The importance of CCT: example #3 - Szabo-Reshevsky, Zurich 1953

I'm continuing to work my way through Bronstein's Zurich 1953 International Chess Tournament during my lunch hours at work and recently came across the following game (Szabo-Reshevsky, round 19 game 130 in the tournament book).  I have to admit that Reshevsky is one of my all-time favorite players and I always enjoy going over his games.  In this one, on move 20 he overlooks that, instead of the obvious recapture on f6 by White, there is a mate in 2 by his opponent after Qxg6+.  Szabo however also overlooks this and Reshevsky then eliminates the Bd5, which was the source of the tactic.  According to Bronstein, Szabo then realized his mistake and was thoroughly shaken for the rest of the game and for some time afterwards in the tournament.

This is another simple, clear example at the professional level that highlights the utility of CCT (Checks, Captures and Threats) in the thinking process.  There are two possible checks on the board for White on move 21.  Bxf7+ can be calculated very quickly as not working, while Qxg6+ can be calculated almost as quickly as leading to the mate.  Because the g6 pawn is optically protected by the f7 pawn, but is not protected in reality due to the pin on f7 by the Bd5, the capture with check is a non-obvious move unless the pin is explicitly recognized in the thinking process.  The "obvious recapture" on f6 is another distraction from recognizing the critical tactic.

The benefit of CCT comes from literally forcing the player to recognize this type of critical tactical element, which as we see from the game can otherwise be overlooked, even by world-class players.  Once Qxg6+ is contemplated, it immediately becomes apparent that fxg6 is impossible.  This requires very little expenditure of calculating time and energy, in exchange for a great reward.

Annotated Game #58: The importance of CCT - example #3

The following first-round tournament game featured an early deviation from normal Slav lines with the Nbd2 development.  White's unchallenging setup gives Black a small plus out of the opening with comfortable development.  Some interesting analytic points come up in the opening and early middlegame where it was revealed that I could have made better decisions:

• Move 7, where Black could have played less stereotypically and obtained an advantage in the center.
• Move 12, where Black should have thought twice about moving the rook off the h-file instead of automatically castling.
• Move 13, where Black could have opened up the center to his advantage.

In the middlegame, a premature pawn thrust from White is mishandled by Black, who could have obtained an easy game by redeploying the Nf6 to a better square. This inaccuracy was however offset by White allowing what kingside pressure he had to be nullified.  Black on move 23 again passes up the chance to open the center to his advantage, focusing only on the immediate material gain of a pawn.  As a result, the kingside and center become closed and play shifts to the queenside.  Black is too slow in redeploying his forces, however, and White gains a winning advantage before missing the best continuation and sliding into a draw.

