Showing posts sorted by relevance for query nunn. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query nunn. Sort by date Show all posts

08 March 2025

Book completed: John Nunn's Best Games, 1985-1993

    


I recently completed John Nunn's Best Games 1985-1993 (Batsford Chess Library, 1995), annotated by the author. GM Nunn is one of the chess world's most accomplished and interesting authors, and has been referenced multiple times on this blog. Some of his other works are specifically aimed at improving players; this is not one of them. 

I would say it falls into a similar category as Victor Korchnoi's best games collection - these high-level annotated games are similarly high-quality, but have relatively little hand-holding for Class-level players. The benefit of studying annotated games collections from the author's own perspective is that you get a unique window into both their chess-related thought process and general psychological factors affecting the game. Nunn's thought process insights are uneven in their level of detail, but in many of the games he does provide more of an explanation of the positions' key characteristics and his evaluations, making them very pertinent for improving players. The biographical details are both personally interesting and lend useful context into his state of mind for each tournament and game, although the chess politics comments are now mostly irrelevant.

One theme that struck me while reviewing the games was Nunn's mastery of evaluation of compensation, which involves understanding positional factors that outweigh the material balance, in the absence of forcing tactics. His comments in that regard I found particularly useful, and are not something you can easily find in chess training material. Nunn's games were also routinely very tactical and combative, with a lot of King's Indian and Sicilian games, so there was plenty of material there as well for understanding tactical concepts, visualization and calculation.

I'll close this with an example of one of Nunn's games (number 34 in the collection) that I think very well illustrates his mastery of compensation for sacrificed material.


[Event "Belgrade Investbank"] [Site "Belgrade"] [Date "1991.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Nunn, John DM"] [Black "Nikolic, Predrag"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C19"] [WhiteElo "2610"] [BlackElo "2625"] [PlyCount "69"] [GameId "1165542594732032"] [EventDate "1991.11.??"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "11"] [EventCountry "YUG"] [EventCategory "15"] [SourceTitle "CBM 027"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceDate "1992.04.01"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "1992.04.01"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 c5 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 Ne7 7. Nf3 b6 8. Bb5+ Bd7 9. Bd3 Ba4 10. dxc5 bxc5 11. O-O c4 12. Be2 Ng6 13. Ng5 Nxe5 14. f4 Nd3 15. Bxd3 cxd3 16. f5 e5 17. Qh5 Qe7 18. Ne6 Kd7 19. Bg5 f6 20. Be3 Na6 21. cxd3 g6 22. Qg4 Bc6 23. Nd4 exd4 24. Bxd4 h5 25. Qh3 g5 26. Rfe1 Qf8 27. Re6 Rh6 28. Qe3 Re8 29. Re1 Nc7 30. Bc5 Qf7 31. Be7 Rh7 32. Qc5 Bb7 33. Qxa7 Kc8 34. Rb1 Rxe7 35. Rxb7 1-0

12 January 2025

Training quote of the day #52: John Nunn

   


From John Nunn's Best Games 1985-1993, Batsford Chess Library, 1995:

Initiating tactics when you have a serious positional disadvantage usually results in an early train home.

(From the annotations to game 30 in the collection, comment made after Black's move 24.)


[Event "Lloyds Bank op 14th"] [White "Nunn, John DM"] [Black "Howell, James C"] [Site "London"] [Round "?"] [Result "1-0"] [Date "1990.??.??"] [ECO "B81"] [WhiteElo "2600"] [BlackElo "2450"] [PlyCount "63"] [Beauty "8250363765287"] [GameId "1166636823298048"] [EventDate "1990.08.??"] [EventType "swiss"] [EventRounds "10"] [EventCountry "ENG"] [SourceTitle "EXT 1997"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceDate "1996.11.15"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "1996.11.15"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. g4 Nc6 7. g5 Nd7 8. h4 a6 9. Be3 Qc7 10. Qe2 b5 11. Nxc6 Qxc6 12. Bd4 Bb7 13. O-O-O Rc8 14. Rh3 b4 15. Nd5 a5 16. c4 Kd8 17. Kb1 Nc5 18. Rf3 Rc7 19. Re3 Rd7 20. Bh3 h6 21. g6 fxg6 22. Rg1 g5 23. hxg5 hxg5 24. Rxg5 Nxe4 25. Bb6+ Kc8 26. Rh5 Rxh5 27. Qxh5 Kb8 28. Rxe4 exd5 29. Re8+ Bc8 30. Bxd7 Qxd7 31. Rxf8 Qe7 32. Qe8 1-0

