
from th e 1959 Candidates' Tourname n t.
h e downs Smyslov with a sustained
initiative a nd a flurry of combination s.
71. Spassky-Bronsteln, Leningrad,
1960
In one sense. the most fa mous game of
a ll - the final position a ppeared on the
demonstra tion board in the film Fro m
Russia with Loue. Both Spassky and
Bronstein are imaginative players a nd
afficiona dos of the King's Gambit. When
Black thinks to gain lime by attac king a
Rook, White ignores it a nd la unches a
sparkling a ttack. In RUSSian. this game

43
is known as the "Bluebird ," but this
doesn't translate wel l.
72. Petroslan-Unzlcker. Hamburg.
1960
With his quiet positional style. Petrosian
failed to excite the chess public as did the
chartsmatlc Tal . but at his best few could
match his depth of conception. Here he
paralyzes the Black position by
controlling the only open fil e. then sets
off on a long King march to prepare the
decisive breakthrough,
73. Gufeld-Kavalek. Marlanske Lazne.
1962
A sharp opening leads to a remarkable
setting, with a Bishop and swarm of
pawns overcoming two Rooks,
74. R . Byrne-Fischer. U.S.
Championship. 1963·64
Yet another "game of the century" by
Fischer, who scored an unprecedented
11-0 In the 1963-64 U. S. Championship.
Here he defeats Robert Byrne with a
combination of such profundity that at
the very moment at which White
resigned, both masters commenting on
the game for the spectators believed that
he had a won position,
75. Bakulln-Bronsteln. Kiev. 1964
A good game by Bronstein. who cleverly
creates and th en exploits weak squares
near the enemy King. Black caps his
positional play with a ~diverting"
sacrifice at move 27, the prelude to a
decisive Rook sacrifice ,

76. Bronstein-Larsen. Amsterdam ,
1964
In the 1960s the SoViet chess hegemony
was threatened first by Bobby Fischer
and then by Danish Grandmaster Bent
Larsen, Fischer's disputes with
organizers over playing conditions kept
him out of world championship
competition for a decade. but Larsen
produced a series of tournament victories
unmatched since Alekhine, including a
tie for first with Spassky. Smyslov and
Tal in the 1964 Interzonal. In this game.
Bronstein adopts a very aggress ive
continuation against the King's Indian
Defense, but Larsen combines defense and
counterattack to take the point.
77. Geller-5myslov. 5th Match Game.
USSR. 1965
The "Hypermodern" masters of the 1920s
and 30s showed that a large pawn center
was not necessarily a source of strength,
but cou ld become an object of counterattack, But new discoveries rarely refute
older experience - apples didn't stop
falling because of Einstein. Here Geller
shows the strength of the classical pawn
center. as he trades it for a winning
Kingslde attack.
78. R . Byrne-Evans. U.S.
Championship. 1966
DUling the 1960s Larry Evans was one of
the strongest U.S. players after Fischer.
Evans was known as a "pawn-grabber"
for his (well justified) fait h in his
defensive abilities. Robert Byrne lures
him into a prepared line of the of the
"Poisoned Pawn Variation," a risky but
resilient defense in which Black snatches
a pawn at the cost of his development.

44

The result is one of the most brtllia nt
games of the d ecade .
79. Larsen-Petroslan . Santa Monica.
1966
Larsen's MEvergreen Game" - he
thoroughly outplays th e World Ch a mpion
and caps his attack with a fine Qu een
sacnflce. Though Larsen fini s hed third
in the Second Platigorsky Cup (behind
Spass ky and Fisch er). h e scored 2-0
against Petroslan and I- I against
Fisc h e r .
80. Nikolich-Fischer. Vlnkovlcl. 1968
Another great gam e by Fischer. as h e
a droitly stymies White·s Queen s ide play
and sacrifices a piece to keep White's
King In a box.
81. Polugaevsky-Tal. USSR
Championship. 1970
The Bishop sacnfice on h7 /h2 is a ra re
bird these d ays. and rarer still In top level competition . but h ere we see former
world champion Mikhail Ta l falling
victim to a refined version. The game
demonstrates the Mtransformation of
a dvan tages : as White trades space a nd
materia l for time. advancing his central
pawns with a sacrifice to obtain a
winning attack. It also shows the level of
prepa ra tion requ ired of Grandmasters Polugaevsky had examined the position
a nsing at move 25 (!) In his pretournament analys is .
82. Larsen-Spassky. USSR-Rest of the
World Match. 1970
This lO-board match was won by the
USSR team by the n a rrowest of margins.
20 112- 19 112 . Bobby Fischer began h is