Recent posts have highlighted the importance of CCT (Checks, Captures and Threats).  Here, White could have won the game by using CCT as part of his thinking process on move 37.  There are only two captures on the board and one wins by force (Bxa6), as the resulting series of recaptures ends with a knight fork.  Once you consider the possibility of Bxa6, the rest is actually rather easy to see and calculate.  However, the pawn is "obviously" protected and if a player does not force themselves to consider non-obvious moves like that, they will be overlooked.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class B"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "D11"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Fritz/Houdini"] [PlyCount "83"] {D11: Slav Defence: 3 Nf3 sidelines and 3...Nf6 4 e3 Bg4} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nbd2 {I don't play these types of queen pawn openings, but this can't be the most challenging continuation for White. Among other things, his dark-square bishop will now have to be developed to b2 or a3, unless the knight goes to b3 (not a great square for it).} Bf5 {Black continues with the standard Slav setup, with no reason to vary from it.} 5. b3 $146 {out of the database on move 5! Either fianchettoing the king's bishop with g3 or playing Nh4 followed by Qb3 are the most popular continuations here.} e6 $15 {by transposition, we are now back in the database, although with just a handful of games; Black wins 2/3 of the time.} 6. a3 {Prevents intrusion on b4, notes Fritz. Although have played Nd2 instead of Nc3, this seems rather a waste of a tempo.} Be7 7. Nh4 Bg6 (7... Be4 {is the active alternative favored by Houdini. White will be able to exchange knight for bishop if he wants to; if it's done on e4, Black gains more central control.}) 8. Nxg6 hxg6 9. e3 Nbd7 10. Bd3 Qc7 11. h3 {Covers g4} O-O {Black should perhaps think twice about moving the rook off the h-file, given its greater scope there and potential White threats along it.} 12. h4 (12. Bb2 dxc4 13. Bxc4 Bd6 $14) 12... e5 {the correct reaction to a flank attack, a countermove in the center that creates activity for Black.} 13. cxd5 {White continues making unnecessary pawn moves rather than developing, with say Bb2 or O-O.} cxd5 (13... exd4 {should have been considered, with White's king still in the center.} 14. exd4 Nxd5 {and White cannot castle immediately due to the hanging h4 pawn.}) 14. Bb2 e4 {this gains space and highlights the problem with White's dark-square bishop development.} 15. Bb5 a6 16. Bf1 {this looks strange, but with the center pawns now fixed, White's king is in no immediate danger. The bishop having exhausted its possibilities on the queenside can now be redeveloped on the kingside.} Rac8 17. Rc1 Qd8 18. g4 $6 {this pawn thrust is premature and weakening.} (18. g3 { with the idea of Bh3 instead looks playable.}) 18... Rxc1 19. Bxc1 Nh7 { the right idea, but wrong square. Now the knight will either be locked away or waste additional time redeploying.} (19... Ne8 {is clearly superior.} 20. g5 Nd6) 20. g5 f6 21. h5 Qe8 {Black finds the correct (and only) defensive idea.} 22. Bh3 (22. hxg6 $5 {would be a more logical follow-up.} Qxg6 23. Qc2 $11) 22... f5 $15 {now White's bishops have almost nowhere useful to go.} 23. f4 gxh5 {the obvious choice for a material grab, but not the best.} (23... exf3 { would break open the center and make White's king position a major liability.} 24. Nxf3 gxh5 $17) 24. Bf1 {literally back to square one.} g6 {this prevents any further ideas of a kingside attack by White. The theater of battle now shifts to the queenside.} 25. Be2 Qf7 {clearing the way for the rook to get to the c-file.} 26. Nb1 Rc8 27. Kf2 Nhf8 28. Bd2 Ne6 29. Bb4 Ng7 (29... Bxb4 $5 { is preferred by the engines. The resulting doubled pawns would be weak and allow Black significantly better chances of breaking through on the queenside by targeting the pawns.} 30. axb4) 30. Qd2 $17 Nb8 $6 {this is too slow, as the other knight needed to be brought into the game with either Ne6 or Ne8.} 31. Bxe7 Qxe7 32. Rc1 Qd7 $2 {this is the pivotal move. Black is complacent and thinks only of recapturing on c8 with his queen, giving him the c-file. Even if that were sound tactically, White could easily play Qc3 afterwards, negating Black's control.} (32... Rxc1 {and Black retains his edge.} 33. Qxc1 Qd8) 33. Rxc8+ $16 Qxc8 34. Nc3 {the d5 pawn now inevitably falls, as neither knight can protect it and the queen if it did would be skewered against the king by Bc4 after recapturing on d5.} Qc7 {a move which does less than nothing, giving White a free tempo. Black should try to bring more pieces into the queenside battle with Ne8. Black was clearly shellshocked by his late realization of the tactic leading to the loss of the d5 pawn.} 35. Nxd5 $18 Qd6 36. Qc3 Nc6 37. Qc4 {here White fails to see the winning tactic and provides another good example of where using the CCT thinking process would have led to a victory.} (37. Bxa6 {it's the only capture White has on the board.} bxa6 38. Qxc6 {a classic psuedo-sacrifice, diverting the queen to a square where it will be forked.} Qxc6 39. Ne7+ Kf7 40. Nxc6 $18) 37... Kf8 $14 {now the forking tactic no longer exists.} 38. Nf6 (38. Nb6 $5 {with the idea of d5 would have put more pressure on Black.}) 38... Ne7 {fighting for the key d5 square.} 39. a4 Ne8 {forcing White to exchange.} 40. Nxe8 Kxe8 $11 41. Kg3 Qc6 42. Kf2 1/2-1/2

The importance of CCT: example #2 - Biel round 9

The previous example featuring a calculation error that could have been avoided using CCT (Checks, Captures and Threats) showed how considering all checks - in that particular case, just one check was possible on the board - could have won the game.