29 December 2024

Mastery Concept: Pawn sacrifices for piece activity

This is another in the periodic series of Mastery Concept posts, which highlight chess ideas at the Master level which are often ignored (or even unknown) at the Class player level. Typically these come from seeing a recurring theme in a recent series of game analysis, one which is echoed in other chess study materials that I'm using. Today's theme is the concept of choosing to sacrifice a pawn, in return for compensation in the form of piece activity.

One of my personal chess weaknesses has been an overly materialistic assessment of situations, which means I have inappropriately valued material over positional factors. This is a common phenomenon at the Class level. For example, players may hang onto a pawn for dear life, even if defending it cramps their position and gives their opponent a winning initiative, rather than deliberately jettisoning the pawn in return for freer and more active play for their pieces.

Another situation illustrated below is ignoring candidate moves that "lose" a pawn, without taking into consideration the benefits for the player's overall game. In some cases, these can even be very temporary sacrifices, or the pawn itself is "poisoned" due to a tactical response, which means ignoring the possibility - consciously or unconsciously - is a definite blind spot in the thinking process.

Finally, I'll make the observation that none of these pawn sacrifices lead to forced wins; these are not puzzles to be solved and the game is over. Rather, they are superior to other candidate moves, even if they only end up in a level position. This fact may also contribute to a Class player not considering them, if there is no obvious win or advantage that results.

Firstly from my own play, here are some clear examples. They are followed by a few master-level ones; if you go through any collections of annotated master games, you should be able to easily find more.

Annotated Game #296: The recurring idea of c4-c5, opening diagonals and the c4 square for pieces. I eventually play it, but under less favorable circumstances than I could have earlier in the game - this is also a recurring theme.

Annotated Game #295: The f-pawn sacrifice I should have played comes early enough to be considered a gambit, but the principle is the same - in return for the pawn, the rest of my pieces gain activity that provides full compensation.

Annotated Game #293: The move 15 possibility of playing c4 opens up activity for the dark-square bishop and queen, and works due to tactics (the hanging b-pawn is poisoned) that I should have further considered.

Annotated Game #291: Here's another freeing c4-c5 pawn sac idea on move 15.

Annotated Game #272: This shows the power of the e3-e4 pawn lever in Colle / Stonewall type positions, even when it is a (temporary) sacrifice.

A few Master-level examples, including from analysis:


From Bologan's Caro-Kann: A Modern Repertoire for Black (New In Chess, 2018) - analysis, King's Indian Attack; the d-pawn is given up by Black for piece activity, and it is also instructive to look at what happens if White tries to seize the d-pawn earlier.

[Event "?"] [White "Enter New Game"] [Black "?"] [Site "?"] [Round "?"] [Result "*"] [Date "????.??.??"] [PlyCount "32"] [GameId "2128221663227972"] 1. e4 c6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 e5 4. Ngf3 Bd6 5. d4 exd4 6. exd5 Nf6 7. dxc6 Nxc6 8. Nb3 O-O 9. Be2 Qb6 10. Nbxd4 Bc5 11. c3 Bg4 12. O-O Rad8 13. Qb3 Bxd4 14. cxd4 Qxb3 15. axb3 Rfe8 16. Bd1 a6 *

From John Nunn's Best Games 1985-1993, Batsford Chess Library, 1995; games 20 (move 19) and 22 (sequence starting with move 21)

