“The distinction between strategy and tactics is one of the first things any chess player learns about, but have you ever heard about statics and dynamics before? Did you know that nearly every critical decision you take in a game of chess is governed by the rules of the so-called static/dynamic balance? If not, for the sake of your own chess development, you might want learn more about it from this very book!
In Supreme Chess Understanding: Statics & Dynamics, GM Moranda meticulously explains rules governing the physics of the game, focusing in particular on the interplay between static and dynamic factors. In today’s dog-eat-dog chess world it is namely not enough to know the general principles, but rather to grasp when, how and why can these be bent… or even broken. Thanks to the knowledge gained by studying this work, navigating through the maze of positional transformations is going to become a piece of cake!
The 65 (there are actually 60, not 65) carefully selected exercises are going to make your chess senses tingle with learning excitement. Apart from that, you shall also benefit from the massive amount of practical advice and psychological tips provided by the author. Finally, the book’s quiz format will make the study process not only fruitful, but above all fun!”
About the author:
“Wojciech Moranda (1988), Grandmaster since 2009, highest FIDE rating 2636 and Poland’s TOP 3 player (August 2022). His most notable recent results include, i.a. silver at the Polish Individuals (Bydgoszcz 2021) as well as team bronze at the European Teams (Čatež 2021), together with individual silver on Board 4 at the very same event. Professional chess coach training students all over the world, focused on helping talented juniors and adult improvers ascend past their previous limitations. In his work as a trainer, GM Moranda puts special emphasis on deep strategic understanding of the game, improving his students’ thought-process as well as flawless opening preparation. As an author, GM Moranda begun his adventure with writing in 2020 by publishing the best-selling Universal Chess Training with Thinkers Publishing. The book quickly became a favorite among amateurs and titled players alike, gaining high acclaim from critics too.”
A few months ago I saw some research into the optimum average score which makes a test effective. I don’t remember the exact figure offhand, but I seem to recall it was something like 70% or 75%. If they get everything right they’ve wasted their time taking the test but if they make a significant number of mistakes they haven’t fully understood the material. Interesting, but you might or might not consider it relevant to books of this nature.
Here we have three chapters, each containing 20 quiz questions, alternating between statics (positional play) and dynamics (tactical play). In each question the best continuation wasn’t found over the board. The questions in the first chapter (Bedtime solving for kids… with 10 years of experience) score 2 points each, for solving a puzzle in the second chapter (Buy this book, they said. It will be fun, they said) you’ll receive 3 points, with 5 points awarded for correct solutions in Chapter 3 (Even MC can’t touch these). Moranda helpfully includes a chart which tells you that you would expect to score 70-79% if your playing strength is 2500-2599. If your playing strength is 1800-1899, you’d expect to score 0-9%.
But he also writes that “Although I believe that this book will mostly benefit +1800 players, I do wish to encourage those rated below this threshold to try their hand.” Even though you wouldn’t be surprised if you failed to solve any of the questions? Well, perhaps. Regular readers of my reviews will know that I think authors and publishers often claim books are suitable for lower rated players than they really are, and that chess players often buy books that are too hard for them to really benefit from.
Let’s take a look inside. I’ll show you one position from each chapter.
I was looking for something to use for the Puzzle of the Week on my club website which would link up with both this book and the World Championship match, and was pleased to find this position where Ding, playing black against Artemiev in a 2021 rapidplay game, failed to come up with the optimal plan.
What you get here, as in Moranda’s previous book, which I reviewed here, is a discussion of the position and the move chosen in the game followed by a (computer generated/checked) variation demonstrating what might have happened if the correct plan had been selected.
Here, Ding should have played 13… Bxc4, followed by Na5, Nb3 and c4, with a slight advantage. Of course, as Moranda points out, you need to see the whole plan in order to justify giving up what looks like your better bishop for a knight.
Out of curiosity, I left the position on Stockfish for a bit. It soon decided that Black’s advantage was just above 0.5, but leaving it on longer saw this dwindling to 0.27, although you might consider that the practical advantage is somewhat greater as his position is perhaps easier to play.
Ding instead chose 13… Bg4, and, as he eventually won the game, no harm was done. Stockfish considers this, Bd7 and Bc8 (which Moranda doesn’t like after Bh3) all equal, but leaving the bishop to be captured on e6 would be a serious error giving White a large (1.5 or thereabouts) positional edge.
Here’s a position from the second chapter: something more challenging taken from the game Anand – Karjakin (Gashimov Memorial Rapid 2021).
Again you have to find a continuation for Black.
Karjakin was awarded one point for sacrificing his h-pawn: 22… g6, but after 23. Nxh6+ Kg7 24. Rf1 he failed to receive the remaining two points as he missed 24… Qd8, a very difficult move to find, especially in a rapid game, according to Moranda, with f5 to follow.
Again, though, we’re talking about small margins. 25. Ng4 f5 26. Qxe5 + Rxe5 27. Nxe5 gives White RNP against Q, with Stockfish assessing the position as about 0.35 in Black’s favour.
The game continued with 24… Rh8 which is assessed as about equal, but again Karjakin won anyway after Anand miscalculated.
Chapter 3 offers puzzles that ‘even MC can’t touch’: I presume he means Magnus Carlsen rather than MC Hammer.
This one’s about dynamics rather than statics. You’ll really have to calculate.
Black to play once again in Vachier-Lagrave – Duda (Zagreb Rapid 2021).
White has sacrificed a knight for an attack against the black king. There’s a threat of Rc5, with a possible mate on h7 to follow. How are you going to defend?
The correct move, which Duda failed to find, is 33… Rfe8, which earns you three points. You’ll get an extra point for meeting Rc5 with Re1 (although Qxc5 also leads to equality), and another extra point for meeting Rg5 with Re4. If you want to see the analysis you’ll have to buy the book!
(Here’s a strange thing. Moranda tells us that after Duda’s 33… Ne3, ‘White converted his advantage in a rather confident manner by … transposing cleverly into a winning rook endgame. Well, yes, but then he traded rooks into an apparently simple pawn ending that should have been drawn, but won after several blunders by both players. But that’s a story for another time and place.)
This is, in many ways, an outstanding book. Moranda is an excellent teacher with a gift for finding interesting and instructive positions, all taken from games played between 2020 and 2022. He also writes engagingly and humorously (not always totally idiomatically, but no matter) while explaining difficult concepts clearly. I really enjoyed reading it, and perhaps you will too.
The book is handsomely produced, like everything from Thinkers Publishing, looking good on both the outside and the inside. The hardback edition received by British Chess News seems to be currently unavailable according to the publisher’s website, but you can still order the paperback there.
If you’re a traditionalist who objects as a matter of principle to computer-generated analysis this probably isn’t the book for you. It’s also probably not a good choice for novice or intermediate players: the title of the first chapter suggests, not entirely seriously, that ten years’ experience may be required. Ambitious players of, say, 2200+ strength will benefit from working through the book sequentially, spending the recommended 15 minutes on each question. Below that level, from about 1800 upwards, if you find the questions too hard you’ll learn a lot from just reading through the answers. I don’t have a FIDE rating but my national rating is currently 1938. I found the puzzles in the first chapter about the right level for me, but those in the second and third chapters too hard, which sounds about right from the chart in the introduction.
If you’re a strong player with time to spare who is looking for a book which will add something extra to your play, this could be just what you’re looking for. If you just want an enjoyable read showing you some fascinating positions from recent games, this book can also be highly recommended. Congratulations to the author and publisher on an excellent publication.
You can discover more, and see some further reviews here. You’ll find some sample pages here.
Richard James, Twickenham 28th November 2024
. Richard James
Book Details:
Hardback: 256 pages
Publisher: Thinkers Publishing; 1st edition (2 May 2023)
If you share my interest in the subject of child prodigies, I’d probably start by referring you to this article by Edward Winter.
One name missing from this article, though, is that of Harry Jackson, who, in the late 1870s, was billed as the Yorkshire Morphy.
You might have met him briefly in my previous Minor Piece, but I’m sure you want to know where he came from, and what happened next.
Our story starts in what was in the 19th century the thriving mill town of Dewsbury in West Yorkshire, south of Leeds and Bradford, north east of Huddersfield.
Among those working in the cloth industry in the middle of the century was John Jackson. He and his wife Hannah had four sons and a daughter. While two of his sons, Samuel and Joshua, graduated into the middle classes, becoming solicitor’s clerks, the other boys pursued different careers. Abraham worked as a labourer before emigrating to Canada where he became a farmer. John, the youngest son, became (like my paternal grandfather in Leicester) a painter and decorator.
It was John who was the chess player, although I’d guess the whole family played socially. He and his wife, another Hannah, had a large family, three of whom played competitive chess. Harry, the Yorkshire Morphy, was his oldest son, born 16th December 1863. We’ll return to him later.
The next chess player in the family was William Ewart Jackson (1867-1951), his name suggesting that the family were supporters of the Liberal Party.
William (known as Willie) played for Dewsbury in the 1880s before moving to Leeds, where he worked for William Pape, a firm of glass merchants, and joining the local club. He was active in Leeds chess, both over the board and correspondence, until at least 1918.
In what may have been one of his last matches (the Woodhouse Cup was suspended between 1916 and 1919) he was privileged to watch Atkins beating Yates in masterly fashion on top board.
Here are two games. Click on any move in any game in this article for a pop-up window.
White unnecessarily sacrificed a piece on move 39 when he might have held by going after the a-pawn.
The youngest of the chess-playing Jackson brothers was Joshua (1878-1935).
Joshua had an unusual competitive chess career, most of it taking place towards the end of his life.
There’s a J Jackson playing alongside Harry for Dewsbury in 1889, but it’s not clear whether this was John or Joshua.
It seems, though, that he only really started to take chess seriously after the First World War. In 1921 he entered the Yorkshire Championship, and also ventured to Manchester for the Northern Counties championship, where he was rather out of his depth, scoring only 1/7 against opponents such as Yates and Wahltuch, who shared first prize.
He was also playing correspondence chess, in 1922 winning his game for Yorkshire against Eric Augustus Coad-Pryor, whose father was at the time Vicar of Hampton Hill.
In 1923 he played again in the Northern Counties Championship, this time in Liverpool. That year the top section was a strong master tournament headed by Mieses, Maroczy, Thomas and Yates. Joshua played in the Major section, scoring 4½/9. Much interest was caused by the participation of 15-year-old Gerald Abrahams, who beat him in the first round.
In 1925 Scarborough Chess Club decided to run what they hoped would be the first of an annual series of tournaments over the Whitsun holiday. Joshua entered the major tournament, which was split into A and B sections along with another group for late entrants. The top two players in each section advanced to the play-offs.
Not all the results were recorded, but we know that he drew with Frank Schofield of Leeds, who won both his section and the play-offs, and beat both Sydney Meymott and Stephen Ludbrooke of Rotherham. As he didn’t qualify for the play-offs, I’d guess he may well have been third in the Major A section. A highly commendable result for someone in his late forties with, as far as I can tell, little competitive experience.
The 1926 Scarborough tournament was graced by the presence of the great Alekhine, who duly won the top section. Joshua again played in the Major, this time coming second to Edith Holloway in his section, and, second again in the play-off for 4th, 5th and 6th places. There were always several ladies competing in Scarborough.
I note that J Jackson of Dewsbury’s Yorkshire Terriers won a lot of prizes in the Belfast Dog Show that year. Is this also Joshua, I wonder?