drive toward the World Ch a mpions hip by
defeating Tigran Petros Ian 3- 1 on board
two. while Larsen faced Spassky on board
one. Spassky's results as champion were
certainly less impressi ve than as
challen ger. but h e re h e m eets Larsen's
opening extravagan ce with classical
d evelopment. a nd scores a quic k knockout.

83. Petrosian-Gligoric . Rovlnj-Zagreb.
1970
It is when both s ides play to win that the
most exciting chess is produced . In this
game . Gligonc offers a consistent and
sou nd piece sacrifice, w hic h h owever
s hould h ave only m a inta ined the
ba lance. Petrosian·s attempt to hold on
to everyth ing r es ults in his Queen being
exiled to hI.
84. Stein-Lengyel. Moscow. 1971
Grandmaster Leo nid Ste in was a strong
and imaginative player. particularly
noted for h is skill in attack. His
unexpected death in 1973 at the age of 39
d epnved the world of many fine gam es
and a possible world ch ampionship
contender . Here h e d emonstrates the
power of the two Bis hops . a nd the tactical
dangers lurking In a n a ppa r ently s imple
position.
85. Fischer-Spassky. 6th Match
Game. 1972
Once the "sideshow" events h ad been put
asid e and he settled d own to play chess .
Fischer clearly d emons trated his
s uperio rity in hi s World Championship
match with Bons Spassky. Many
observers h ad s uggested tha t Fisch er·s
limite d opening repertoire wou ld prove

45
hiS undoing (he ha d rarely begun with
any move but I. e4). but in this game h e
showed an equal mastery of Queenside
play.

86. Bronsteln-Ljubojevlc. Petropolls.
1973
One of the m ost exciting games of the
"interregnum" between Fischer's
retirement a nd the rise of Karpov. The
meeting of two courageous tactiCians
produces a fierce battle in which both
Kings are under attack .
87. N. WeIDsteln-DeFotis. Chicago.

1973
The Naj dorf Variation of the Sicilian h as
long been one of Black's most popular
defenses. for it leads to double-edged
positions In which Black can play for a
win as well as White. Fischer and
Browne. among others. d emonstrated the
resources of the Black setup. But the
White players were not idle. and
Inevitab ly Black began to take too ma ny
Uberties. Here.White scores a crushing
win against BlacKs overrefinement
(I I.. .Rb8 and 12 ... Rg8). sacrificing Queen
and Rook for a n attack that leads to a
winning endgame .
88. Browne-Zuckerman. New York.
1973
Perhaps th e most successful American
player of t he post-Fisch er era. Wa lter
Browne from 1974 to 1983 won or tied for
first In the U.S. Cha mpionship no less
than six times. Here he shows the
advantages of the -isolated Queen's
Pawn" (open e-file, open diagonals for the
Bishops. outpost square on e5) in a game

descIibed at the time as an "orgy of
sacrifi ces ...
89. Karpov-Spassky. 9th Match Game.
USSR. 1974
Who would be Fischer's first challenger?
Most pundits chose Spassky. for though
his record as Champion had not been too
impressive. his dominant play In the
mid-sixties h ad not been forgotten. But
in the second round of the Candidates'
Matches he faced the youthful Anatoly
Karpov. who advanced to the fina ls with
remarkably mature play. Here he gives a
textbook example of exploiting a s mall
positional advantage on the White s ide of
the Sicilian Defense.
90. Portisch-Gligoric. Milan. 1975
The format of the Milan 1975
tournament was an unusual one - a
round -robin a mong 12 of the world's top
players. followed by playoff match es
among the top four finishers. Hungartan
Grandmaster Lajos Portisch won the
preliminary leg. but h e lost the fina l
match to Karpov 3 112-2 112. In his game
against Svetozar Gligorlc. Portlsch caps
his strategic play with a series of finely
calculated "interference" combinations.
(See The Chessmaster's Problem
number 7.)

