The Chess Mind

Garry Kasparov, with the participation of Dmitry Plisetsky, Garry Kasparov on Modern Chess, Part Two: Kasparov vs. Karpov 1975-1985. Everyman Chess, 2008. Reviewed by Dennis Monokroussos.

Why do we play chess? Is it for the competition? That might be one reason, but if that’s all we’re after we could engage in hundreds of other activities instead. Maybe it’s for the social aspect, the fun of seeing friendly acquaintances week after week at the local club? That too is part of the story, but here too chess is hardly unique. And it certainly can’t be for the money. I submit that at least two other elements are present for most chess fans: the beauty of the game at its best, and the gripping drama of its historical moments. When we see chess – fighting chess – at its best, we’re inspired and amazed, energized to go forth and do likewise in our games. (Or at least try to.) And just like sports, the great battles in chess history arouse our passions as fans, watching the heroes of the game beat the odds and fight their way to the top.

If that’s what inspires you, too, then the decision to get Garry Kasparov’s brand new work covering his games with Anatoly Karpov through their second world championship match almost defines the expression “no brainer”. The Kasparov-Karpov matches were the greatest in chess history, for many reasons. First, it was an epic battle: two players enduring five full matches for the world chess championship in six years is unprecedented. All five matches were very closely contested, with two of them coming down to the final game. Four of the matches went the distance – 24 games – and the one that didn’t went an insane 48 games. Further, one of the players (Kasparov) is widely recognized as the greatest player of all time, while the other (Karpov) is easily a candidate for the top five ever, and at least arguably the greatest player ever prior to his rival. Add to this the high level of their play, the clash of styles and personalities, the vicissitudes of the matches, and the intrigue (and how!) and, taking the matches as a whole, we have perhaps the greatest event in the history of chess.

As mentioned in the previous paragraph, the first two matches (comprising 72 games) are covered in the book, as well as four games played in earlier years. The first match, like Karpov’s title defenses in 1978 and 1981, was a race to six wins. After nine games of this match, played in 1984, Karpov had won four and lost none. Match over, right? Incredibly, no. Kasparov started a strategy of grimly hanging on, and managed to regain his equilibrium. While he assumed of course that the match would eventually be lost, he survived the immediate disaster and drew the next seventeen(!) games. At that point, Karpov won yet another game, and a 6-0 whitewash looked imminent. It didn’t happen. Kasparov won game 32, and after fourteen more draws and the start of a new year (1985), won games 47 and 48 as well.

What happened next was unprecedented and remains controversial to this day. Florencio Campomanes, then the FIDE President, made the decision to stop the match. On what basis, you might wonder, and for whose benefit? For the answer to that question, you should read Kasparov’s book…and other works as well. But Kasparov certainly lays out the case that this, as well as other events that occurred before the match, were done by leading members of the Soviet Chess Federation for the benefit of Karpov. (Needless to say, Karpov tells a different story, which is why I suggest multiple accounts of this episode.) The upshot was that the match was terminated and the players started anew in a traditional 24-game match.

That second match was a thriller: it went back and forth, featured some exquisite chess and the occasional blunder, and came down to the last game. Kasparov led by a point, but if Karpov won (with White), the match would be drawn and Karpov, as champion, would keep his title. Karpov had his chances too, but Kasparov’s defense and subsequent counterattack won the day, the game, the match and the title. (And then they played three more times, including a rematch the very next year – but for that we’ll have to wait for the next volume.)

Those two matches are the centerpiece of this volume, and Kasparov’s coverage is worthy of them. The games are deeply annotated (but not to forbidding, Hübnerian depths), and the biographical and match narratives make for interesting and occasionally riveting reading. Karpov fans might cringe every now and then, both because of the way the matches went and because of Kasparov’s pointed statements, but they won’t be bored!

I have one minor criticism concerning Kasparov’s coverage of the second match. There are updates to the analysis and theoretical comments, of course, but both the analysis and especially the text closely follow the material in Kasparov’s 1986 Pergamon Press book New World Chess Champion. There are new remarks, of course, but after twenty-three years it would have been nice to see a fresh text rather than a reworking of the original. This is only a minor point, however, as almost no one has the earlier book, the material on the first match is wholly new to English readers, and the analysis of the second match has been expanded and very carefully checked. So while more original narrative and retrospective material on the second match would have been welcome, this only slightly dims my great enthusiasm for this volume.

Very highly recommended.

Note: the book is available through the usual outlets (the publisher, chess book outlets that overcharge, Amazon and its copycats), but it’s worth considering buying it as an e-book. I enjoy reading physical volumes more than texts on a computer, but it’s conversely easier to go through well-annotated games in (e.g.) Fritz or ChessBase than on a board. (Full disclosure: I purchased the book long ago on a pre-order, but received, upon request, a copy of the e-book from the publisher.)

Alexander Delchev and Semko Semkov, The Safest Sicilian: A Black Repertoire with 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6, 2nd edition (Chess Stars 2008). 228 pages. Reviewed by Dennis Monokroussos.

To my mind, Chess Stars is now the premier publisher of opening books in the chess world. While there are other authors outside their stable whose work is worth reading (I’ll give Viktor Moskalenko and David Vigorito a plug here), Chess Stars (henceforth CS) has done a consistently fine job of producing works that are up to date (the authors finished this book in July; by August it was in my hot little hands), written by very strong grandmasters, well-organized, thorough, and with enough explanation for an outside to learn what is and isn’t important in a given variation. Based on what I’ve seen from the __est Sicilian books (Easiest, Safest, Sharpest) and Khalifman’s “Opening According to Anand/Kramnik/Karpov” series, I feel comfortable at this point telling readers from 1900-2000 and up that if CS puts out a book on one of their openings, they should probably buy it. (Players below this level would benefit more from “Starting Out” books.)