He didn’t take part in 1927, but was back again in 1928, scoring 5/9 in his section of the Major tournament.
In 1929 they were struggling for strong players, due, in part, to the local corporation withdrawing their support, so the top section was very much a mixed affair. There were two genuine masters, Tartakower and Sir George Thomas, two strong amateurs in Harold Saunders and Victor Wahltuch, and four lesser players, one of who was Joshua Jackson. Unexpectedly, he had made the big time late in life.
While he was no match for the top players, he managed a win and two draws against the other lesser lights of the tournament, scoring a respectable 2/7.
The games were all recorded by Tinsley and have now been published in a book by Tony Gillam and by John Saunders (no relation to Harold) on BritBase.
Joshua played the Old Indian Defence too passively against both Saunders and Wahltuch and was duly squashed.
Here’s the Saunders game.
Against both Tartakower and Thomas he sacrificed a piece unsoundly thinking he was going to regain it but missing a fairly obvious tactic.
Here’s the Tartakower game.
He played out a steady, uneventful draw against Edith Holloway, concluding in a level pawn ending. Against Bolland he seemed to agree a draw in a winning position with two extra pawns.
His one win came from an instructive ending, when his opponent chose the wrong queen trade, going for a lost rather than a drawn pawn ending. There were further mutual blunders on move 42.
Among the other competitors was the 15-year-old Maurice Winterburn, also from Dewsbury, who may well have travelled there with Joshua.
Scarborough hosted the British Championships in 1930, although the championship itself was replaced by an international tournament. Joshua didn’t take part this time, but continued to play both over the board and by correspondence into the 1930s.
Chess was now becoming increasingly popular with teenage boys, and Joshua, as Dewsbury’s star player, served as a mentor to the youngsters coming through the door.
One of those was Maurice Child, who joined as a 15-year-old in 1932, and, 75 years later, had very fond memories of Joshua Jackson.
The outstanding personality between the two world wars was Josh Jackson. A fine player, among the top half-dozen in Yorkshire, and a great analyst. He was always ready to teach any young player and could play several games simultaneous and blindfold!
He was a barber and there was always on show in the shop a board with the latest position in his current correspondence game.
But it’s Harry you really want to know about, so we need to return to Dewsbury.
His father John first attended the annual meeting of the West Yorkshire Chess Association in 1876. Both John and Harry would also attend every year between 1877 and 1880.
In January 1877 John and Harry travelled to Lincolnshire, both taking part in the Second Class section of the inaugural Lincoln County Chess Association meeting.
The Chess Player’s Chronicle reported on this event.
The Westminster Papers added that “Master H Jackson is a young gentleman of promise, aged 13, and is likely to be heard from again in the world of Chess”. For the winner, Abraham Cockman, see this discussion.
It’s easy to forget, in these days of pre-teen grandmasters, how unusual it was for even 13-year-olds to take part in chess competitions, and interesting to note how much attention young Harry received at the time.
Inspired by this success, John was inspired to give young Harry a trial game against Samuel Walter Earnshaw at Leeds Chess Club a few weeks later.
At the gathering of the West Yorkshire Chess Association, there was concern that the strain of match play was too much for one so young.
Try telling that to Bodhana or Ethan.
In December a delegation from Huddersfield Chess Club led by John Watkinson, who would found the British Chess Magazine in 1881, visited the Dewsbury Working Men’s Club to assess their chess players. Watkinson took on ten of them, including both John and Harry Jackson, in a simul.
Harry’s game was unfinished but Watkinson thought he could win. Stockfish agrees with his assessment.
Harry played in Lincolnshire again over the New Year, but this time was less successful, as the Chess Player’s Chronicle reported.
The winner was Thomas Walter Marriott, not, as was reported in some sources, Arthur Towle Marriott. You’ll also note that Mary Rudge finished 3rd.
An interesting feature of this event was a displacement tournament, where the bishops and knights started on each other’s squares, an early precursor of Chess960.
A chess club had now started in Dewsbury, with Harry finishing in second place in their first tournament, and playing on top board in their first match, against Huddersfield.
John Watkinson visited again for another simul: this time Harry put up rather less resistance, inadvisedly choosing an unsound gambit as early as move 2..
After winning a prize in the West Yorkshire gathering, Harry ventured to London for the Counties Chess Association meeting.
He did well to win both his games against Rev John De Soyres, a pretty strong player (2146 on EdoChess at the time), who would later emigrate to Canada. You can read more about him here.
In this game his opponent, whom I believe to be Frederick Orme Darvall, who had been Auditor-General of Queensland 1867-77, but was by that time living in London, overlooked a mate in one.
Harry’s participation must have caused quite a stir, not just because of his age but because of his background as the son of a painter and decorator from Yorkshire. It was also not without controversy.
I like the description of John here, who sounds very much like some (but, I hasten to add, not all) chess parents today.
After this trip to the capital Harry continued playing locally, and also by correspondence.
He lost this game against the blind player Henry Millard.
Stockfish thinks it’s mate in 15, not mate in 11, but never mind.
In November 1879 he took the top board in a match between Dewsbury and Wakefield, winning two games and drawing one against schoolmaster John William Young, who taught English and Music at Wakefield Grammar School. John played in the same match, on bottom board, but was only able to conclude one game, which he lost.
In this game Harry’s speculative sacrifice proved successful.
In 1880 Harry returned to Lincolnshire, this time to Boston, where he won the 2nd class tournament of the Counties Chess Association.
But now he was playing less as he’d taken up a new hobby: composing chess problems. Between 1879 and 1881 many problems bearing his name appeared in a wide variety of publications. Two of them even won first prizes.
Problem solutions can be found at the end of the article.
Problem 1. #3 1st Prize (London) Brief 1880.
Problem 2. #2 1st Prize The Boys’ Newspaper 1881.
By 1881 Harry was living in London and involved with the City of London Club, taking on the role of librarian. In a match against St George’s he did very well to beat the very strong William Hewison Gunston 2-0. On 31st May the Chess Player’s Chronicle reported that ‘young Mr Jackson (lately Master Jackson of Dewsbury)’ had reached the last three in a handicap tournament before being eliminated.
I haven’t been able to locate him in that year’s census, but the rest of his family were all present and correct back in Dewsbury.
He remained in London for a few more years, playing, alongside his old friend Samuel Walter Earnshaw, in a simul against Mackenzie in 1882, and in 1883 beating Hugh William Sherrard in a match between the City of London 3rd team and Cambridge University, although he seems to have taken a break from composition.
At this point he may have moved back to Yorkshire. A couple of problems appeared in 1885, and then, in 1877, he turned up in York.
Here he is at their 1887 AGM, resigning as secretary and being appointed vice-president, as well as winning their club championship and guaranteeing himself top board for the next year. Although this is the earliest mention I’ve been able to find he must have been there for several months.
Later records give the club venue as at Mr Jackson’s Cocoa House in High Ousegate, suggesting that this was Harry’s occupation at the time.
On 24 April 1889 the local unionist party held a major event. No less than 3000 people sat down for tea, followed by concerts, dancing, and a demonstration of living chess. Although this was not Harry’s party (he also played for York Liberals) he wasn’t above taking part. There was a pre-arranged game between two local dignitaries, and then a more serious game between Charles George Bennett and Harry Jackson.
The game was played to a pretty high standard considering the circumstances.
He had returned to the role of secretary of the Ebor Chess Club, but in 1890 he switched to the job of treasurer. The following year he resigned from that role and didn’t enter the club championship because he was away from home. But the 1891 census found him living in lodgings and working as a clerk, which suggests the cocoa house hadn’t been successful.
He continued to be very much involved with the Ebor club: as well as playing in matches he was giving regular simuls and lectures up until November 1894. After that, he seemed to disappear for a year or so.
In 1896 he turned up again – in another country.
Here he is, having moved to Edinburgh. He would stay there some time.
The 1896/97 Scottish Electoral Register gives his address as 47 Comely Bank Place, north west of the city centre and not far from the Royal Botanic Gardens.
In this game from 1899 he overlooked a tactic.
In 1901 Harry was part of the Edinburgh team which won the Richardson Cup (Scottish KO Championship) for the first time.
And here, thanks to Edinburgh Chess Club, is the winning squad.
Harry Jackson is the burly (like his father) gentleman second from the left.
There’s no sign of Harry in the 1901 Scottish (or even the English) census. However (thanks to Alan McGowan for the information) he was in the 1901 Irish census, in Cork. He gave his occupation as a Commercial Traveller (Glass) and was living in a boarding house along with a number of other commercial travellers. He also said that he was married, but there was no sign of his wife.
In 1902 Edinburgh started two correspondence games against their counterparts in Rome, with Harry being one of the team.
Here’s the game in which Edinburgh played the white pieces, which concluded in early 1905.
Harry’s opponent in this game was an important figure in Scottish chess. The rather unimpressive 1. d4 d5 2. Qd3, which had been tried once by Pollock, seemed to have been his usual choice with White at this time.
Archibald Johnston Neilson might be considered Scotland’s answer to Antony Guest. He contributed an excellent column, usually twice a week, to his local paper, the Falkirk Herald, for 47 years, from 1895 right up to his death in 1942.
Perhaps he chatted with Harry after the game, asking him to contribute some problems. Since his early enthusiasm between 1879 and 1881 he had only composed occasionally, but now he entered the most prolific period of his chess problem career. For the next three years he regularly contributed problems, not just to the Falkirk Herald but also to the Mid-Lothian Journal.
His games from this period shine a light on both Harry’s strengths and weaknesses.
He could lose horribly when his opening went wrong, as in these two games. You’ll see in the first game that, although he was an Edinburgh player, he sometimes represented Glasgow in matches against English club. (Coincidentally, a Scotsman with the same name as his English opponent here wrote an excellent book on the King’s Gambit some years ago.)
Given the opportunity, Harry could demonstrate skill in the ending: another couple of games.
By way of contrast, here’s an exciting game featuring opposite side castling with both kings seemingly in danger.
Now for a few of his problems from this period of his life.
Problem 3. #2 Mid-Lothian Journal 21 Apr 1905
Problem 4. #3 Falkirk Herald (for Stirling solving contest) 15 May 1905
Problem 5. #2 Falkirk Herald 31 May 1906
To conclude, an easy one with a very familiar theme.
Problem 6. #3 Falkirk Herald 24 Apr 1907
The year 1911 brings us a surprise. Harry isn’t in the Scottish census, but turns up in the English census, in Salford, near Manchester, visiting John Harry Leyland and his family. He’s aged 47 and working on his own account as a dealer in glass bottles. Perhaps there’s some connection there with his brother William, who was also in the glass business. He also has a wife, Ellen, aged 43: they’ve been married 17 years with one child, who is still alive, but not on the census record. Later records will tell us that their child’s name was May.
It’s a reasonable guess that Ellen, also known as Nellie, was related to the Leyland family, and we can locate an 1867 birth record which matches. The family were from Lancashire, but spent the first few years of their marriage in Smethwick. There’s no marriage record for Harry Jackson and Ellen Leyland from round about 1893-94, but there is one from 1902 in Chorlton, not all that far from Salford, so I’d guess that was where and when they married. There’s also a birth record for May Leyland in York in 1895 (no mother’s maiden name given), which was about the time he moved from York to Edinburgh. It seems like Harry and Ellen had had an affair, and perhaps the birth of their daughter prompted them to move to Scotland. They only got round to getting married some years later. Although we know Harry was on the 1901 Irish Census, I haven’t yet been able to find Ellen/Nellie and/or May on any of the England and Wales, Scottish or Irish census for that year.