91. Geller-Karpov. USSR
Championship. 1976
Anatoly Karpov once s uggested that
Grandmasters could be divided into
"maximalists " and "minima lists" - those
who try to find the best move in every
pos ition. and those who economize their
Ume and effort to achieve the bes t
tournament standing. Efim Geller

46
belongs to the first group. One of the top
SoVIet Grandmasters since the early
fifties. he h as produced many. many fine
games. and here he outplays the World
Champion. concluding with a spectacular
Queen sacrifice.

92. LJuboJevlc-Andersson. WIJk aan
Zee. 1976
When two players of contrasting styles
meet. the result is a battie of Ideas which
can only enrich the game. LjubojeVlc Is
one of the most dangerous attacking
players of the modern era. while Ulf
Andersson Is one of the most difficult
players to defeat. With a sharp pawn

saCrifice. White places many practical
problems before his opponent. and with
the clock ticking. Andersson Is unable to
find the hidden path to the draw.

93. Korchnol-Polugaevlky. 7th Match
Game. Evlan. 1977
Karpov's first challenger for the World
Championship was Vlktor Korchno!.
Korchnol played under many handicaps:
after his defection to the West tn 1976.
SoVIet Grandmasters boycotted
tournaments In which h e competed. and
it Is difficult for any master to stay In
top form without top-filght competition.
Still. he came to the Candidates' Matches
armed with many new Ideas and a fierce
will to win and scored decisive VIctories
over Tigran Petroslan. Lev Polugauvsky
and Boris Spassky.
94. Spallky-Korchnol. 2nd Match
Game. Belgrade. 1977
The Wlnawer Variation of the French
Defense leads to sharp. unbalanced
positions reqUiring both strategiC
judgement and precise calculation. Long
a favorite of BotVInnlk. it Is also very
well suited to Korchnors counterattacktng style. In this game from his
final Candidates' Match with Boris
Spassky. Black sacrifices a pawn for the
Initiative. and the White King Is unable
to find a safe haven on either side of the
board.

Grandmaster LaJos Portlsch.

95. Chrlstlansen-Selrawan. Berkeley.
1978
In the round-robins which predominate
at the International level. every player
may expect a reasonable prize. but in
American "Swiss" tournaments (a large

47
number of players compete over a
weekend. with equal scores being paired
in each round). a last-round game may
mean the difference between a
substantial prize and a long walk home.
In this game. Selrawan outplays his
opponent strategically. but Christiansen
launches a clever counterattack which
leads to a King hun t and a very long
discovered check9.
96. Adorjan-Ribll. 4th Match Game.
Budapest. 1979
Hungarian Grandmaster Andras Adorjan
shows a fine tactical flair in prosecuting
his attack against the denuded Black
King. The use of an advanced passed
pawn to support mating th reats is not
new. of course. but Adorjan adorns it
with several witty and original pOints.

97. Kasparov- Butnoris, USSR, 1979
An early example of the future World
Champion's promise. Many players.
even very strong ones. would have
rejected the White position after move 19.
but Kasparov looks Just a little further.
98. Kasparov-Marjanovlc, Malta, 1980
The 17 -year-old Kasparov plays a Une
first p layed by PolugayevskY in his
match against Korchnoi. Marjanovic's
pieces con gregate on the Queenside an d
Kaparov sends his to the Kingside.
Marjanovic's Kingside pawns are no
match for a ll of the pieces sent against
them.

9A discovered check occurs when one piece attacks
the opponenfs King because another piece . which
blocked the attack . is moved out of the way.

Grandmaster Viktor Korchnoi (I .) and
U.S . Champion Vasser Seirawan .

99. Alburt- Peters, U.S . Championsh ip ,
1981
In this brilliancy prize game from the
198 1 U.S. Championship. Black's sharp
Exchange sacrifice produces a complex
position with the struggle ranging all
across the board, an example of Modem
Benoni at its best.