[Event "World Cup"] [White "Nunn, John DM"] [Black "Portisch, Lajos"] [Site "Reykjavik"] [Round "8"] [Result "1-0"] [Date "1988.10.??"] [ECO "C73"] [WhiteElo "2625"] [BlackElo "2635"] [PlyCount "65"] [Beauty "8179769202696"] [GameId "1166636377100288"] [EventDate "1988.10.??"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "17"] [EventCountry "ISL"] [EventCategory "15"] [SourceTitle "CBM 010"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceDate "1989.06.01"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "1989.06.01"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 5. Bxc6+ bxc6 6. d4 exd4 7. Qxd4 Nf6 8. O-O Be7 9. Nc3 O-O 10. Re1 Bg4 11. Qd3 Bxf3 12. Qxf3 Nd7 13. b3 Bf6 14. Bb2 Re8 15. Rad1 Re6 16. Qh3 Qe8 17. f4 Rd8 18. Qe3 Nb6 19. e5 dxe5 20. f5 Rxd1 21. Rxd1 Re7 22. Ne4 Rd7 23. Nxf6+ gxf6 24. Re1 Qd8 25. Qe4 Nd5 26. Qg4+ Kh8 27. Bc1 Qf8 28. c4 Nb4 29. Qh4 Qd6 30. Qh6 Rd8 31. h3 c5 32. Re4 Rg8 33. Qxh7+ 1-0

[Event "Olympiad-28"] [White "Pinter, Jozsef"] [Black "Nunn, John DM"] [Site "Thessaloniki"] [Round "12"] [Result "0-1"] [Date "1988.11.26"] [ECO "E99"] [WhiteElo "2535"] [BlackElo "2435"] [PlyCount "92"] [Beauty "7220913783326"] [GameId "1166636396122112"] [EventDate "1988.11.13"] [EventType "team-swiss"] [EventRounds "14"] [EventCountry "GRE"] [SourceTitle "TD"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceDate "1994.03.01"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "1994.03.01"] [SourceQuality "1"] [WhiteTeam "Hungary"] [BlackTeam "England"] [WhiteTeamCountry "HUN"] [BlackTeamCountry "ENG"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. Nf3 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Ne1 Nd7 10. f3 f5 11. g4 Kh8 12. Ng2 a5 13. h4 Nc5 14. Be3 Ng8 15. Rb1 Bd7 16. b3 b6 17. a3 a4 18. b4 Nb3 19. Nb5 Nf6 20. exf5 gxf5 21. Nc3 e4 22. g5 Nh5 23. fxe4 f4 24. Bd2 Nxd2 25. Qxd2 Qe8 26. Bf3 Ng3 27. Rfe1 Be5 28. Ne2 Nxe4 29. Bxe4 f3 30. Nef4 fxg2 31. Nxg2 Qh5 32. Qd3 Bg4 33. Re3 Qf7 34. Qd2 Qg7 35. Rd3 Rf7 36. Re1 Raf8 37. Ne3 Rf4 38. Ng2 R4f7 39. Ne3 Bh5 40. Rf1 Rxf1+ 41. Nxf1 Rf4 42. Qe1 Bd4+ 43. Kg2 Qe5 44. Ng3 Bg4 45. b5 Bf2 46. Qxf2 Bh3+ 0-1

From Journey to NM - Lightning Strikes Back blog, the round 4 game; technically this isn't master-level play, but it's close and White's sacrifice of the d-pawn for piece activity and an attack is an excellent example.

Don't Just Memorize, Understand! Two Key Moves in the London System - the full video (from Dr. Can's Chess Clinic) is worth watching for its principles, also containing a great pawn sacrifice idea in the central variation presented against the London System, which has a concrete tactical reason behind it.

24 December 2024

Training quote of the day #51: John Nunn

  


From John Nunn's Best Games 1985-1993, Batsford Chess Library, 1995:

It is curious that I have always played best when the result didn't really matter; if there is some additional stress, such as often occurs in the last round of an Olympiad, the result has usually been disastrous. I know some people who operate the reverse way, and achieve their best results when put under pressure. I think the difference is in the level of stress which a normal game of chess engenders in an individual. Some stress is essential for a good performance, and in my case I find a normal game creates just the right level of adrenalin for optimal play. When other factors are added, the balance shifts and my play deteriorates.

09 December 2024

Training quote of the day #50: John Nunn

 


From John Nunn's Best Games 1985-1993, Batsford Chess Library, 1995:

I decided that I had still not fully recovered from the overdose of chess at the end of 1988, and that the best cure would be a complete rest from the game. Thus, my 'preparation' for the Rotterdam World Cup was to not look at a chessboard for a month.