Harry seems to have been back in Scotland by June, when he was elected one of the vice-presidents of the Scottish Chess Association. He was in august company: one of his fellow VPs was future Prime Minister Andrew Bonar Law.
In February 1912 he returned to the Edinburgh team after an absence, facing Percy Wenman of Glasgow in the Richardson Cup final, the game being drawn on adjudication.
And that he seems to have taken a long break from chess, and it’s not for almost a decade that we pick him up again.
The 1921 Scottish census goes some way to confirming my suspicions.
Here we have Harry, 57, born in Dewsbury, Nellie, 54, born in Smethwick, and May, 26, born in York. Harry was still working as a glass dealer on his own account, while Nellie and May were engaged in household duties. Their address was 13 South Charlotte Street and their residence, right in the city centre, just off Princes Street very close to the castle, had six rooms. Harry’s glass dealing business must have been very successful: not bad for the son of a painter and decorator from Dewsbury.
After an absence of more than a decade Harry returned to the fray in 1923, continuing to play until late the following year, when, perhaps for health reasons, he retired from competitive chess.
Again there was an unexpected move: back to London. They may have been somewhere else first, but in 1927 Harry and Nellie showed up on the electoral roll in Hampton Wick, which is just over Kingston Bridge. Their address was 1 Garden Cottages, Park Road, which, I suspect is where Ingram House is now, just across the road from the Timothy Bennet memorial and a gate into Bushy Park.
This was one of a pair of cottages: number 2 was occupied by John and Unity Chatterton: the unusually named (after her mother) Unity was Nellie’s sister, and it seems the families must have moved there at the same time.
He didn’t stay there very long, though, dying of heart disease just a few months later.
The death record tells us he had been a Medical Bottle Merchant, perhaps acquiring them from his brother William’s company and selling them to hospitals, pharmacies and doctors. His daughter May had travelled down from Scotland where she was living in a remote village on the shore of Loch Tay with her husband, William Eric Graham Wilson.
His old friend Archibald Neilson wrote an obituary.
The British Chess Magazine noted his death in October, and published this obituary in November.
You’ll note that they mistakenly called him Henry rather than Harry, the same error they would make a few years later by calling Fred Yates ‘Frederick’.
“A fine and striking personality, he was of a reserved, if not shy, disposition.” “Generous to a fault, and of a quiet and modest demeanour.” A fine way to be remembered by your friends. In the words of the cobbler Timothy Bennet, whose memorial stands opposite where Harry spent his last days, “I am unwilling to leave the world a worse place than I found it”. I’d like to think Harry Jackson would have approved.
Blackburne’s prophecy wasn’t quite fulfilled, but he was still one of the best players around, first in Yorkshire, and then in Scotland. If he hadn’t hampered himself by playing ‘certain bizarre moves in the opening’ he might have ranked higher still. He was also a skilled and, at times, prolific problem composer.
Nellie, John and Unity were still in Garden Cottages in 1928, and by 1929 John and Unity’s son, also John, had reached voting age. By 1930, though, both cottages were in different ownership.
One further thought: in 1928 a new shop opened not very far from there. Perhaps Nellie walked up the road for a few minutes, turned right into Bushy Park Road, crossed the railway line over the level crossing (there’s a footbridge there now) and, coming to the end of the road, visited the Ham and Beef Store owned by the Misses Ada and Louisa Padbury to stock up on provisions. Perhaps she saw a young girl there as well: Ada and Louisa were juggling running the shop with bringing up their irresponsible sister Florence’s illegitimate daughter Betty. (Nellie, the mother of an illegitimate daughter herself, would have been sympathetic.) Perhaps John Chatterton, who was a schoolmaster, taught at the local primary school she attended. Perhaps the family also worshipped at St John the Baptist, Hampton Wick, just a short walk from their homes in the other direction. This was the church where, two decades later, Betty would marry, and where her older son would be baptised. Many years further on, he would tell the story of the chess career of Harry Jackson, the Yorkshire Morphy.
Another coincidence: Unity returned to Lancashire, dying in Ormskirk in 1961. At round about that time, Betty and her family visited Ormskirk, where her favourite cousin Marion, the bridesmaid at her wedding, lived for many years.
It’s another golden thread that binds us all together.
If you’re interested in my file of Jackson family games and problems, let me know and I can send it to you. If you have any more information about this family, I’d love to see it and perhaps incorporate it in this article. And don’t forget to join me again soon for some more Minor Pieces.
Problem solutions
Problem 1.
Problem 2.
Problem 3.
Problem 4.
Problem 5.
Problem 6.
Sources and Acknowledgements
I thought this might be a quick article to research, but it turned out to be anything but. You have someone with a common name who moved around quite a lot (Yorkshire, London, Edinburgh) and disappeared from the records for a time. There are a lot of traps for the unwary and I hope I’ve avoided most of them.
Steve Mann’s Yorkshire Chess History is excellent on the Jackson family in Yorkshire, but doesn’t pick up Harry’s time in Scotland. Rod Edwards (EdoChess) picks up most of his English results, including some of his London matches, but attributes at least one to a totally different Jackson, and also doesn’t record his Scottish results. His Scottish problems are not to be found in the online collections I’ve consulted, which sometimes give him a non-existent middle initial: HS Jackson. Confusingly there was also an HB Jackson from, of all places, Fiji, submitting problems to the Illustrated London News in the late 19th century, some of which have been incorrectly attributed to Harry. This was the unrelated Henry Bower Jackson, whose aunt was married to a distant cousin of Edmund and Eliza Thorold. He in turn was seemingly not related to Sir Henry Moore Jackson, who became Governor-General of Fiji in 1902.
ancestry.co.uk
findmypast.co.uk/British Newspaper Library
Scotland’s People
Yorkshire Chess History (Harry Jackson here)
Alan McGowan (Chess Scotland historian/archivist)
New in Chess (Edinburgh CC 200th Anniversary here)
EdoChess (Rod Edwards: Harry Jackson here)
BritBase (John Saunders)
ChessBase/Stockfish 17
Yet Another Chess Problem Database (Harry Jackson here)
MESON chess problem database (Harry Jackson here)
Google Books and Hathi Trust Digital Library (Chess Player’s Chronicle) British Chess Magazine November 1927
Geoff Steele website
“Chess students love a Puzzle Rush. And solving tactics puzzles certainly helps you improve your pattern recognition and will help you find good moves in tournament games. But there is a downside to most tactics puzzles — we always know who is supposed to win!
Chess in real life is different, not just because no one taps us on the shoulder and tells us to look for a tactic. Sometimes tactics work, and sometimes they don’t. Sometimes your opponent has a few tricks up their sleeve, too.
This book shows the reality of chess tactics. It explores a chess player’s challenges over the board: attack, defense, and counterattack! It exposes the actual give-and-take nature of chess tactics.
American grandmaster Joel Benjamin, a three-time U.S. Champion, was inspired by the 20th-century classic Chess Traps, Pitfalls, and Swindles by legendary chess authors Fred Reinfeld and Israel Albert Horowitz. With modern examples, Benjamin arouses the same spirit of fun and enjoyment. With a generous amount of puzzles in quiz form, this manual will help chess students sharpen their tactical skills and be ready to strike – or counterstrike.”
About the Author:
“Joel Benjamin won the US Championship three times and has been a trainer for almost three decades. His book Liquidation on the Chess Board won the Best Book Award of the Chess Journalists of America (CJA), and his most recent book Better Thinking, Better Chess is a world-wide bestseller.”
I’ve recently been reviewing books on endgames and grinding, and understandably so as well.
Here’s something, as they say, completely different.
I’ve always liked the Tal quote: “You must take your opponent into a deep dark forest where 2+2=5, and the path leading out is only wide enough for one.”.
That’s what we get here. 129 thrilling games in which the tactics could go either way. The author’s main source was his ‘Game of the Week’ series which ran for several years on ICC, so if you followed that you’ll have seen some of the games before. You may well enjoy meeting them again, though. While there are a few familiar chestnuts, many of the games are likely to be new to most readers.
Chapter 1 is Strike, Counterstrike, ‘the fundamental give-and-take nature of chess tactics’.
Chapter 2 tells us that The King is a Fighting Piece, and bears some similarities to the Steel Kings chapter of one of my all-time favourite chess books, Tim Krabbé’s Chess Curiosities.
Take this position, from Spassky – Polugaevsky (USSR Championship 1961).
White could have mated by marching his king further up the board, to f7, but instead played Kh5. This should have led to a draw, but he later blundered and lost.
Here’s the complete game. Click on any move for a pop-up window.
Chapter 3, Dodging Defenses, is much shorter, looking at how the attacker with a plethora of tempting continuations might choose the one that negates the opponent’s attempt to escape.
Chapter 4, Staying Alive, is more David Smerdon than John Travolta. Here, we look at how to maximise our chances of a successful defence, perhaps by looking for swindles.
Here’s a position from a game in which an amateur threw all his pieces at his 500 point higher rated GM opponent.
It proved effective, as Black erred with 29… Qc8, after which White demonstrated the win, as you’ll see below. The winning move would have been 29… Nxd4, but these things are never so easy over the board, even against a massively lower rated player.
Chapter 5 is another short one: Trying Too Hard to Win. In a complex position you sometimes have to decide whether to take a draw (for instance by repetition) or try for more. If you’re too ambitious it might well backfire.
It can work the other way as well.
In this position England’s new No. 1 Vitiugov missed a snap mate against Svidler, taking a perpetual with 26… Nf3+?, when he might have preferred 26… Qa5+! 27. b4 Qxb5!! 28. Qxb5 Nc2+ 29. Ke2 f3#.
The complete game again:
Chapter 6 looks at Back Rank Tactics, which might be the key to a winning combination, or provide an unexpected defence. All players at all levels should be familiar with these ideas.
Chapter 7, In the Beginning … and in the End, considers two very different topics. First, we’re shown a couple of openings which often lead to tactical mayhem: the King’s Indian Defence and the Marshall Attack in the Ruy Lopez. Engines now consider the former close to unplayable and the latter more or less a forced draw, but at anything below GM level they’re worth playing – and often a lot of fun. Then we look briefly at some endgame tactics.
Finally, or almost finally, Chapter 8, Whoops!, looks, as you might expect, at blunders, in particular the nature of mistakes and the misconceptions that cause them.
The book concludes with Chapter 9, Tactical Tips, 30 useful suggestions to help you improve your tactical play.
The first eight chapters open with some puzzles based on the games in that chapter: a total of 78 in all, to provide interactive content for those who wish to avail themselves.
The examples throughout have been expertly chosen, although I suppose another author might have chosen different chapter headings or placed some of them in different chapters. In a book of this nature there will be considerable overlap. The annotations are excellent: Benjamin does a first class job in getting the balance right between computer and human assessments, which, in complex positions can be very different from each other. I’m pleased that the complete games are always given, rather than just the tactics at the end.
The production is well up to this publisher’s customary high standards, although, as everyone does, they fail the Yates test (he was Fred, not Frederick).
You might not consider this an essential purchase, but, if you like games of this nature, and who doesn’t?, you’ll enjoy and perhaps learn from this book. It’s certainly enormous fun for all lovers of red-blooded tactical chess. The names of the author and publisher are guarantees of excellence, and I’d consider it suitable for everyone of average club standard or above.