100. Selrawan-Karpov, London, 1982
A rare sUp by Karpov in the opening
allows Seirawan to win a piece, and he
exploits his advantage preCisely and
energetically. This was the first
tournament victory by an American over
a reigning world champion since Dake
defeated Alekhine at Pasadena 1932,

48
101. Korchnol-Kasparov, Lucerne
Olympiad, 1982
A titanic struggle. Karpov chose not to
play in the match in which he would
have to face his bitter enemy Korchnoi.
and so the first board encounter was
between the fonner challenger and the
next one. Kasparov chose a sharp and
risky piece sacrifice to stir up threats
against the White King. and even
Korchnofs great defensive sktlls proved
Insufficient.

102. Hanken-BELLE, Pasadena, 1983
Man versus machine. as a human master
faces the world computer champton at
the 1983 U.S. Open. Hanken exploits the
computer's primary weakness. a lack of
positional judgement: it will grab
material if it cannot see a bad
consequence within the number of moves
it looks ahead. while a human player
wou ld see trouble on the horizon.

•

KASPAROV KAK~

•

Cary Kasparov (I.) and Analoly Karpov.

-

49
103. Smyslov-Ribll, 5th Match Game,
London 1983
The old lion proves that he can still bite.
as Vassily Smyslov. World Champion in
1957. crushingly defeats favored
Hungarian Grandmaster Zoltan Ribli.
Smyslov won the quarter-final
Candidates' Match 6 112-4 1/2. avoiding
modem theoretical variations a nd
relying on classical positions in which
his greater experience gave him the edge.
104. Bellavsky-Nunn, Wijk aan Zee,
1985
Despite the vast a mount of theory that
has accumulated on the King's Indian
Defense over the last 40 years. it is still
possible for a creative player to produce
an original game. John Nunn is one of
the new generation of Grandmasters who
have made England one of the world's
leading chess powers (silver m edal in the
1986 Olympiad. behind the Soviet
Union). Beliavsky is one of the top
Soviet players after Kaspa rov a nd
Karpov.
105. Karpov-Kasparov, 24th Match
Game. 1985
Once more a game in which the sporting
factors outweighed the chesslc ones.
After 23 games. Kasparov led by a score
of 12- 11. but a 12- 12 tie wou ld al low
Karpov to retain the World
Cha mpionship. and he had White in th e
last game. Kasparov remained true to
himself. eschewing passive defense and
once more adopting the double- edged
Siciltan Defense. Karpov obtains an
attack sufficient for a draw. but his
attempts to obtain more lead only to a

s lashing counterattack and a decisive
Victory for the challenger from Baku.
106. Ribll-Kouatly, Lucerne , 1985
The roma ntic gambits of the 19th century
are rarely seen nowadays. but any
opening can lead to exciting play in th e
hands of an imaginative player. Here
Hunga rian Grandmaster Zoltan RibU
u ses a quiet fzanchetto opening 10 as the
springboard for a Kings lde attack with
several witty pOints.
107. Yusupov-Noguelras, Montpellier,
1985
Even in a quiet Queen's Gambit. opening
inaccuracies may meet with a drastic
refutation. It is true that in closed
positions maneuvering may be more
Important than rapid development - but
you must be certain that the position will
remain closed .
108. Rohde-B. Kogan, U.S.
Championship, 1986
A brilliancy prize game by one of the best
young American players. White's control
of the center prevents the Black pieces
from gathering to exploit the weakened
position of the White King. and White
makes u se of the corollary of the doubled
pawns ll - an open fil e l2 - to prepare a
sacrificial attack against the Black King.

l OA jlanchetloed (fixed) Bishop Is one that is placed
on the square ort~inally occupied by the Knighfs
Pawn after It has been pus h ed one square.
I 1Doubled pawns are two pawns of one color on the
same me. They a rc usually a weakness.
12An open file Is a file which Is n ot blocked by any
pawns. It can provide a palh of attack for a Rook or
Queen.

50
109. Short-Ljubojevi c , Netherlands ,
1988
Though his results have been uneven .
young British Grandmaster Nigel Short is
considered by many the West's best hope
to regain the world championship. After
a tiny inaccuracy. he is able to sacrifice
two pieces to smoke out the Black King
a nd drive it all the way to h2 before
administering the coup de grace.
110. Seirawan-Tal , Brussels, 1988
In the early 80s Seirawan was closely
associated with Ta l's nemesis Viktor
Korchnoi. In this game. he chooses a
solid opening well-calculated to put the
aggreSSive Tal off his game. a nd improves
his record a gainst the former world
champion to 4-0 .