The playing conditions and organization at Rotterdam were excellent, and the tournament attracted a good turn-out of spectators.

As I arrived in Holland, I was extremely nervous about how my plan would turn out, but in fact it succeeded beyond my expectations. I felt enthusiastic about playing chess for the first time in many months and I had plenty of energy for the games. Fortunately, most of my opponents challenged me in openings with which I was very familiar, and after six games I had scored five draws and one win.

13 October 2012

What makes an annotated game useful?

Perhaps it's better to ask what makes an annotated game most useful.  There are quite a number of things that we can look for in annotations, for example:
  • Openings guidance - traps to avoid, identification of critical lines, explanations of typical ideas and choices
  • Comparison of possible middlegame strategic plans, including ones not chosen
  • Examples of combinations
  • Key tactical ideas, either in the game itself or in variations
  • Methods of conducting an attack
  • Methods of conducting an effective defense
  • Understanding of key turning points in the game and how they came about
  • Evaluations of positional factors
  • Endgame strategies explained
  • Endgame technique explained
  • Meta-factors - these include things like the tournament standing of the players (does one need a win desperately?), personal rivalries, and past history of their meetings
Any game containing all of the above is sure to be very useful for the improving player's understanding of the game.  But how often do you see that?  Rarely, of course.  But some works do offer us this kind of high level of utility
  • Logical Chess Move by Move by Irving Chernev was the first book I completed after starting this blog.  Not all of the games contain all of the elements described above, but on the whole the collection does cover all the bases, at a level of explanation geared toward the club player.
  • I also own John Nunn's Understanding Chess Move by Move and read it a number of years ago.  I will definitely return to it, hopefully with greater concentration and deeper understanding.
  • I'm still working through Bronstein's Zurich International Chess Tournament 1953 on my lunch hours, when possible.  His game annotations vary in depth but are among the most useful and engaging that I've run across.  Naturally those of his own games are very insightful and his willingness to present a critical view of his own thought processes and actions is quite refreshing, as well as instructive.
  • Anatoly Karpov's How to Play the English Opening is an outstanding example of instructive, high-level GM annotations.  Rather than produce a standard opening manual, Karpov annotated a large number of illustrative games in the English at the professional level.  As I noted in the original post, it's not for the faint of heart, although a focused club player should be able to keep up with most of it.
Perhaps you have your own favorites.

I also find it fun and valuable to look at annotated games from ongoing international events, for example those posted on the Chessbase news site.  A recent report on the Polish Team Championship drew my attention for the helpfulness of the two game annotations it contained, particularly the fact that explanations of ideas at key points were provided.  This sort of thing also shows that it doesn't take a huge effort to produce annotations with valuable insights.

While we're on the subject, I think it's also worth re-emphasizing the utility of annotating one's own games as a method of improvement.  In fact, it's hard to see how someone can make significant progress without analyzing and better understanding their own play.  As a somewhat crude example of this, it's been a bit embarrassing for me to repeatedly publish games with the same basic errors in them, for example in the Caro-Kann Advance variation series.  In the past I neglected this type of analysis and as a result simply wasn't even aware of the need to correct my play.  The implications of this for my performance at the chessboard are obvious, as are the benefits of doing game analysis now.

As a final note, one doesn't have to be a master-level player  to usefully annotate games, especially if they're your own.  Some other bloggers in the chess improvement community have done similar things and I'm always interested in seeing what they come up with.  My previous favorite example was TommyG's blog (now defunct) as it was always entertaining to read and the game annotations, which were geared towards self-improvement, I found both useful and motivational.

10 August 2020

Bad chess attitudes #2: My opponent disrespects their clock and must be punished

I'm highlighting in a short series of posts some bad chess attitudes that can actively harm our game performance and hold us back from improving. To avoid being seen as too judgmental, I'll only share ones that I've struggled with myself. #1 was about trying to punish your opponent's opening choices; here it's about their clock use.

Old school clock, perennial issue
2. My opponent disrespects their clock and must be punished

This attitude can afflict chessplayers who consider themselves to be conscientious about time management. It is a common reaction to those opponents who show up late to a tournament game, which means their clock has significantly run down before they start playing, or to opponents who get massively behind on time and have to blitz out a number of moves to make the time control. Both of these things, of course, can occur in the same game.