If you’d like to see more before deciding whether it’s for you, you can read some sample pages here.
My first Minor Piece, 3½ years ago, featured the Reverend Samuel Walter Earnshaw, the missing link between Paul Morphy and my great grandmother Jane Houghton.
I promised another article at some point demonstrating some more of his games. It’s more than time I wrote it, so here it is.
Let me take you back first of all to 9 July 1858, when Earnshaw, a young chess addict in his mid twenties in his first ministry, at St Mary’s Church Bromley St Leonards in East London, just south of the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, travelled into town to watch the young American star Paul Morphy in action against Samuel Standidge Boden. He recorded the moves, and, in 1874/5, submitted it for publication in the City of London Chess Magazine. You can read the first volume online here (it’s on page 280, with extensive annotations by Steinitz). The two Samuels became firm friends: I suggested in my previous article that Earnshaw might have been considered Boden’s Mate.
Here’s what Stockfish thinks of the game. Click on any move for a pop-up window.
Boden must have taught Earnshaw this variation, which would become his lifelong pet defence to the King’s Gambit.
The following year, he obtained a second curacy at St Thomas’s Church Birmingham, and, for some years, disappeared from the chess world.
His next job was in the small village of Nether Whitacre, 12 miles or so outside Birmingham, where he baptised several members of my great grandmother Jane Houghton’s family.
By 1865 he’d returned to chess, joining the Birmingham and Edgbaston Chess Club. Here he is, winning their club championship.
He was also submitting many of his games, losses as well as wins, to the Birmingham Journal (editor unknown, appearing irregularly between 17 June 1865 and 26 December 1868, 57 articles in total, according to Tim Harding in British Chess Literature to 1914). One wonders if Earnshaw himself wrote the column, given that it published many of his games and stopped at the point when he left Birmingham.
Let’s look at a few of them.
You can judge from these games that Earnshaw enjoyed attacking chess, being particularly fond of the Evans Gambit.
He was also travelling down to London to play at the capital’s chess haunts, where he was winning games against opponents such as the German endgame expert Josef Kling.
In this game he was successful on the white side of the King’s Gambit.
At this time, matches between clubs were starting to take place. In 1866 he played for Birmingham in a match against Worcester. Although he lost both his games, his team scored a narrow victory.
You’ll spot some interesting names in the Worcester squad. There’s Lord Lyttelton, Lord Lieutenant of Worcestershire and sometime President of the British Chess Association. Then we have the future Sir Walter Parratt, whom you might recall would, a few decades later, play in several Windsor – Twickenham matches.
At some point that year Earnshaw played, as you will have seen in the earlier article, a series of games against Steinitz. It’s uncertain whether these were played in London or in Birmingham. I showed you the games last time, but have now asked Stockfish for its opinion.
Another game between Earnshaw and Steinitz was published in 1879, without any indication of when (except ‘some time ago’) or where it was played. It might, I suppose, have been one of this series.
In the 1866-67 Birmingham Club Championship Earnshaw reached the semi-final, where he was paired against John Halford. After 8 games the scores were level, with three wins apiece and two draws, so lots were drawn, resulting in his opponent proceeding to the final.
Here’s one of his wins.
In April 1867 Earnshaw took part in another match, this time against a combined team from two other clubs.
Lord Lyttelton was again representing the opposing team. I guess he was an honorary member of several clubs. Within a couple of decades exceedingly pleasant meetings between chess clubs would become much more frequent, strengthening the social bonds of friendship between Chess players. Long may they continue.
But then there seems to have been a break in Earnshaw’s chess career. In August 1867, as reported in my previous article, he was involved in a tragic incident, which must have affected him very much. Perhaps as a result, he left Nether Whitacre at the end of the year. His last baptism was in November, and by 22 December a new incumbent had taken over.
And look! There, on the other side, is Maria Howton (Houghton)’s illegitimate son, not, I should add, her first, fathered by a butcher in a neighbouring village, being baptised. Maria was a sister of my great grandmother Jane Houghton. Soon afterwards she’d finally marry, and Henry would take on his step-father’s surname, becoming Henry Tomes.
Earnshaw then took on a chaplaincy in Tremadog in North Wales, before being appointed headmaster of Archbishop Holgate School, Hemsworth, Yorkshire.
With a new job and five young children (born between 1861 and 1870) he must have been too busy to devote much time to chess, but by the mid 1870s he had joined both Sheffield and Leeds Chess Clubs. In 1874 he lost to Blackburne in a Sheffield simul, and in 1877 he was matched against a child prodigy in a friendly game.
Young Master Jackson didn’t exactly become a second Morphy, but his story is one perhaps for another time.
Here’s the game.
At the end of 1876, it appears that Earnshaw’s friend and fellow clergyman George Alcock MacDonnell took over the chess column of the Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News. In 1877 Earnshaw returned to the ministry, becoming Rector of Ellough, a tiny village near Beccles in Suffolk, which nevertheless boasted a splendid church. His predecessor there, Richard Aldous Arnold, who had served his few parishioners for more than 60 years, came from the same family as Thomas Arnold of Rugby School and his poet son Matthew.
He now had more time for chess, travelling to London every seventh week to play at Simpson’s and Purssell’s, crossing swords, usually unsuccessfully, with the likes of Gunsberg, Blackburne, Mason and Bird, as well as winning miniatures against fellow amateurs. He would have been able to take the Great Eastern Railway from Beccles to their new Liverpool Street terminus, which had opened in 1874. He sent many of his games to Macdonnell, who was happy to publish them in his magazine column.
He was winning at one point in both these games, but ended up losing.
In the summer of 1878 Earnshaw played what would be his only public tournament, the Counties Chess Association meeting in London, but it didn’t go well for him. He only managed one draw from eight games (one may have been a loss by default) before withdrawing with four rounds still to play.
He threw away a good position again in this game.
The tournament proved controversial in more ways than one. The second class tournament included teenage prodigy Harry Jackson, whose father provoked some anger by interfering in one of his son’s games. Yes, we’ve all known parents like that. But that was a minor incident compared with the participation of the automaton Mephisto (operated by Gunsberg, although this wasn’t known at the time) in the Handicap Tournament confined to amateurs.
A few weeks later, Earnshaw tried a Fried Liver Attack against Mason when Black’s pawn was already on a6. Stockfish, unlike MacDonnell in his annotations, is happy with this, but again White lost the thread, ending up on the wrong end of a brilliancy.
Back in Suffolk, he was doing his bit to promote chess in Beccles.
By 1880 he was even described as a ‘chess celebrity’.
Here are a couple of wins against lower level opposition from this period.
His friend Samuel Boden’s death in January 1882 hit him hard: perhaps this is one reason why, by that time, his games were appearing less often in the press.
But in 1885 he turned up in an inter-club match. The St George’s team included Marmaduke Wyvill, runner-up in the first ever international tournament back in 1851, and formerly Rishi Sunak’s predecessor as MP for Richmond, Yorkshire.
On the other side of the board, you’ll notice George Archer Hooke, who had another half century of competitive chess ahead of him, two boards above Earnshaw, with the splendidly named problemist Edward Nathan Frankenstein sitting between them.
But the next we hear from Samuel Walter Earnshaw, sadly, is from this death record, giving his name as Earnshaw-Wall (Wall was his mother’s maiden name, an affectation used by his son Walter Ethelbert Stacey Earnshaw-Wall .
The cause of death is given as Gout (21 days) and Pericarditis (3 days).
You’ll have read MacDonnell’s warm tribute to his friend in the previous article.
A true and enthusiastic lover of chess, we are told. Not a great player, but a good enough player, and really that’s all that matters. He was, for his day, well booked up, enjoying gambit play and demonstrating strong attacking skills, but all too often he would miscalculate or make careless mistakes and throw away his advantage. But he clearly enjoyed playing, whether against fellow amateurs or against the leading masters of his time. He, and many others like him, over the past 150 years or more, are what chess, in my opinion, is really all about. I’m delighted that my great grandmother and her family had made his acquaintance.
Join me again soon for more Minor Pieces.
Sources and Acknowledgements:
ancestry.co.uk
findmypast.co.uk/British Newspaper Library
Wikipedia
ChessBase 17/Stockfish 17
chessgames.com (Earnshaw here)
Yorkshire Chess History (Steve Mann: Earnshaw here)|
EdoChess (Rod Edwards: Earnshaw here) British Chess Literature to 1914 (Tim Harding: McFarland 2018) Steinitz in London (Tim Harding: McFarland 2020)
Other sources referenced and linked to above
“Magnus Carlsen’s brilliant endgame play is one of the key reasons for his success. The World Chess Champion can win positions which look drawn to anybody else. And more than any other player, he is able to save bad endings.
For this second volume of Magnus Carlsen Endgame Virtuoso, International Master Tibor Karolyi has selected Carlsen’s best endgames from 2018-2022, whereas the first volume covered 1999-2017. Reviewing these new games and explaining what Magnus was doing, the author was thoroughly impressed. Even Carlsen, who in 2017 was already the best endgame player of all time with Anatoly Karpov, had managed to improve his skills further.
Carlsen has it all. He can find deep ideas, play very technically, and is exceptionally well-versed in strategic and tactical endgames. The author is convinced that this new selection contains even better and more instructive games than Volume one.
Karolyi explains the general ideas in the games and gives concrete variations. Exploring these annotated endgames, you will soon get a good sense of what is happening. You will find out that Carlsen does not rush unless it is necessary. You will learn how Carlsen increases the pressure and uses all available resources. And you will see that sooner or later, his opponents will start playing second-best moves, feeling uncomfortable, following up with some dubious decisions, and, finally, cracking.
Endgame Virtuoso Magnus Carlsen – Volume 2 is a highly instructive, inspiring and entertaining book. It will help you appreciate Magnus’ endgame magic and improve your skills in this important game phase.”
About the Author:
“International Master Tibor Károlyi was Hungarian Champion in 1984 and is renowned as both an author and a trainer. He won the Guardian Chess Book of the Year prize in 2007.”
You will probably agree that endings are increasingly important – at all levels – in chess today, and that Magnus Carlsen is the strongest human endgame player in the history of chess. So everyone will benefit from studying his endings.
It’s not quite as simple as that, though. The problem is that today’s top GM games are played at a level way beyond the comprehension of average club players. If you’re looking for a book that will do more to improve your endings, I’d recommend this book which was the subject of my last review.
On the other hand, studying the games of the world’s leading players will give you a wider appreciation of chess culture, and, with the guidance of a skilled instructor to provide excellent annotations, you’ll undoubtedly learn something as well as being inspired, in a more general way, to improve your chess.
In this book you’re in the safe hands of IM Tibor Karolyi, one of the best and most experienced annotators in the business, and one who has a particular gift for making difficult positional concepts comprehensible to the average player.
The first volume of this series covered Carlsen’s earlier career. Here we have 104 endgames from 2018 up to 2022, taken from games played at all time controls. As in my last review, the author takes a pretty broad view of what constitutes an ending.
Here, for example, is a position where Magnus missed the best continuation.
This is taken from the first play-off game in the 2018 Carlsen – Caruana World Championship match.
Carlsen played the obvious 24. Bxe6+, winning a pawn and, eventually, the game, although Caruana missed drawing chances on a few occasions.
He missed the very difficult 24. Rxd4!! Kf7 25. Kh1!!, a great prophylactic move according to Karolyi, so that an eventual Nxf3 won’t be check, when Black would have had no defence to Red1 followed by Rd6. This fascinating ending is analysed extensively over 3½ pages.