This next example is from round 9 of the Biel super-GM tournament and illustrates the second C (captures) part of the thinking process.  See what happens on move 30, when White (Etienne Bacrot) fails to consider all possible captures by Black.  The Re1 is protected, so evidently GM Bacrot did not bother to calculate its possible capture.  White's multiple hanging pieces, however, means that this was an immediately losing oversight.

The importance of CCT: example #1 - Biel round 1

When constructing a practical thinking process, I used as a centerpiece Checks, Captures and Threats (CCT).  This simple idea - beginning any search for candidate moves with these three categories of forcing moves, in the order presented - in fact can have a huge impact on your ability to find "hidden" or non-obvious move possibilities in a position.  CCT should therefore be applied both to identifying your opponent's possible threats (ideally right after he/she moves) and to your own candidate move selection.  The previous linked post goes into more detail on the overall thinking process, for those interested.

Of course, a thinking process is only effective if it's actually used.  Some of my recent games have reinforced this fact to me, as it's all too easy to fall back into bad old habits of only actively considering "natural" appearing moves and not looking past things like "obvious recaptures" as occurred in Annotated Game #57.  Breaking old (bad) habits is only possible by constructing new (good) ones to replace them, so I'm making an effort to consciously apply the thinking process and especially CCT.  Missing good opportunities for onself (or an opponent's threats) is otherwise all too easy.

Being dismissive of the need, or simply being too mentally lazy to apply CCT, has been an issue for me in the past.  One of the ways I'm trying to combat this tendency is by selecting professional examples of where the use of CCT would have changed the outcome of a game.  It's also a useful reminder for the improving player that sometimes failure does not mean you are doomed to chess purgatory forever; even the top levels of professional chess are susceptible periodically to making these types of errors.

The first example is the following game from round 1 of the recently-completed Super-GM level Biel tournament.  Watch what happens on move 33, when it becomes obvious that neither Morozevich nor Giri had done the first C in CCT.  Morozevich would have immediately obtained a winning advantage by playing the only check available to him on the board, had he considered the move.

Annotated Game #57: Training game - English with a b6 twist

Prior to resuming my tournament game review, I wanted to look at the following "revenge" game played against the "Turk" Chessmaster personality, who in Annotated Game #56 had thrown me off my game by opening with 1. g3 and transposing into a King's Indian Attack.  Although it ended up in a draw, I should have been able to get the win.

This game I was White and knew enough about the English Opening to be able to quickly punish Black's 2...b6 approach after he opened with 1...e5.  White ends up with a pawn and the initiative out of the opening, able to rely on a strong center and open lines to use against Black's uncastled king.  A key attacking opportunity employing a pawn sacrifice is missed by White on move 21, although there were some other attacking inaccuracies prior to that which analysis also usefully revealed.  White soon afterwards very unwisely delays taking a pawn offered by Black, forcing White to then exchange down in order to neutralize Black's potential attack.  Despite being a pawn up when the dust settles, the opposite-colored bishops mean that the game is drawn.

Lessons taken away from the analysis include:

• Don't stop analyzing prematurely after an "obvious recapture".
• Look to maximize dynamic piece activity, even at the cost of a pawn or a positional defect, if concrete analysis supports it.
• Don't trust your opponent; analyze carefully any potential gain of material and don't be deterred from taking it if there is no refutation.
• When the conditions are right, keep your primary focus on attacking the opponent's king; other considerations are not as important.