The objective result of this situation is always an advantage to the player with more time on their own clock. However, even if you have more time on the clock, a misguided emotional reaction to the situation can disrupt your own game more than that of your opponent. Rather than focusing on playing as excellently as you can, which I think for an improving player should be the goal of every serious game, it is common to instead start trying to punish your opponent for their misuse of time. This attitude typically manifests itself in choosing to play more quickly than you know you should, to try to pressure your opponent into moving more quickly themselves. In essence, it is a decision to pursue a negative strategy (trying to force the opponent to make bad moves) rather than a positive one (focus on making good moves yourself).

The obvious problem with this strategy is that it puts you on roughly the same level as your opponent in terms of actual time usage. This means you end up playing your opponent's kind of game, rather than your own. Time-trouble "aficionados" - or "addicts" or whatever you choose to call them - by definition have a lot of experience in playing rapidly. This means they are used to it and maybe even enjoy it, especially if they play a lot of blitz chess. I believe it is a fundamental error to think you will successfully rattle your opponent by altering your own playing style for the worse. Occasionally it might work, but relying on luck (for your opponent to play badly) while deliberately compromising your own excellence of play is a bad idea in itself, and is not likely to be a winning strategy over time.

Instead, a practical approach to time management is to develop a general game plan for your clock usage at the selected time control - then stick to that plan, regardless of what your opponent does. This means consciously calculating your expected average time per move and using that as a cutoff point for think time, making an exception only if you are in a critical position. For example, GM John Nunn in Secrets of Practical Chess recommends forcing a cutoff of the thinking process when you cannot decide between two moves with very similar evaluations after a reasonable period of calculation/thought. Basically, you pick one on intuition and do a blunder check before going with it. This practice can help reduce unproductive mental wheel-spinning, since in many positions without forcing continuations, it is easy to simply keep calculating different possibilities with no real resolution.

A common thread for this bad attitude and #1 on openings is focusing excessively on how your opponent is choosing to play. In reality, you have little to no influence over their move choices or how they use their clock, which means your mental energy is much better spent on improving your own game. Like many things that seem simple and obvious, it is not always easy to enforce this kind of mental discipline during a game. Deliberately committing to an efficient time management plan and positively focusing on the quality of your own play, however, should provide a strong foundation for your game, regardless of what your opponent does.

29 December 2014

Chess computing resources for 2015 - Part I: Database and Analysis Software



This starts a series of posts that will be, in part, an update of previous ones on computer-related resources.  In this post, I intend to review chess database and analysis software functionality in a more in-depth manner, from the point of view of an improving club player.  My primary aim is to provide a reasonably comprehensive guide on how improving players can use these computer tools in a practical manner.  I therefore focus on how they can assist game analysis and related studies, which I've made the centerpiece of my own improvement program.

Online chess game publishing is a separate but related topic that I think deserves its own future update, although the last post on the topic from 2013 remains useful as a starting point.

Companion posts in this series on other types of computing resources can be found here:
Part II - Chessplaying software and computer opponents
Part III - Game databases and e-books
ChessBase's list of web-based applications

Database and Analysis Software

This category of computing tools, which use game databases for training, study, research and analysis purposes, has evolved to the point where I believe it can and should be employed by all serious chessplayers, not just the pros.  The broad range of functions now included in software packages cover just about everything you would want to do in chess analysis and preparation.

Although some database programs offer options for computer opponents along with analysis functions, that is normally not their primary focus, so I've decided to break that category out (along with a more detailed discussion of computer engines) into a separate post on chessplaying software / computer opponents.  Finally, in a third post I'll include a list of some game database resources and discuss the use of chess e-books (that in reality are annotated databases) and related software.  Naturally, individual software packages can contain all of the above categories of chess resources.

Below we will explore various types of database functions and highlight their possible utility for the improving player.  In large part, I'm doing this in order to help expand my own training tools for the new year by making myself smarter on the available options.  That said, I hope readers may also find the walkthrough and function review helpful.