Black against Vallejo Pons (Karlsruhe/Baden-Baden 2019), Carlsen reached a pawnless ending with RB against BN.
You might think this is drawn, but Carlsen knew that, with the opposing bishops on different colour squares, Black is winning. If you buy this book you can see for yourself how he brought home the full point – and how his opponent could have made it harder for him.
Karolyi tells us that Fischer could have reached a similar ending against Browne (Rovinj/Zagreb 1970), but his annotations suggested that he believed the ending to be drawn.
This game, from move 12 to its conclusion 60 moves later, is covered in 4½ pages here.
It’s striking how often Magnus plays for mate with very limited material on the board.
Here, our hero was black in an Armageddon game against Nepomniachtchi (Stavanger 2021).
Nepo erred by playing 52. Bg7? here (Ke2 would have held), which Magnus met with 52… Rh1, with Rh2+ to follow.
Along with the games you also get a running commentary on Carlsen’s tournament performances over the period, helpfully putting the games into context as well as providing some gripping reading.
At the end of the book there’s an informative interview with Carlsen’s long-term second Peter Heine Nielsen, along with a useful Endgame Classification index and the expected index of names.
What you don’t get here is the opportunity for interactive learning. Unlike in many books from this publisher, there are no quizzes at the start of each chapter, nor does the author stop every few moves to ask you questions. You might well consider this not to be a problem in a book of this nature.
As usual from New in Chess, the production values are excellent. The English, although not always totally idiomatic, reads fluently. If you’re looking for a book on Carlsen’s endgames, and there are many reasons why you should be, you won’t be disappointed with this volume. You might also want to buy Volume 1 as well, and, in a few years time, Volume 3.
I consider this a first class book written by one of the best annotators in the business. While players of, say, 2000+ strength will perhaps learn most from it, all club standard players will find Carlsen’s endgames, especially as explained here, both instructive and inspirational.
If you want to look further before making up your mind you can find some sample pages here.
Richard James, Twickenham 18th October 2024
Book Details:
Softcover: 256 pages
Publisher: New In Chess; 1st edition (23 March 2023)
Ralph Jackson won the Sydney Junior Championship back in 1976 and is currently ranked 7th among players in Australia born before 1960.
He is also intrigued by family history, and his interest was piqued in 2015 when a cousin showed him transcripts of letters his great grandfather’s brother had been sent by an English nephew in 1874 and 1875 concerning his family’s financial struggles, and his mother’s illness and subsequent death.
He idly, as one does, entered the name of his English relation, of whom he had previously been unaware, into Google and was both startled and delighted to discover that Antony Guest had been a prominent chess player and journalist. You could even make the case that he was the Leonard Barden of his time, and that, almost a century after his death, his influence can still be felt today.
When Ralph noticed that I’d mentioned Guest in an earlier Minor Piece he contacted me to ask what more I could discover about him. As he was on my list of future Minor Pieces, in part because of his local connections to me, I was more than happy to oblige.
The birth of Antony Alfred Geoffrey Guest (he didn’t use his rather splendid middle names for chess purposes) was registered in the second quarter of 1856 in Staines, Middlesex. His father Augustus was a schoolmaster, classicist and artist, the son of Thomas Douglas Guest. His mother Phoebe, also known as Elizabeth or Mary, was the daughter of refugees, originally from Eastern Europe, but who had arrived via Denmark. Although she was born in the Jewish faith she later converted to Christianity.
Antony was baptised by cricketing clergyman Henry Vigne in St Mary’s Church Sunbury on June 18 that year. Entirely coincidentally, I visited that church recently and took a few photographs.
I don’t know the age of the font on the left: the inscription records when it was moved, not when it was installed, but I’d guess it wasn’t the one in which baby Antony was baptised.
By 1861 the family, now joined by Isabella Katherine Celia Guest (who would later be known as Katherine or Kate), had moved to Thayer Street in central London, conveniently situated just a few yards from the Chess & Bridge Shop in Baker Street.
But on 20 June 1864 Augustus was admitted to Grove Hall Lunatic Asylum, where he died on 19 March 1866. The family were now struggling to maintain their previously affluent lifestyle, and Antony had to leave school early. By 1871 he was working as a clerk, while his mother was now a lodging-house keeper. Isabella was, for some reason, visiting a carter’s family in Hampshire.
Meanwhile, Phoebe’s three brothers, Abraham (who changed his name to Alfred Lionel), Henry and Maurice had emigrated to Australia in the 1850s, seeking their fortune in the Gold Rush.
Henry, in particular, did very well for himself. After visiting the gold fields he took a job in public service, later rising to become Registrar-General of Victoria as well as attaining the rank of Major in the volunteer forces.
It was Uncle Alfred who was the recipient of Antony’s surviving (in transcript) letters.
The first letter Ralph has is from July 1874.
Circumstances have gone very hard with us of late, my mother has been very ill lately, and has been unwell for the last two years, and find it very very difficult to make ends meet-, especially since food and other necessities have become so dear, a little assistance therefore now and then would be a very great comfort to her.
In October he wrote again with the sad news that his mother had died of gastric (typhoid) fever the previous month.
My poor mother left her affairs in a very unsettled condition, her debts amounting to nearly 70 pounds, and my sister and myself would be greatly obliged to you or our uncle Henry for any assistance you could give us.
In December he informed Uncle Alfred that he had moved into a boarding house and his employer had lent him enough money to pay off his mother’s debts, but it appears that his family in Australia had been unable to help financially.
Ralph’s final letter, from April the following year, sees Antony telling his uncle that his prospects were now good, but thanking him for his offer of a home in Australia for his ‘delicate’ sister Isabella. If she took up the offer she wasn’t there long as she was back in England by 1881.
Here, then, was a formerly prosperous family that, due to illness and death, and perhaps also financial mismanagement, had hit hard times. Young Antony was doing his best to sort things out.
He also developed an interest in chess, watching one of the games in the 1876 match between Steinitz and Blackburne, and remembering, almost a quarter of a century later, how deeply absorbed he was.
We next pick him up in 1880, when he applied to become a member of the London Stock Exchange. The 1881 census found him on holiday at the Grand Hotel in Brighton, giving his occupation as Stock Jobber. A Stock Jobber was a private trader in stocks and shares, as opposed to a Stock Broker who worked for clients. The Grand Hotel, according to Wikipedia, “was intended for members of the upper classes visiting the town and remains one of Brighton’s most expensive hotels”. He’d clearly turned round his family fortunes, then.
By this time, Antony was spending much of his spare time frequenting Purssell’s and other places where the game was played socially.
He also acquired a new job, as a journalist for the Morning Post, a Conservative daily newspaper which would be taken over by the Daily Telegraph in 1937. In 1883 a major international tournament took place in London and Antony was dispatched to report on it. His reports must have proved very popular as the paper commissioned him to start a weekly column, beginning on 28 May 1883.
The column would typically include a problem (sometimes two) for solving, a list of successful solvers of the problem from two weeks earlier, a game, either contemporary or historical, news from home and abroad, answers to readers’ questions and, on occasion, book reviews, such as this one.
Guest was always very enthusiastic about promoting chess for ladies, so would have been pleased to support Miss Beechey‘s venture.
Although he was not yet playing in public, he started publishing a few of his own games later in the year. Here he gave his opponent odds of pawn and move (he played black without his f-pawn). As always, click on any move in the game for a pop-up window.
By 1884 he had also started to compose problems, at first in collaboration with future BCF President John Thursby.
You’ll find the solution to all problems at the end of the article.
Problem 1. #3 A Guest & J Thursby Morning Post 26-05-1884
At the same time he played in public for the first time, in a handicap tournament at Simpson’s. Here he was accepting odds of pawn and move from the masters, who, in his section, were Blackburne and Gunsberg. He won his section with 7½/9, but was beaten by Mason, also giving him odds, in the play-off between the winners of the two sections.
Buoyed by this success he took part in his first master tournament, an event run by the British Chess Association in London. His performance, considering his lack of experience, was rather remarkable.
Gunsberg, as expected, ran out a comfortable winner with 14/15, but Guest shared second place with Bird on 12/15.
In his game against Wainwright (see earlier Minor Pieces) he gave up the exchange in the opening but later trapped his opponent’s queen.
He won very quickly against Hewitt, who wasn’t given the chance to recover from a hesitation in the opening.
This was a most auspicious debut for a relatively young (by the standards of the day) player. It was probably anticipated that he would have a big future in master chess, but, as it turned out, his first high level tournament would also be his best result.
Later that year Guest was involved in an interesting debate with John Ruskin.
The debate as to whether chess should be on the school curriculum is still going on today, almost 140 years later. Unlike many of my colleagues in the world of junior chess, I’m very much in agreement with Guest here. Ralph Jackson shares our views.
Here’s another problem, this time a joint composition with Louis Desanges.
Problem 2. #3 A Guest & L Desanges Morning Post 16-11-1885
On the same day that this problem was published there was some important news.
A few months later the new club ran a master tournament in which Guest took part, but this time he was much less successful, only scoring 2/7, well behind Blackburne (6½), Bird and Gunsberg (both 5), and not helped by defaulting his game against Pollock.
I’m not sure whether or not this game was played in the tournament. Guest attempted to play like Steinitz, but it didn’t end well.
He had better luck later in the year in the British Chess Association Amateur Championship, which was won by Gattie (15/18), Guest sharing second place with previous Minor Piece subjects Hooke and Wainwright on 13½/18.
Guest’s next tournament was towards the end of 1887: the British Chess Association Congress in London. He had originally entered a lower section, but, on the withdrawal of Skipworth, was, at the last minute, promoted to the master section, where he would face the likes of Blackburne, Burn, Gunsberg and the ailing Zukertort.
He got off to a flying start, winning his first three games, against Bird, Pollock and the perpetual backmarker Mortimer.
His game against Pollock wasn’t short of excitement. He defended the Evans Gambit and, after various adventures, his extra pawn on the queenside eventually turned into a queen.
In Round 3 Guest sacrificed two rooks to win Mortimer’s queen. He miscalculated some later tactics, but his opponent failed to take advantage.
After a loss to Lee in the fourth round, his fifth round opponent, Mason, failed to arrive because he had confused the start time. Guest was originally awarded a win by default, but it was later decided that the game should be replayed, Mason winning.
He then lost his last four games against some of the world’s strongest players.
Against Burn he played a totally unsound Greek Gift sacrifice in this position, overlooking Black’s diagonal defence.
The game continued 9. Bxh7+? Kxh7 10. Ng5+ Kg8 and now he must have realised that 11. Qh5 fails to Bf5, while the move he tried, Qd3+, failed to g6. Regular Minor Piece readers will recall Locock making the same mistake.
Here’s the tournament crosstable.
In August 1888 the British Chess Association Amateur Championship took place in Bradford. I’m not sure how ‘amateur’ was defined (Guest was a professional chess journalist, but not a professional player), but the 1888 event was a rather weak affair compared to other years, notable for the participation of Eliza Thorold in days when ladies very rarely competed against gentlemen. There was a master tournament taking place at the same time in which some of the stronger amateurs, such as Charles Dealtry Locock, participated. Guest won with a score of 10/12, just half a point ahead of 20-year-old Bradford born mathematician George Adolphus Schott, who, however, defeated him in their individual game.