[Event "Chessmaster: Grandmaster Edition Rated G"] [Site "?"] [Date "2012.06.10"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Turk"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "A25"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Houdini"] [PlyCount "75"] [EventDate "2012.??.??"] {A25: English Opening vs King's Indian with ...Nc6 but without early d3} 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 b6 $6 {if Black wants to play this early on, probably best to play it first, or at least not open with 1...e5.} 3. Nf3 {the preferred response, according to the database. White immediately hits the e5 pawn, which thanks to Black's second move is not defended, nor can the pawn be advanced to e4.} Nc6 4. g3 Bb7 5. Bg2 Nd4 6. O-O {a plurality of games in the database feature castling, which scores 85 percent for White. Black's lack of kingside development is one obvious drawback for him in this line.} Bxf3 $146 { exchanging the bishop rather than the knight essentially invalidates all of Black's opening ideas. Now White will have an unopposed Bg2 striking at Black's weakened queenside.} (6... Nxf3+ 7. exf3 Be7 (7... c5 8. Re1 d6 9. f4 Bxg2 10. Kxg2 f6 11. d4 cxd4 12. Qxd4 Qc7 13. Nd5 Qc6 14. Qe4 Rc8 15. b3 Ne7 16. Bb2 Nxd5 17. cxd5 Qd7 18. fxe5 dxe5 19. f4 Rc5 20. fxe5 f5 21. Qf3 Rc2+ 22. Kh1 {Gurieli,N (2375)-Plesnik,H Pula 1997 1-0}) (7... Bc5 8. Re1 Bd4 9. Nb5 Kf8 10. Nxd4 exd4 11. b4 c5 12. bxc5 bxc5 13. d3 Ne7 14. Rb1 Bc6 15. f4 g6 16. Qe2 Bxg2 17. Qe5 Rg8 18. Kxg2 d6 19. Qe4 f5 20. Qe6 Rg7 21. Rb7 Nc6 22. Rxg7 { Arnlaugsson,G-Kantardzhiev,M Buenos Aires 1939 0-1 (36)}) (7... Qf6 8. d4 exd4 9. Re1+ Ne7 10. Nb5 O-O-O 11. Nxa7+ Kb8 12. Nb5 Nc6 13. Bf4 d6 14. Qa4 Qf5 15. b4 g5 16. Bxg5 f6 17. f4 d5 18. cxd5 Rxd5 19. Re8+ Bc8 20. Bxf6 Bg7 21. Re5 Qxf6 22. Bxd5 {Anoshin,G-Rovner,D Moscow 1958 1-0}) 8. Re1 d6 9. d4 exd4 10. Qxd4 Nf6 11. Nd5 Bxd5 12. cxd5 O-O 13. Bd2 Qd7 14. Rac1 Rac8 15. f4 Rfe8 16. Bc3 Nh5 17. Re3 Bf6 18. Qd1 Rxe3 19. fxe3 Bxc3 20. Rxc3 g6 21. e4 {Gres, V-Kirichenko,M Lviv UKR 2011 1-0 (46)}) (6... Bd6 7. b3 $14) 7. exf3 {the doubled pawns here are not a serious weakness, especially since White will be able to immediately place a rook on the half-open e-file.} c6 {Black moves to combat the latent threats on the h1-a8 diagonal and to take away the b5 and d5 squares from the White knight. Howver, Houdini judges developing Black's pieces is more important with} (7... Bd6 8. Nb5 Qf6) 8. Re1 $16 Be7 (8... Bc5 9. Rxe5+ Ne7 10. Na4 $16) 9. d3 {this releases the Bc1 and prepares f4. The e5 pawn is not defensible without causing additional problems for Black.} (9. Rxe5 {immediately snatching the pawn is Houdini's preference.}) 9... Kf8 (9... Nf6 { is a better try, according to Houdini, getting another piece out.} 10. Rxe5 O-O 11. f4 $16) (9... d6 $6 10. f4 {and Black will have to defend the weakness on c6 as well as his problem on the e-file, while his king is in the center and White increases his activity.}) 10. Rxe5 Nf6 (10... Bf6 11. Re1 $16) 11. Re1 { White decides to simply consolidate his advantage.} (11. Be3 {is what Houdni prefers, but I didn't like the potential for Black to kick the Re5 around, with it cut off from retreat. The engine thinks White can get compensation for the rook, however.} Ne6 12. f4 d6 13. Rxe6 fxe6 14. Bxc6 Rc8 15. Qa4 $18) 11... Bd6 12. Be3 Nf5 13. Qd2 {White accepts the knight for bishop trade. Houdini would prefer to keep the bishop on the board, moving it to d2 or g5.