51

Brainteasers
These ten problems are d esigned to teach
you tricks and techniques you can use to
win.
If the problem calls for White to move
and mate in some number of moves. then
you must find the move for White that
will force checkmate of Black In that
number of moves (or possibly less if
Black errs.)
8

7

K~

111

6
5

If the problem calls for White to move
and win. then you must find the move for
White that leads to an overwhelming
advantage. such as the win of a piece. or a
passed pawn (one which can not be
prevented from Queening) .
The solutions to the problems begin on
page 54.

8

7

1

11 '1

6

~

1

0

1

1

.Q.. ft
4:l
2
ftftftft 1ft ft ft

4

3

3

§

fQ. A,'

abc d e

Al

5

4

1

A*~

K

~"'!i.~)K

§

f

2

1

4:l
ftftftft
§

9 h

1. Legall's Legacy
White to move and mate in 2 moves.

~

K

111
ft
4:l

ft
ft

.Q..'itJ'it>.Q...§

abc d e

f

9 h

2. Deflection

Black to move and mate in 4 moves.
8
7

1
1

6
5
4

3

3

2

2

ft

1

§

abc d e f

9 h

3 . Alekhlne-Reshevsky, Kerner! 1937
White to move and win.

it'

abc d e

f

9 h

4 . Phllldor's Legacy.
White to move and mate in 5.

52

•
7

•

I

6

5 .t,l

4

1! ~

1

.i.

3

.i. ...
1 .:£:j 1
ft

•
7

6
5 ~

1

<£)

2 ftftft
.§E

<$}

abc d e

f

9 h

15 . Saunlna-Chek hova. Sochl. 1980
White to m ove and win.

•
7

•

1

7

4

3 ft
2 ft .i.

3

It

be d e

f

•

'II

1 {J 1

ft

-'t

7

•

1

it'

<£) 1

.§

1

"

.:£:j

ft

8 . Hect or- Talavera . Seville . 1986
White to move and mate In 5.
b

1 E!
{1
6 .§.ru
5
1
4
t
7

2

'1f

1

a b c d e f gh

9 h

7. Interfe re nce
White to move and win.

9 h

Ii.
.i.

5

4

3

'1

6

1

f

6 . Wahls-Bjarnason . Malmo . 1985
White to m ove and mate in 7 .

•

6

5

abc d e

5

.:£:j

'#i'

4

-'t . •

it'

.ft

3

,

ft

ft 1

'it>

ab c d e f g h

abcdefgh

9 . Problem by D. Densmore. 1916
White to m ove and mate In 4.

10. Endgame Study - Troltzky. 1914
White to m ove and win .

53

Algebraic Notation
The solutions to the Brainteasers are
written in algebraic notation. one of a
number of shorthands for writing down
chess moves. Here's how to read it.

The columns of the chessboard. called
jiles, are lettered a through h. The rows,
called ranks, are numbered 1 through 8.
like this:

'.41.t.'lr¢>.t.41 A

,, 11111111
,
,
,
' ft.ft.ft. ft.ltft.ft.
{) ,Q:itI'it>.Q. {) !:l
ab c d e

fgh

Each square is referred to by its file
and rank. For example, the White King is
on e l .
Each piece is referred to by a letter:
King
Queen
Rook
Bishop
Knight

K

Q
R
B
N

There is no symbol for a pawn; it is

referred to by the absence of a piece
letter.
A move is described by the move
number. the piece moving and the square
it moves to. For example. from the
starting position in the diagram above,
the moves 1. Nf3 d5 mean that on move 1
White moves a Knight (N) to (3, and then

Black moves a pawn (no piece letter) to
d5.
The move 4 ... d5 means on move 4 Black
moves a pawn to d5: the - ... - tells you
that White's move number 4 is not
shown.

In all these examples. the move is clear
because there is only one piece of the type
called for that can move to the
destination square. But sometimes two
identical pieces can move to the same
destination square. In that case. the
correct piece is indicated by the rank or
file the piece starts from . For example.
Nef5 means the Knight on the e file
moves to is.
If a capture is made. the letter x appears
before the square: Bxg6 means a Bishop
captures on square gB.
Other symbols are also used:
0{)

0-0-0
+
++
Q
ep
!
!!