This book is no exception. Delchev (the stronger player and primary author) and Semov have put together a fine work advocating a repertoire based on what’s loosely called the Taimanov Sicilian, though as the authors note the lines employed nowadays often have only the most tenuous connection to what Taimanov himself advocated. After explaining certain move order finesses and laying out the book chapters, the material begins.

The first two parts cover 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nb5 d6, and now the part 1 addresses the Hedgehog structures that result from 6.c4 while part 2 looks at the Kalashnikov-like 6.Bf4 e5. Almost the entire remainder of the book examines positions resulting from 5.Nc3 Qc7, and I’ll note here that they reject 5…a6 on account of the 6.Nxc6 lines. Back to 5…Qc7: Part 3 turns to the very popular “English Attack” system with 6.Be3 followed by f3, Qd2 and long castling. Part 4 sees the Classical System with 6.Be2. Part 5 returns to 6.Be3, but after 6…a6 White plays 7.Bd3 and castles on the kingside. Part 6 offers yet another approach with 6.f4, part 7 introduces the fianchetto line with 6.g3, and then in part 8 we see what happens after 6.Nb5 (hoping to exploit the absence of 5…a6) or if White plays 6.Nxc6 despite the absence of 5…a6. Finally, the last three parts of the book examine White alternatives to the Open Sicilian after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6: the Alapin (or Sveshnikov) 3.c3, the King’s Indian Reversed (or KI Attack) with 3.d3, and various lines of lesser importance. (If you’re worried about anti-Sicilian lines that begin on move 2, you’re out of luck.)

The preceding paragraph indicated what they cover; this one will describe how they cover the material. Each part is divided into three, um, parts: Quick Repertoire, Step by Step, and Complete Games. The Quick Repertoire section has two main functions: provide some needed general information about the variation to be discussed, and to provide the main lines with a minimum of detail. The first function is especially valuable, and I’ll offer some excerpts from that portion of part 1 below. In the Step by Step section, Delchev gets into the theoretical details, but without abandoning verbal explanation, talk of themes, positional traps to avoid and so on. Finally, the Complete Games are lightly annotated but do a nice job of illustrating key positional ideas once the more overtly theoretical phase has passed. On a few occasions, the complete games are an occasion to extend the theory of a key line a bit more deeply, but the heavy duty material is generally confined to the Step by Step section.

As an example of what we can find in the Quick Repertoire section, let’s focus on part 1 (3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nb5 d6 6.c4). Here the authors offer Black three key bits of advice. First, Do not wait passively! This is a repudiation of the view that Black can “aimlessly [maneuver] for 20+ moves without committing to any concrete action.” As an example of the ills that can befall Black play if he acts in this way, the position after move 18 in the game C. Ionescu – D. Heinbuch, Berlin 1988 is presented. They write: “Beward this setup! The hedgehog structure is not bullet-proof. White has a clear pawn for a queenside pawn storm. In the diagram position White lately struck a very unpleasant for the opponent idea. [Yes, the English isn’t always perfect. But this is one of the worst examples, and I don’t recall finding an instance where the meaning wasn’t clear.] Beside preparing c4-c5, he could capture on e5 and base his play on the clumsy bishop pair.” The game continued 19.Bxe5! dxe5 20.c5! Rfd8 21.Qe1 Rxd1 22.Rxd1 Rd8 23.cxb6 Bxb6, and now they claim that 24.Rxd8 followed by 25.Na4 gives White a clear advantage.

The next piece of advice is also negative. Some claim that Black can more or less automatically meet White’s opening with the “Saemisch maneuver” (…Rc8, …Qb7, …Bd8-c7) followed by …Kh8, …Rg8 and …g5, hoping for a kingside attack. To this, Delchev and Semkov say Forget about this plan! They briefly explain why, and then offer their last bit of general advice: The slogan of Black’s campaign should be: d6-d5! There’s further explanation of why this should be, what is likely to be required in achieving this break, and what the results might be.

There’s independent analysis in the book, the bibliography covers all the expected sources (one exception: James Rizzitano’s 2006 “Chess Explained” book on the Taimanov isn’t included, but Khalifman’s very important Opening for White According to Anand, vol. 9, is), so with the book’s other assets it’s very easy to give this work my wholehearted recommendation – if you’re at least 1900 (or a correspondence player, or an ambitious player not too far from 1900) and are interested in playing either side of the variations he covers. One question remains to be answered though: what should one do if he already owns the first edition of this book, from January 2006? According to the preface, there are important updates and additions to parts 3 and 4, a “major reconstruction” of part 5, there’s some new material in part 6 and on the Alapin, with only minor corrections elsewhere. So my answer to the Update?/Don’t update? Question is that is that it depends. If the latest and greatest theory and analysis isn’t essential, or if you’ve kept up on your own and have generated your own ideas, then you might not want to spend the money. Still, for more serious players in need of the latest ideas, it could well be worth the expense. (Maybe the best solution would be some sort of e-update for the updated chapters for an intermediate cost.)

Highly recommended (for stronger readers and correspondence players).