Because ChessBase 13 (CB13) was just recently released and is popularly viewed as the "gold standard" for database software, I'm using that as the primary reference point for examples.  Other packages (including the two listed below) may provide similar functionality in many respects and for less money (or even for free, in the case of SCID vs PC).  Because of the quality freeware available, there is now no barrier to entry for any serious player (of whatever grade) to have, at minimum, a database of their own collected games available for analysis, along with a large database of master-level games for study, comparison and research.
  • Chess Assistant 15 - this package from ChessOK is the main commercial database alternative to CB13, with its own proprietary format, although both it and CB13 can also work with PGN files.
  • SCID vs PC - this is a full-featured freeware database analysis package (including the Stockfish engine and pre-loaded opening books) that also has some extra features like a FICS client for online play.  Latest release version as of this post is October 2014, from the Sourceforge site linked above.
For organizational purposes, below I'll examine different database functions under the headings of opening, middlegame and endgame study, along with a final section on game analysis, which serves to put it all together.

A.  Opening Study

One of the fundamental tasks for a chessplayer is to keep a record of their opening repertoire, as it is created and evolved.  Although ChessBase has offered designated "repertoire" databases with the most recent versions, including two individual ones for White and Black with CB13, this type of database organization and use is not terribly intuitive, including for more advanced players.  The simple openings database system I use - SORDS - organizes different major variations into games, similar to the way openings books are divided into different chapters. This is something any database program can do for you.
  • Collect Openings is a CB13 function (see PDF manual p. 227) that is designed to be used on a database of your own games.  It will automatically create a new database that groups and merges games into different opening classifications, in effect showing you what your repertoire has been.  This seems like a powerful tool and could, for example, be used to generate your first repertoire database automatically.
  • Opening "books" are included in many database programs, can be generated from them, or downloaded as separate files.  CB13 allows you to generate them from a reference database (see PDF manual p. 191) or if you are online to access the "Live Book" which is always up-to-date.  A "book" gives you a tree of opening moves to follow, similar to printed references such as Modern Chess Openings (MCO), the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings (ECO, whose codes are now standard), Nunn's Chess Openings (NCO), etc.
Statistics are normally included along with book displays. For example, here is a screenshot of the LiveBook from CB13.  It shows the move (the opening move for White, in this case), number of games in the book with that move, the score (result) in percentage terms, average Elo of players playing that move, the date, and the book evaluation.  This is typical across database programs.  The CB13 Livebook also has "visits" and a percentage next to it, which shows what moves people have been looking at in the online book.


The "Reference" tab in CB13 provides a deeper look at the position on the board and is primarily used for study of the opening phase, as it automatically retrieves and compares all games in the database with the same position.  As an example, below shows Gelfand-Tomashevsky from the 2014 Baku Grand Prix commentary after Black's 6th move.  As with the book format, we can see the move list (starting with White's move 7), number of games in the database and score (from White's perspective).  It also includes the last time it was played in the database by a titled player, the "Hot" indicator (a bar that reflects more recent play by top players), and a list of the best players who have played the move.  (move list, % result from White's perspective, "Hot" games, best players)


In the second window, the database program provides the most popular and highest-scoring lines (showing number of games and percentage score) along with the line fragment.  This shows at a glance how the game can evolve from the position and points of departure.  The third window contains all of the database games (obviously with a scroll bar) and can be sorted by all of the column headers - White player, White Elo rating, Black player, Black Elo rating, result, date, and notation.  These functions are all quite helpful and will be discussed further in the Game Analysis section below.  All of the games shown can be brought up in a separate window by double-clicking them.

"Report - Opening Report" is a CB13 function that scans the reference database and sorts information into a new database with HTML text and links, essentially providing an automatically-generated document detailing the reference pane information.  While this can be quite helpful to have all laid out for you in once place, as the main moves and continuations are included in the output, along with links to high-level sample games, the function is not fully reliable.  For example, running the opening report on the game position above, from October 2014, does not include it or any of the other 2014 games in the database output.  I believe this is a quirk in how CB13 is querying the date field of the games, as I've noticed the 2014 games in the database (Mega 2014) have included a month in that field; the software appears not to be able to recognize that with this particular function.  This same quirk can affect column sorting by date, although the games themselves at least appear.