In this game, winning his opponent’s IQP proved decisive.
In August 1889 Antony Guest reported some important news. A lady had won the championship of the Bristol and Clifton Chess Club.
“There is no reason why (ladies) should not excel at the game.” Guest’s views, propounded in a Conservative-leaning newspaper, were quite enlightened for his day. It was not until 1895, though, that another – very successful – Ladies’ Chess Club was started.
In November and December 1889 the British Chess Association Masters and Amateur tournaments took place consecutively rather than simultaneously in London, so George Wainwright was able to play in both events, while Guest only took part in the latter event. In those days games in amateur tournaments were played on a fairly casual basis with games often being postponed when one of the players was unavailable.
It seems that this event ground to a halt just before Christmas once Wainwright had guaranteed victory. Several of the other players, including Guest, had been too busy to play many of their games.
It’s not known whether any further games were played after this incomplete crosstable was published.
As you’ll see, Guest was the only player to beat Wainwright, in an opening variation still topical today.
He made a tactical oversight in his game against Thomas Gibbons. His opponent, a disciple of Bird, opened with 1. f4 and sacrificed a pawn on the kingside for nebulous attacking chances.
In this position, 25… Ne7 would have kept him well in control, but he erred by playing 25… Be7? 26. Rdg1! Qxh4? 27. Rxg7+ Kh8 28. Qxf5!!, after which he had to resign.
From here on, Antony Guest was playing less frequently, perhaps by choice, or perhaps because he was too busy with other activities.
The 1891 census found Guest and his fellow chess journalist Leopold Hoffer living in lodgings in Fulham Road, right by Stamford Bridge stadium, which would, in 1905, become the home of the newly founded Chelsea FC.
Just look at the name of their next door neighbour.
Yes, there he is: Raymond Keene. Not, to the best of my knowledge, related to his grandmaster and author namesake, although this Raymond’s son and grandson were also named Raymond Keene.
In an 1891 club match Guest’s temporary queen sacrifice brought victory against a strong opponent who really should have spared himself the last 20 moves.
Later that year, Guest and Hoffer were both involved in a telephone chess match against Liverpool.
Liverpool won the first game, while the second game resulted in a draw.
In August 1892 Guest returned to tournament chess, taking part in the Counties Chess Association tournament in Brighton.
It didn’t go well.
George MacDonnell was particularly scathing about his performance.
He should make due preparation and exert himself to the utmost. He didn’t pull his punches, did he?
Guest went horribly wrong on move 10 against the eventual winner.
But he did manage to win a nice minature against Lambert.
The following month he reached this position in a game at Simpson’s against OC Müller.
Here, Guest played 27. Qg6!, an offer which can’t be accepted, and threatening Qxh7+, an offer which can’t be refused. Black should now play 27… h6, when the game is likely to be drawn by perpetual check after 28. Rh3 and a later Rxh6+. Instead he erred with 27… Bg2?, and had to resign after 28. Rg4, as h6 would be met by Rxg2.
This scathing criticism of his play in Brighton didn’t stop him playing in club matches, such as this one against Twickenham.
You can read more about the Humphreys family here and about Guest’s opponent here.
He was also playing for Metropolitan, here losing a brilliancy against one of the ‘fighting reverends’. He really should have known his chess history, though. Wayte reached a winning position from the opening by transposing into a very well known predecessor.
By now Antony Guest had resumed his problem composing career, now without collaborators.
Problem 3. #3 A Guest Morning Post 1893
(Source given in MESON: however I wasn’t able to find it in a quick look to identify the date of publication.)
Problem 4. #3 A Guest Illustrated London News 25-08-1894
In 1895 he took part in the cable match between the British and Manhattan Chess Clubs, where he faced John ‘Paddy’ Ryan, capable, according to the press, of producing ‘startling brilliancies’.
Here, Ryan punted the speculative 21… Bxh3!?. What do you think? We’ll never find out what would have happened as at that point time was called and the game declared drawn.
The Ladies’ Chess Club had been founded in January 1895, and Guest used his Morning Post column to promote their activities. He was invited to give a simul at their prizegiving ceremony.
Approaching his 40th birthday, it might have seemed like Antony Guest was a confirmed bachelor, but in 1896 he married Violet Harrington Wyman, some eleven years his junior. Violet’s brother Harrington Edward Hodson Wyman, was a knight odds player at the British Chess Club, later becoming vice-president of Ealing Chess Club. Her family firm were the publishers of Mortimer’s The Chess-Player’s Pocket Book.
In January 1897 Guest returned to tournament chess, playing in a ten-player selection tournament for that year’s Anglo-American cable match. Again he failed to complete the event, withdrawing after only three games, two losses and a win against Herbert Jacobs. Whether or not this was due solely to pressure of work is unclear.
This would be his last tournament, although he continued playing club chess. His performances, as you can see here (taken from EdoChess), show a steady downward trajectory after a promising start.
The year 1897 was significant for the publication of FR Gittins’ volume The Chess Bouquet.
As one of the Chief Chess Editors of the United Kingdom, Guest certainly qualified for inclusion.
We’re offered a photograph, a biography, a game (against Pollock, see above) and two problems. Here’s how Gittins describes him.
Physically, Mr. Guest is a perfect giant, his towering form and splendid proportions being well in evidence at the recent Hastings Festival. Socially, he is one of the best, full of bonhomie and good humour.
This is a charming mate in 2, which, unfortunately, had been anticipated by Conrad Bayer, who had published a mirror image back in 1865. It’s been reprinted on a number of occasions over the years.
Problem 5. #2 A Guest The Chess Bouquet 1897
The second problem, number 3 above, was unfortunately given with a missing pawn on c7, allowing an unwanted second solution.
He wasn’t the only Guest in The Chess Bouquet. There were also entries for Black Country problemists Thomas Guest and his son Francis Hubert Guest, who were not, as far as I can tell, related to Antony.
Here’s an exciting game played at Simpson’s against a French opponent.
Although now retired from tournament play, Guest was still making occasional appearances in consultation games, and club and county matches, both over the board and by correspondence. He was also publishing the occasional problem, such as this one, from 1900.
Problem 6. #3 A Guest Morning Post 12-03-1900
Later that year, Guest wrote a very interesting article entitled Steinitz and Other Chess-Players, first published in The Contemporary Review, and later republished in the USA in The Living Age.
The last three paragraphs, which take a broader social view of the game, are those which interest me most.
Here he is, celebrating the increasing popularity of chess among the working classes.
The present extraordinary growth of the popularity of the game must surely have some significance. Many of the players are young men engaged in offices, shops and factories; that their numbers include several clergymen, doctors, lawyers and members of other professions is not so remarkable. What strikes me as important is that so many young clerks, and others of similar occupation, should find their chief recreation, at least in the winter months, in the game of chess.
And here again on the artistic side of chess.
But I believe that in most of us there is some kind of artistic instinct, some aesthetic tendency, that finds no outlet in the humdrum of everyday life. If this is true it would sufficiently account for the increasing popularity of chess, for it is an art as well as a game. Its intricacies and combinations are capable of affording aesthetic delight that may be compared with the emotions produced by poetry, pictures or music — different, no doubt, but, to many, similarly sufficing. One need not be an expert to enjoy the pleasure of play; to the beginner it is like a voyage through an unknown country teeming with beautiful surprises. Every sitting reveals some new and captivating feature, suggests some tempting path, or affords some hint as to the best mode of pursuing the journey.
They don’t write them like that any more, do they?
You can read the whole article, along with the chapter about Guest in The Chess Bouquet, in this excellent article by Batgirl (Sarah Beth Cohen).
In 1901 it was time for another census. Strangely, Mr & Mrs Guest were not together. Antony was lodging in Bayswater, while Violet and her parents were lodging in Hastings, perhaps on holiday together.
He returned to the social aspect of chess in a 1901 article explaining how chess can build friendships between people of different nationalities.
For a few years now, Guest seemed, apart from his column, to stop both playing and composing, only resuming in 1907.
In this game against G Freeman from a Surrey v Essex county match he built up a strong attack from the King’s Gambit Declined.
Black had just blundered and now the rather neat 23. Rf5! forced resignation.
Problem 7. #3 A Guest Morning Post 12-08-1907
His game annotations were also being syndicated across various newspapers.
In July 1909 Antony Guest was honoured to be the subject of a feature in the British Chess Magazine, who published a photograph along with a biographical sketch contributed by Frank Preston Wildman.
Problem 8. #3 A Guest British Chess Magazine 07-1907
At some point during this decade, Antony and Violet moved out to 1 Anglesea Road, Kingston, alongside the Thames half way between Kingston and Surbiton. This was a sizeable property, with 12 rooms excluding bathrooms. (I’m not sure whether or not it was the white building you can see behind the trees, which is now Anglesea Lodge, 28 Portsmouth Road.)
This is the view from the Barge Walk on the other side of the river.
The 1911 census found them there, along with two servants, William and Marie Wilkins, a married couple of about their age, and the Wilkins’ teenage daughter Elsie.
Guest decided to join Surbiton Chess Club, playing in this match against Wimbledon.
He was now becoming less active in the chess world, but in 1914 had the opportunity to express his views again on chess for schoolboys.
“In opening the way to friendships the practice of chess is very valuable to young men.”
I totally agree, although these days we might want to refer to young people instead. It worked for me, anyway.
Guest’s column continued through the war, although there was little chess action to report.
Here, he took the lack of competitive chess during the hostilities to promote the value of social chess in promoting friendship.
His wife Violet sadly died in February 1921. That June the 1921 census found him still the head of the household at 1 Anglesea Road, and still working as a journalist. There was a resident housekeeper, but most of the property was taken up by motor builder John Bambury, who ran his own business in Kingston, along with his wife and five children aged between 17 and 22.
Guest was still seen regularly at major events such as Hastings and the British Championship, but by the 1924-25 Hastings Congress he was clearly in poor health and died after an operation on 29 January.
He didn’t leave that much money, compared to Hamilton Brooke Guernsey, one of whose administrators, Leslie Dewing, – one for coincidence lovers here – would have seen him at Hastings four weeks earlier, where he lost all his games in the Premier Section 1. (Coincidentally again, or perhaps not, there’s currently a marketing agency in Guernsey called Hamilton Brooke.)
The Morning Post was far from being Guest’s only chess outlet. At various times, according to Tim Harding in British Chess Literature to 1914, he also wrote columns for the Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News, the Daily News, Cassell’s Saturday Journal, Life and Tinsley’s Magazine.
Nor was chess the only subject on which he wrote. In 1891 Guest and barrister Sylvain Mayer co-authored Captured in Court, a novel with a legal setting. Some of the reviews were pretty harsh. “It is very unlikely to add to the reputation of either as story writers”, according to the Glasgow Herald. “… the bundle of incidents which does duty for a plot is as amateurish as the style”, proclaimed the National Observer. According to the Weekly Dispatch, “The plot is preposterous and the dialogue inane”. Preposterous plots and inane dialogues were perhaps more suitable for children’s literature, and, from 1895 onwards, he contributed to collections of short stories alongside such authors as E(dith) Nesbit, still much loved and remembered today for books such as The Railway Children.
In 1896 Antony Guest contributed an article on Some Old English Games to The Badminton Magazine of Sports and Pastimes, describing games such as Pall Mall and Shuffleboard, illustrated by Albert Ludovici., followed by More Notes on Old English Games a year later, this time including Bandy-Ball and Nine Men’s Morris.