?
??
!?
?!

Castles Kingside
Castles Queenslde
Check
Checkmate
Promotes to Queen
En passant
Good move
Excellent move
Poor move
Blunder
Interesting move
Questionable move

In the solutions to the Brainteasers.
bold type is used for the moves in the
problem solution and light type for other
possibilities being discussed.

54

Solutions to Brainteasers
1 LegaU's Legacy
White to move and mate in 2 moves.
This is the only surviving game of
Philidor's pupil Legall de Kermeur.
played at Paris c. 1750. Black blundered
on his last move. capturing the Queen on
d I. and now White mates with 1. Bxf7 +
Ke7 2. Nd5++.
2. Deflection
Black to move and mate in 4 moves
The mating pattern should be familiar
after problem number I. but here the Nf3
guards the d4 square. So. 1. .. Qh4+! 2.
Nxh4 (or 2. g3 Qxg3+ 3. Ke2 Qf2+ 4. Kd3
Nb4++( 2 ... B£2+ 3. Ke2 Nd4+ 4. Kd3
Nc5++.
3. Alekhine-Reshevsky. Kerner!. 1937
White to move and win.
A combination exploiting the weak
back rank. After 1. Rxb8+! Kxb8
2. Qxe5+ there are three variations:
i) 2 ... Kc8 3. Qc7++. iI) 2 ... Ka8 3 .Ral+ Ra2
4. Rxa2++. and iii) 2 ... fxe5 3. Rf8+ and
mate in two moves.
4 . Philidor's Legacy.
White to move and mate in 5.
This "smothered mate" is often known
as "Philidor's Legacy," though it was
known to Lucena. 1. Qe6+ Kh8 2 . Nf7+
Kg8 (If it were not for the weak back
rank. Black could play here 2 ... Rxf7) 3.
NhS+ Kh8 4. Qg8+ Rxg8 5. Nf7++ .

5. Saunlna-Chekhova. Sochi. 1980
White to move and win.
Though hidden by the presence of other
pieces, the pattern here is the same as
"Philidor's Legacy." 1. Rxe4 Qxe4
(Black can avoid immediate mate only by
losing a full Rook. e.g. I. .. Qc6 2. Rh4
Rxg7) 2 .Ng5 Qgs 3 .Qxh7+! Qxh7
4. Nxf7++.
S . Wahls-Bjarnason. Malmo. 1985
White to move and mate in 7,1
A clearance sacrifice involves vacating
a square with gain of time, so that it can
be occupied by another of the same color.
Here White would like to combine the
action of hiS Queen and the Be3 for an
attack on a7. and plays 1. Ra8+! Kxa8
2 . Qal+ Kb8. Now 3. Nc6+ doesn't
work - 3 ... Qxc6 4. Qa7+ Kc8 5. Qa8+ Kd7
and the King escapes. So White uses the
motif of attraction (see problem number
8): 3. Qa7+! Kxa7 4. NcS+ KaS (or
4 ... Ka8) 5. Ral+ and mates in two moves.
7 . Interference
White to move and win.
Interference involves placing a piece at
the intersection of lines of action of two
enemy pieces. If one of them captures. it
will block the action of the other.
1. Nf5 Bxf5 (Forced. as other moves
either allow mate at h7/g7 or lose the
Queen for nothing. But now the Bf5
blocks the Black Queen's defense of the
1 A c?~puter solution of this mate would require
exammmg some 4,500 trillion board pOSitions.
This would take a few thousand years, more or less.
depending on the speed of your machine . If you
solved this problem, you can not be replaced by a
computer.

55
Rg5.J 2 . Qf6+ Kg8 3 . Qxg5+ Bg 6 4. Qf6
and wins .

8 . Hector- Talave r a , Seville 1986
White to move a nd m ate in 5.
The combination based on attraction
involves forcing a n enemy piece to
occupy a bad square. on which it is
subject to a fork. discovery or some other
combinational motif. Class ic Game
number 25 (Ed . Lasker-Thomas) is a n
extreme example.
This one is similar: 1. Qx h6+ Kxh6
2. Ne6+ g5 3. Rf6+ Kh 5 4, Ng7+ Kh4
5. Bel++ .
9. Problem by D. Densmore, 1916
White to move and m ate in 4 .
Composed problem s a re a world qUite
apart from practical play: aesthetic
principles govern . as every piece mus t be
need ed. and ideally every variation
shou ld be thematically related to the
main idea.