Search functions allow you to look up games by ECO code and whatever other criteria you would like to add.  For example, as part of my "Stonewall Hero" exercise, I pulled all of Artur Yusupov's games in the Stonewall (ECO code A90) up via the search function and copied them into a new database.
  • In the reverse process, most databases should allow you to look up the ECO code of the game - in CB13 this can be done via "Report - Opening Classification".  ECO codes can also be searched online at various chess sites (or even just via standard internet search such as Google, for example "ECO code Classical Caro-Kann").
Identifying the game novelty (the move when it first goes out of the database) can be done various ways, including simply stepping through the game moves until there are no other database games showing in the Reference section.  The shortcut for this in CB13 is to use the Report - Novelty annotation function, which accesses the Live database for comparison purposes.  In the example above, Gelfand-Tomashevsky, the novelty is flagged as 12...c5 and the software automatically includes a predecessor game as a variation in the annotations, as well as a game in what it considered a relevant major variation for White on move 9.  More on the role of variations will be discussed in the below Game Analysis section.


B.  Middlegame Study

While openings are an obvious choice for database research, since there are normally so many other examples to draw on for each game analyzed, the middlegame should not be ignored either.  Looking at similar structures, tactics and maneuvers across different games is an excellent way to identify and better understand position-types that are common in your games.

In CB13 the user has to manually activate the "themes" for database sorting, but once that is done (File - Options - Misc - Activate theme keys), they will automatically appear for databases in ChessBase format.  There are four tabs with different theme categories: a general one, tactics, strategy and endgames.  What appears there will depend on how (or if) the games have been modified or marked.
  • "Themes" tab contains a number of different miscellaneous categories, the most useful of which (if you have an annotated database like Mega 2014) is probably "Commented games", which contains games with comment symbols and/or text broken down into a number of subcategories such as "Initiative", "Attack", etc.  Individual historically important players have their own subcategories, for example in Mega 2014 Fischer has 162 commented games.
  • "Tactics" tab provides broad categories ("Attack", "Defense", etc.) rather than examples of specific tactics - see below for a more specific search function - but also includes games with training questions.  In Mega 2014 there are 3732 games with training questions (2088 commented) included.  Because CB13 allows you to edit any game to include training questions, this could be a very useful tool for assembling your own computer-based "flashcards" for tactics, using your own games or those of others as a base.  Training questions can also be used in an opening repertoire database, as a means of testing your recall and understanding of positions.  The questions can also be toggled on or off in the main menu, so if you prefer to see the whole game at once it's not an obstacle to have the questions included in database games.
  • "Maneuver search" (PDF manual p. 88) is the way you can look for a particular tactic across different games using CB13.  You need to follow the manual's instructions for the search, but it allows you to do some powerful things, for example look for all bishop sacrifices on h7 while automatically mirroring tactics for the other side (in this case Black bishop sacrifices on h2).
  • "Strategy" tab contains a large number of categories and is much more developed than the corresponding tactical themes.  For example, there is a detailed breakdown of pawn structure types and different material imbalances.  This offers an easy way of researching both classic and recent games with particular middlegame features, for example an isolated White pawn on d4.
  •  "Report - similar move" (PDF manual p.168) - "With one click the program finds games with similar pawn structures where similar moves were made."  When analyzing games (see below), this is a particularly interesting feature.
  • "Report - similar structures" (PDF manual p.167) - "With one click the program loads all the games with similar pawn structures from the database and sorts them by similarity to the current game. The program also takes account of the positioning of the pieces (rooks on open rows, queen and bishop on the same diagonal, the position of the kings)."  This is also a particularly powerful comparative feature when analyzing games and can benefit a serious student, one who wants to emulate Benedict of Amber and observe how similar battles are fought.  Both this and "similar move" do appear to work properly, in my limited testing.

C.  Endgame Study

Endgame themes lend themselves well to database analysis and comparison.  The "Endgames" tab contains a lot of different subcategories, for the most part broken down by material, already populated.  Below I've expanded the Pawn Endings and Rook vs. Other Pieces endings as examples.