In the early 20th century he developed (pun not intended) an interest in photography, and in 1907 his book Art and the Camera was published by G Bell and Sons, who of course also published chess books.
This time the critics were unanimous in their praise. Modern reprints are readily available should you wish to read it.
In 1910 he turned his attention from cameras to cancer.
It’s still a hot topic today, and the evidence is still inconclusive.
A man of many interests, as well as chess, then. Polymaths were probably more common then than now.
There are a couple of family issues to clear up.
Antony and Violet had no children. His sister (Isabella) Katherine married a wealthy man named Robert Edward McLeod in 1883. Robert’s brother Bentley was a chess player, representing Surrey, Brixton and Metropolitan, through the last of which he would have known Antony. Robert died in 1893, leaving his wife with two young children. Neither of them had children, so that was the end of Augustus Guest’s family. Katherine died, like her father, in a mental hospital, in Brighton in 1941.
To find Antony’s closest relations, then, we have to travel to Australia. Henry, whom you met at the start of this article, returned to England with some of his many children after his retirement. The family was hit by tragedy when his daughter Helen died in 1907. Helen and her older sister Ethel were very close, and, 18 months later, Ethel, suffering from depression as a result of the loss of her beloved sister, took her own life. There were mental health problems, then, on both sides of the Guest family.
Henry’s son Stanley later returned to Australia, married and had six children, the youngest of whom, Marisa, born in 1929, is still alive. Marisa, the closest surviving relation of Antony Guest, is the mother of Ralph Jackson.
One of the wonderful things about chess is that, even if playing competitive chess doesn’t appeal to you, there are many other ways of living your life through your favourite game. For Guest’s contemporary and acquaintance Charles Dealtry Locock it was through problems, writing and, in the last period of his life, teaching. For Antony Guest himself, it was as a journalist and occasional problemist. His record of almost 42 years might pale in comparison with Leonard Barden’s records, but it’s still very impressive. You can see a lot in common: both strong players who, finding competition a little bit too stressful, concentrated on their, in both cases, excellent newspaper columns, and perhaps did far more good in promoting chess in that way than they would have done by just playing.
He was in many ways a man ahead of his time as well. Although he wrote for a conservative newspaper, he was always very keen to promote chess for ladies, for the lower middle and working classes, and for schoolboys (it would be left to Locock to include schoolgirls). He also promoted chess for recreational and social reasons, to establish friendships on a local, national and international basis. I couldn’t agree more. Ralph Jackson is very lucky to be able to count Antony Guest as a close relation.
Problem Solutions:
Problem 1:
Problem 2:
Problem 3:
Problem 4:
Problem 5.
Problem 6.
Problem 7.
Problem 8.
Acknowledgements and sources.
Ralph Jackson – private correspondence
Batgirl (Sarah Beth Cohen) articles on Guest and Donisthorpe at chess.com
Krone Family website here
ancestry.co.uk
findmypast.co.uk/British Newspaper Library
ChessBase/MegaBase2023/Stockfish16.1
chessgames.com (Antony Guest here)
EdoChess (Antony Guest here) British Chess Literature to 1914 (Tim Harding) The Chess Bouquet (FR Gittins) British Chess Magazine July 1909 (thanks to John Upham)
Wikipedia
Yet Another Chess Problem Database
MESON Chess Problem Database
“There are many books devoted to basic endgames, even from the Middle Ages. Principles of typical endgames (such as keeping the rook behind a passed pawn, not setting pawns on the same colored squares as your bishop’s, distant pawns being more dangerous than central ones etc.) are well known too. But what about “complex endgames”? I have in mind endgames with at least two pieces on each side; well I don’t find them often nor sufficiently well-explained in the past! It is exactly this fact (together with my passion and great endgame experience) that has motivated me to write this book (many friends simply call me “Endgame Wizard” ).
Over two decades of working as a coach has confirmed my opinion that endgames are the biggest problem for young players. Today, in the computer era with a lot of information easily provided, youngsters all over the world rather play blitz, or solve some tactical puzzles in a manner that is “the faster the better” (or even spend time on some other chess disciplines). All of this neglects the basis of chess – the importance of endgames! It is not uncommon that everyday you can be witness to some strange endgame misunderstanding, even at the top level.
This is why I consider some of my favorite endgame books based on logic as the best I’ve ever read – I learned the endgame from some of the best endgame players and authors. And this is why I want to fill that gap in chess literature and to share my devotion, ideas, principles, opinions with you! I hope you will enjoy this material and I am pretty sure you will broaden your endgame horizons.”
About the author:
Born in Cuprija, Serbia, 05 August 1977
Started chess at four years old watching father and his brother playing
Entered first chess club “Radnicki” Cuprija at seven
Fide Master in 1994
Serbian youth champion in 1995
Champion of the Belgrade University in 2001 and 2002
Won countless times the Serbian team championship (in youth competition as well)
IM since 2014
FIDE TRAINER since 2015
Winner of many open, blitz, rapid and internet events
Professional coach for more than 15 years
Author and contributor for American Chess Magazine since 2019
This is his 4th book for Thinkers Publishing.
From the back cover:
IM Zlatanovic will bring something new to your chess library. In our computer era, focus is usually on openings. Watching recent broadcasts, the new generation would rather choose games of a certain opening and look for an interesting idea or even a brilliant novelty. I offer, and recommend, a different concept altogether, based on the famous Soviet school of chess. The focus should be on understanding strategical concepts, principles and underlying logic. Fashionable opening lines will be forgotten (or re-evaluated) sooner or later, but understanding cannot be lost, and can only be upgraded. It is sad to see some players that are well equipped with opening lines, who are unable to realise a big positional advantage in an endgame. So, our advice is con concentrate on Strategy and Logic.
This new series of books are highly recommended for club players, advanced players and masters, although even higher rated players may also find it useful! There is no doubt that lower rated players will learn a lot about thinking processes and decision making, while some logical principles can be put to use by more advanced players too.
What is an endgame? Engines tend to tell you you’re in the endgame when neither player has more than two major/minor pieces on the board. You might, of course, consider BNN v BNN to be more like an ending than QR v QR. Me, I have no very strong views on the subject. Zlatanovic seems to take a very broad view of what constitutes an ending.
This, then, is a practical, rather than a theoretical book. If you want to know how to play KRB v KR, for example, you’ll need to look elsewhere. We have 188 positions, all of which start with at least two major/minor pieces, many with three, and some with almost the whole complement of pieces. Most of the positions come without queens. So what we have here is something much more than just an endgame manual. You could see it as a guide to positional play in the late middlegame, or even, in some cases, the opening.
The range of sources is impressively wide: from Steinitz in 1883 through to Zlatanovic himself in 2021. From grandmasters to amateurs. From world championship matches to online blitz games. While there are a few very familiar examples (although they’ll always be new to somebody) there will be a lot which you almost certainly won’t have seen before. Here, then, is an author, unlike many who only use a small number of sources for their books, who clearly has an exceptional knowledge of chess and its literature.
He explains in the preface that he has divided the material into 15 chapters, starting with the most important principles and gradually moving on to the most specific principles.
We have:
The Center
The Active King
Open Files
The Bishop Pair
Activity & Harmony
Space Advantage
Key Squares
Pawn Majority
Pawn Weaknesses
Two Weaknesses & Playing on Both Sides
Opposite-Colored Bishops
Exchange Problems
Do Not Rush
Schematic Thinking
Restriction & Prophylaxis
These chapters represent an increasingly important aspect of chess. Even relatively low rated amateurs these days can play the opening well and avoid tactical oversights in relatively simple positions. Incremental time limits mean that games are more likely to be decided by positional factors in the ending than in the days of mad time scrambles or, when I was learning the game, by the adjudicator.
I’d suggest, then, that this could be a very valuable book for anyone of average club standard or above wanting to improve their game. Let’s take a look inside.
Each chapter starts with a brief introduction. Here, as a fairly random example, is that for Chapter 8 (Pawn Majority).
Of course the natural goal of pawn play is the creation of a passed pawn and its promotion! However, this does not happen often!
The logical prerequisite to creating a passed pawn is to have a majority. Of course, with balanced material there would be majorities for both players, on different wings. Which majority is better? Well generally, it is clear that a 2:1 majority is “the best one”. Not only because it can easily create a passer, but even more importantly, it is because of the fact that the passer will be a distant one – it should deflect the opponent’s army (and king!) which would lead to progress and to gaining material on the opposite flank!
You may have already seen this approach a multitude of times. However what about other majorities? Is a 3:2 always better than a 4:3 majority? What about doubled pawns? What about exchanging pieces? Is it better to have more or fewer pieces kept on the board in a situation with mutual majorities? All these answers can be found in this chapter. And a lot of others besides!
I’ll quickly show you a few of Zlatanovic’s examples.
This is Botvinnik – Rabinovich (Leningrad 1934).
Let’s start this chapter with a relatively simple example. White has the better majority – 3:2, which is usually better than 4:3. However the point is that Black has separated a- and c-pawns and it looks like the majority will soon transform to an even better version for White: 2:1.
Later in the chapter: Smyslov – Szabo (Hastings 1955).
White is dominant although it may look as if Black is okay. White’s queenside majority is the key positional factor here, especially after fixing the b7-pawn. Black cannot easily advance it to b6 because of c6, and even exchanging it would create the a-passer. With his next move White opens up the key diagonal and attacks b7.
For my final example, we’re still in the opening, with most of the pieces still on the board. White has to decide on his 12th move in Erenburg – Murariu (Las Palmas 2003).
Here is a more complex example. White has many advantages: better development, more space and a better majority. However the advantage is not large. Black hasn’t made a single bad move – he is ready to place his king on e7 and finish development soon. In such situations active play is extremely important.
Is this position really an ending? Probably not. Does it matter? Again, probably not. If you want to see what happened next in these games, along with Zlatanovic’s explanations you’ll have to buy the book.
You might think the title is slightly misleading, and I might well agree with you, although I’m not sure I could come up with anything better. In some respects this is a modern book on a modern subject but in other respects it might be seem as slightly old-fashioned, and perhaps none the worse for that. The annotations throughout are based on practical considerations rather than computer analysis. Whereas other publishers promote active learning by offering puzzles at the start of each chapter or stopping to ask questions after every few moves, there’s nothing of that nature here.
You could just read the book, or, if you prefer, cover up the moves and try to guess the continuation. You could also set up the positions and play them out against a training partner, your chess coach or a computer.
The production standards are high, although, as you might have realised from the brief quotes above, the English is not always as idiomatic as one might like. There’s also some inconsistency in naming conventions – sometimes using just the player’s initial, sometimes the first name, sometimes also the middle initial and sometimes the full name. It probably won’t bother you but I find that sort of thing slightly annoying. The book also, inevitably, fails the Yates test (he was Fred Dewhirst, not Frederick Dewhurst). We have an index of games at the end, but an index of players might also have been useful.
In spite of these minor reservations I really enjoyed this book and think that, if you’re an above average club standard player, it will add an extra dimension to your play. Even stronger players will, I suspect, find much of value as well. I’d also consider it an invaluable resource for chess coaches working at this level: it’s evident from the book that the author must be an outstanding teacher.
Zlatanovic has clearly put an enormous amount of thought into how the book should be structured and done a lot of research into finding the most suitable examples to include, and should be congratulated on having produced an excellent book. If you agree with him (as I do) that, at least at club level, understanding is much more important than memory, I’d recommend you to take a look.