Here the idea is a "Plachutta
interferen ce" - two Black pieces defend
against two threats. their lines of action

intersectfng on a critical square. By
sacrificing a piece on that square. White
forces one of the Black d efenders to
occupy it a nd "interfere" with the other.
After the key move. 1. Ra2. Wh ite
threatens 2. Rc2++. Black has several
defenses:
i)

1.. .Rf2 2 . Be2
a) 2 ... Rfxe2 3. Re8+ Rxe8 4 . Rc2++
b) 2 ... Rexe2 3. Rc2+ Rxc2 4 . Re8+

i i)

I...Qf1 2. Be2
a)2 ... Qxe2 3. Re8+ Qxe8 4. Rc2++
b)2 ... Rxe2 3. Rc2+ Rxe2 4 . Re8++
iii) I...Qh7 2. Ne4
a ) 2 .. .Qxe4 3. Re8+ Qxe8 4. Rc2++
b) 2 ... Rxe4 3. Rc2+ Rc4 4 . Re8++
iv)

1.. .Rf5 2. Ne5
a ) 2 ... Rfxe5 3. Re8+ Rxe8 4 . Rc2++
b) 2 ... Rexe5 3. Rc2+ Rc5 4 . Re8++

v)

1...d5 2. Ne6
a) 2 ... dxe6 3. Rc2++
b) 2 ... Rxe6 3. Re8+ Rxe8 4 . Rc2++

10. E ndgame Study. Troltzky. 1914
White to move a nd win.
Endgame studies differ from problems
in th a t they do not lead to a mate in a
s pecified number of moves, but to a
winntng position by means of a forced
maneuver .
The them e of this study is domination
of the Black Queen by the two White
pieces. 1. Rb7 Qg8 We can quickly
dismiss 1...Qxb7/c8/e8 2. Nd6+. Squares
attacked by the Knight or Rook are
obviously out. leaving a8, f8 and g8 .
l...Qf8 fa ils to 2. Ne5+ Kc5 3. Nd7+. and
I.. .Qa8 to 2 . Ne5+ Kc5 3. Rb8 Qxb8
4 . Nd7+ . But the main line seems safe.
2 . Ne5+ Kc5 3. Rb8 Qh7 Again.
3 ... Qxb8 loses to 4 . Nd7+. But now the
Queen s eems to be out of the box ... 4 . b4+
Kd6 5 . Rh8 and the Queen is tra pped 5 ... Qxh8 6 . Nf7+ wins.

56
The Software Toolworks appreciates
the assistance of the publishers of
Pergamon Chess magazine.
Published monthly. Pergamon Chess
contains chess news, problems. contests,
lessons and features like Beginners'
Corner. Beat the Masters and Computer
Chess.
For subscription information, write:
Pergamon Chess
Railway Road. Sutton Coldfield
West Midlands. 873 6AZ England

The Software Toolworks, a California
Corporation. warrants that the diskette
on which this program is recorded is free
from defects in material and
workmanship for a period of thirty (30)
days from the date of purchase.
In the event that the diskette fails to
operate due to defects in material or
workmanship within thirty days of purchase. return it to The Software
Toolworks for a free replacement.
Should the diskette fail to operate after
the thirty-day period . it will be replaced
for a five dollar charge.
The diskette and accompanying booklet
are licensed to the purchaser for personal
use only. Neither may be copied, or used
for any commercial purpose without the
expressed written permission of The
Software Toolworks .
The above warranties are in lieu of all
warranties. expressed. implied or
statutory. including but not limited to
a ny implied warranties of
merchantability and fitness for a
particular purpose and of any warranty
obligation. In no event shall The
Software Toolworks be liable for
indirect. special or consequential
damages.

The photographs on pages 9, 17.20.23.26 and 28

appear courtesy of UPI/Bettmann Newsphotos.

The Chessmaster® Is a registered trademark of The
Software Toolworks.