  • "Report - Similar endgames" is a CB13 function that can be called from a specific game (PDF manual p.167) - "The games are sorted by similarity. The program takes account of pawn structures (passed pawns, blocked pawns, connected pawns, chains, isolanis, backward pawns) and the relevant positioning of the pieces (rooks behind passed pawns, rook is cutting the king off, king in a square, wrong bishop, etc)."  Again, this type of function is useful for your own game analysis, especially if you want to take it to a deeper level or to get a quick idea of how other players have handled similar situations.  This can, among other things, help identify winning ideas and plans.
  • Searching for material distribution in an endgame is a more basic function, but if your database software lacks automatic report generation, then it can serve a similar purpose.

D.  Game Analysis: putting it all together

For the type of game analysis I normally do for training purposes, I take a balanced approach between doing only a superficial review and a deep probing of my games and selected master-level ones of interest.  For a more detailed discussion of the benefits of the analysis process, you can follow the above link; here I'll focus on the utility of using database and analysis software to enable the process.
  • Commentary / "your thoughts here" - any software that allows you to create and maintain a database of your own commented games is an invaluable study tool.  Putting your thoughts down (in terms of text commentary, symbols, and variations) shortly after each serious game you play is fundamental to better understanding your strengths and your areas needing improvement.  Normally I do this on a fairly superficial level (taking 15-20 minutes) as a first pass on analysis of one of my games, to identify my thinking process, evaluations during the game, and key variations that were considered but not played.
  • Openings / "what would Grandmasters do?" - the next step in analysis is stepping through the opening moves with the "Reference" tab open.  This tells me how far the game follows the main line (as indicated by the majority of database games at the master level), if there are major move branches or only one overwhelming preference by professional players, and helps capture transpositions that only looking at the move sequence would ignore.  Some of the most useful additional functions are looking at what the strongest players for your side do (sorting by Elo) and also sorting by date, to see what is currently considered best (or at least most popular).  Other games can easily be copied into your game as variations, either for temporary or permanent reference.
  • Variations / "choices choices choices" - using the software, you have a free hand to put down all of the options that occur to you at each point and then explore them as much as you want.  While the same type of thing can be done using a physical board - and this has its uses for training - the virtual board gives you much greater efficiency in moving between the stem position and all of the various branches, as well as recording your thoughts.  It's important to be curious about what works and what doesn't in a position (and why).  Something that made an impression on me was a quote from GM Nigel Davies, as blogger Robert Pearson used to cite, "...move the pieces around...Grandmasters do this, amateurs don't."  In other words, set things up for yourself and work it out.
  • Engine analysis / "evaluate" - there has been a good deal of silliness written about the horrible evils of using chess engines in training, on the one hand, and their infallibility, on the other hand.  "Pitfalls of Computer Analysis" contains some more detailed thoughts on this topic.  To my mind, the best use of engines, when loaded into database software, is to provide a very strong objective evaluation of the position in front of you.  One trick even top grandmasters like Kramnik use is to load an engine and have it display its current evaluation, but not the moves under consideration, so they can work it out for themselves.  The major caveat for improving players using an engine for assistance is that, if you cannot understand its evaluation in the absence of concrete tactics, it will not be of much use to you from a learning perspective.  However, if you can at least describe the major positional factors at play, a top engine can help guide you in better understanding things like the value of compensation, space advantages and structural strengths/weaknesses, especially as you step through variations to see their final outcomes.  Engine analysis normally is of significant assistance in identifying key turning points in a game, along with highlighting missed opportunities - especially ones which would simply never occur to you.
For more in-depth computer analysis, CB13 includes the "deep analysis" function, which is best left running for a lengthy period of time on a game and then saved as a different game from the original one.  It also goes a step further with programmed multiple "analysis jobs" which let you queue up position analyses with various advanced parameters for your engine(s).  This type of approach was first included a few years ago in the Aquarium software package (which will be referenced in the next post in the series) as "IDeA" projects.  These types of functions in practical terms will be of interest more for the professional or correspondence player, or people who are more interested in very deep analysis of individual games; I have not done more than give the functions a cursory look.

In Part II of this series, I will take a closer look at chessplaying software and engines, including some additional thoughts on the practical value of computer opponents and analysis for the improving player.

Below are some additional references for CB13 functions:
All of the above are from the ChessBase site and of course one must keep in mind that they are designed to help sell the product.  The individual authors' assessments of the product nevertheless seem to be valid; I would consider that the first article is the most candid in that respect.