} Nxe3 14. Rxe3 h5 {Black proceeds with the only active plan available to him, a kingside attack using the h-pawn.} 15. Ne4 (15. h4 $18 {is Houdini's defensive suggestion. It's not rated much higher than the text move, but it is a much simpler way of defusing Black's threats.}) 15... Nxe4 $2 (15... Be7 16. Rae1 $16) 16. fxe4 {White focuses too much on un-doubling his pawns and misses a much more active option.} (16. dxe4 $142 $5 Qe7 (16... Be7 17. Rd3 d6 18. e5) 17. Rd1 $18 Bc5 18. Rd3) 16... h4 17. e5 Be7 18. d4 Rc8 19. Qe2 {choosing the wrong file with better defenses for Black; it would have been best to concentrate on the d-file instead.} (19. d5) (19. Rd3) 19... hxg3 20. fxg3 $18 {here the usual "capture towards the center" rule is overridden by the concrete benefits of 1) opening the f-file on which Black's king sits, and 2) allowing White freer movement along the second rank. For example, the Qe2 can now easily defend h2 if needed, by moving the Bg2.} c5 $2 {while it may look reasonable at first glance to challenge White's central dominance, now the Bg2 dominates the long diagonal and the d5 square is permanently ceded to White.} ( 20... d6 21. e6 f6 22. Rf1 $18) 21. d5 $6 {White chooses the obvious move, but ignores more active attacking options.} (21. Bd5 {Houdini doesn't hesitate to give up the d-pawn.} cxd4 22. Rf3 f6 23. exf6 gxf6 $18 24. Raf1 {and White would have an overwhelming attack.}) 21... Bg5 $2 (21... d6 $16 {is the logical follow-up to Black's previous move.}) 22. Re4 (22. Rf3 {is the best way to reposition the rook, although it temporarily blocks the Bg2. Black's weak king position overrides other considerations.} d6 23. Raf1 Rc7 24. Qf2) 22... d6 23. h4 (23. exd6 {I didn't think would get me anywhere, but Houdini spots the better opportunity, as Black cannot recapture the pawn.} Rb8 (23... Qxd6 24. Qg4 $1 {forking the Bg5 and Rc8, which I didn't spot due to stopping my calculation after the "obvious recapture"}) 24. Re1 Bf6 $18 25. Bh3 { with the idea of forcing d7, for example} Rxh3 26. Qg4 Rh8 27. d7 g6 28. Re8+) 23... Be7 24. e6 Bf6 25. Bh3 Rc7 26. Re1 Re7 {White has been steadily ramping up the pressure, but now needs to regroup before continuing.} 27. b3 Bd4+ 28. Kg2 g5 $2 {this pawn offer in fact does nothing for Black, although I was put off from taking it by the fact that it would open the h-file and give Black a potential target on g5. However, Black's pieces are not coordinated well enough to exploit these potential weaknesses, a fact which would have been revealed by concrete calculation.} (28... f6) 29. exf7 (29. hxg5 {and White takes home the point, says Houdini via the Fritz interface.} a6 30. Rf1 b5 31. Rxf7+ ({or simply} 31. Ref4)) 29... Re5 30. hxg5 $4 {now White's judgment fails, as Black's previous move opened lines for his heavy pieces, which can take advantage of all of the obvious drawbacks of the pawn capture.} (30. h5 $18 {is the way to deal with the threats.}) 30... Qxg5 $14 31. Qg4 {at least I was able to rally and play the correct defensive move sequence at this point.} Qxg4 32. Bxg4 Rxe4 33. Rxe4 Kxf7 34. Be6+ {with the opposite-colored bishops, this now looks like a draw, but White tries to make the most of the g-pawn.} Ke7 35. g4 (35. Rh4 Rxh4 36. gxh4 Kf6 $14) 35... Be5 $11 36. Re2 Rh2+ 37. Kf3 Rxe2 38. Kxe2 {and a draw was agreed, as White has no way to break through a dark-square blockade of the g-pawn.} 1/2-1/2