Jack Redon was one of the elder statesmen at Richmond & Twickenham Chess Club for the first 20 years or so of my membership. On completing my studies in 1972 I joined the committee and got to know him well.
Jack was a pretty strong player who was known for his artistic interests. He was a commercial artist by profession, designing things like LP sleeves, but had a particular interest in amateur dramatics and seemed to be involved with every artistic society in the area.
He seemed to live a life of some affluence, sharing a large Victorian house near Richmond Bridge with his wife and sister. Richmond Junior Chess Club would later spend many years in another large house on the same estate, which had been converted into a community centre.
(I also visited the house regularly years later, to teach a chess pupil whose name, coincidentally, was also Jack.)
If you have an interest in 19th century domestic architecture it’s well worth a stroll round these roads. You can also read more about the Twickenham Park estate here and here.
The distinguished poet John Greening also knew Jack very well at about this time, describing him well in a memoir.
He was indeed an extraordinary man, full of wise saws and anecdotes. He did tend to repeat them time and time again at every committee meeting, but, given his age and seniority within the club, we forgave him his eccentricities. He generously made his residence available for these meetings in the mid 1970s, and, when one of our younger members suggested we might meet in a pub instead, he didn’t take kindly to the idea.
While John Greening recalls the unperformed playscripts, I recall the skirting boards being lined with paintings, which, like his plays, were created for his own pleasure rather than for profit. My recollection is that they may well have been in the style of Odilon Redon: and he also told us that he was Odilon’s great nephew. But was it true?
Almost certainly not. Odilon (Wiki) came from a wealthy slave-trading family and, although born in Bordeaux, was conceived in New Orleans, like Paul Morphy the son of a Creole mother. Jack’s family background was very different. It has little to do with chess, so if you want to see some moves you’ll have to jump ahead, but if you’re interested in social history you’ll want to read on. Or even Redon!
Redon is a rather unusual French surname specifically associated with the South West of the country. But let me take you back more than 300 years, to 1722. We have a record of a clandestine marriage for one Peter Redon, a weaver living in Stepney. If you see a weaver with a French surname in that part of London at that time you’ll probably assume that he was a Huguenot. Maybe, but Jack’s ancestors later embraced the Jewish religion, calling their children Elias, Abraham and Reuben, Leah, Esther, Rachel and Rebecca.
By 1798 the Redons had crossed the river to Southwark, where Elias (a labourer) and his wife Rachel were accused of running a brothel. In 1839 Abraham Redon, perhaps a son of Elias and Rachel, was on the other side of the law, a victim of a crime. He was working as a toll collector at the Cambridge Heath tollgate in Hackney and, while he was sleeping, two of his assistants, Henry Walker and John Hollingshead, stole his takings. Both were found guilty at the Old Bailey and sent to prison.
In the 1841 census we have John and Leah Redon, along with their children Alfred (20) and Esther (15), living in Woolwich, with John working as a toll collector. Alfred’s occupation is not legible, but certainly not ‘toll collector’. Woolwich is not all that near Hackney. Alfred was actually Abraham Alfred, so was John actually Abraham John, or were Abraham and John brothers sharing an occupation?
Esther, who had an illegitimate daughter, spent much of her later years in and out of the workhouse, their records describing her as a Jewess. Abraham Alfred, showing the first sign of artistic talent in the family, worked as a painter and signwriter. He married Rose Sawyer in about 1854 (or perhaps he didn’t: I haven’t been able to find a marriage record), but, tragically, none of their first six children lived to see their seventh birthday. Their two youngest sons did survive, though: John Edward, born in 1867 (baptised in the Church of England) and Reuben Alfred, born in 1869. Rose died in 1887, and by the time of the 1891 census Abraham Alfred, unable to look after himself in old age, was in the workhouse, where he died the following year.
So far, the Redon family history is one of poverty and tragedy, very different from the affluent environment in which their namesake Odilon grew up. But Jack gave the impression of being fairly affluent himself. What happened to change the family’s fortunes?
Reuben Edward Redon, continuing the family’s artistic tradition, making a living first as a glass embosser (in 1901 he was living in the road running alongside my old school, Latymer Upper), and later as a designer of showcards, running a business in Harrow for several years.
He was married, but had no children, and died, by that time living near his brother in Peckham, in 1927.
We need to follow John Edward Redon and see what happened in his life. In 1871 he was in Manor Place, Walworth (just south of Elephant and Castle) with his parents, brother and aunt. In 1881 the family were still at the same address: John had left school and was working as an office boy. In 1891, his mother having died and his father in the workhouse, the two brothers were living in a boarding house near the Old Kent Road, the cheapest place on the Monopoly board. John was now, following in his father’s footsteps, working as a signwriter.
By the 1901 census John was working as a clerk for London County Council, and boarding just south of Waterloo Station, right by Westminster Bridge. Also there was a dressmaker named Bessie Emma Varney, and, in October that year they married. Bessie’s family seems to have been London working class, and, her mother having died when she was only 5 years old, she and her younger sister were brought up by relatives. John and Bessie had three children, René Bessie (1902), John Edward, named after his father, who would always be known as Jack (1905) and Reuben Ernest (1908-1912).
At some point, I’d guess from circumstantial evidence, round about 1903, John left his job with the council and formed a partnership with Danzig born Charles Ernest Rokicki. They started two companies, a moneylending business based at John’s home address in Lambeth, and a shop in the Old Kent Road.
In 1907, John, like his grandfather before him, fell victim to a robbery when a habitual criminal named Reuben Vaughan (there are a lot of Reubens in this story) paid for a gramophone and 46 records using a forged cheque, receiving a sentence of six years penal servitude.
Their partnership was dissolved in 1910, with John apparently buying his partner out.
The family business of Musical Instrument and Cycle Factors and General Furnishers must have been successful. In 1911 they were living above their Old Kent Road shop. John, perhaps no longer involved in the moneylending business, was described as a Dealer in Musical Instruments (Gramophones), while Bessie was assisting in the business. They were able to afford to employ a Domestic Servant (Mother’s Help) to give Bessie a hand in looking after the children. Young Reuben, sadly, would die the following year.
Within the space of two decades the family had gone from workhouse poverty to employing a servant. At some point between 1911 and 1921 they moved their shop to 185 Queen’s Road, Peckham.
During the First World War John was called upon to serve his country as a clerk in the Admiralty: he was still there in 1921. Bessie, who seems to have been a remarkably strong and ambitious woman, was running the business on her own, describing herself in the 1921 census as a Music Seller. René had no occupation recorded, although I’d guess she was helping out in the shop, while 16-year-old Jack was a part-time art student.
As well as studying art, Jack was becoming interested in the Art of Chess, joining Battersea Chess Club.
Here he is, in 1923, becoming the second ever winner of the Wernick Cup, which is still, more than a century on, the fourth division of the Surrey individual championship. In 1962 the name of another promising young player, RD Keene would be engraved on the trophy. It’s easy to forget that, in these days of preteen grandmasters, a century ago it was relatively unusual for teenagers to take part in competitive chess against adults.
His would be a solid rather than a meteoric chess career, though, developing into a strong club player who, by 1926, was good enough to be selected for an important county match.
He lost his game, but Surrey’s greater strength on the higher boards saw them through. Crossword addicts will notice an anagram on the other side.
While he continued playing chess, Jack soon took up a new interest, in amateur dramatics, setting up a group in his local church. (By now the family were very much Church of England.)
You’ll note the name Florence Warden, also known, from what I recall, as Flossie, who was living with her grandmother and step grandfather, having lost her mother in childbirth when she was only one year old.
John died in early 1931, and it’s quite possible that Jack now had to take a greater role in running the family business. He still had time to play chess, though, and by 1935 had reached top board for Battersea.
He had also reached the top section of the county championship, but in this game from 1937 he was out of his depth against a strong opponent. (For this and all games in this article, click on any move for a pop-up window.)
In this county match game from the same period against an electrician from Brighton, he played an opening gambit and probably didn’t have enough for the pawn, but when he threatened a queen sacrifice his opponent carelessly overlooked it.
and probably didn’t have enough for the pawn, but when he threatened a queen sacrifice his opponent carelessly overlooked it.
The amateur dramatics must have been going well too, as in 1938 he married his fellow thespian Florence Warden.
You’ll immediately note Jack’s artistic signature, appropriately for a member of a family involved in signwriting. There are two other things to note as well. The marriage took place not locally but in the City of London, at St Michael Paternoster Royal, a church associated with Dick Whittington, which had been rebuilt by Sir Christopher Wren after the Great Fire. He gave an address nearby, which, I suspect, was a dummy address enabling him to marry there. You’ll also see that his late father’s occupation was given as Accountant, which doesn’t tie in with other records. Perhaps he did the accounts for the family shop, or maybe it was a euphemism for Moneylender.
His marriage certainly didn’t stop his chess career: at this point he was very active in both club and county chess, winning a prize for one of the best performances in the Battersea first team. If you look at some of the other names here you’ll observe that it was a very strong club at the time.
Although marriage didn’t stop Jack playing chess, the war did. Just three days before this report appeared, and with war just having broken out, a national registration of the civilian population was taken.
Bessie, now in her late 60s, was still running her shop in Peckham, selling gramophone records, musical instruments and cycles. Jack and Florence were living there as well, as was Florence’s elderly grandmother Matilda, an old age pensioner. Florence had a temporary job operating an Elliott-Fisher bookkeeping machine. Jack was described as a designer of sight tests on glass, etching and stencil cutting.
Most of London’s chess clubs, including Battersea, closed for the duration, so there was little opportunity now for Jack to play chess. Matilda died in 1942, and Bessie in 1943. I presume Jack and René would have inherited the business, selling it and moving, along with Florence, to their new home in Twickenham. They must have done pretty well for themselves: not only were they able to afford a large house in a desirable area, but it seems that they no longer needed to work for a living. Not quite Old Kent Road to Mayfair, but still pretty impressive.
Jack threw himself enthusiastically into his theatre and chess hobbies, which would dominate the rest of his life. In 1944 he was a member of the Twickenham Community Players, writing and producing plays for them, just as he had done back in Peckham. They even met for rehearsals at his house (was he the founder, I wonder), but sought larger premises at the new Georgian Club in Richmond.
Jack joined Kingston and Thames Valley Chess Club, which, like Barnes Village, continued meeting during the war. He also rejoined Battersea, who resumed their activities in 1945, where he would win their club championship in 1960. There was now no active chess club in Richmond or Twickenham, though, and this was something he wanted to change. He started a chess section at the Georgian Club, which had modest beginnings.
Retired schoolmaster Phillip Flower, who lived round the corner from Jack, had been strong enough to play in the Major Open at the 1911 British Championships, as well as the First Class in 1921 and 1922, where his victims included future stars Fairhurst and Buerger. Jacob Zafransky ran (or at least he did in 1939) a radio and cycle shop again just round the corner from Jack: there might have been a work connection as his business was very similar to that of Jack’s family.
By the following year they were able to raise a dozen players for a match against an established club.
Jack had managed to recruit two very strong players for the top boards: eccentric philosopher, schoolteacher and much else Dr JD (John David) Solomon, and civil servant Geoffrey Ashcroft, who, although he lived in East Sheen, was a friend and colleague from Battersea Chess Club. It’s pleasing to see that Reginald Tarrant (and it was lovely to hear from his son-in-law recently) provided a link with the ‘Old Richmond and Kew Club’.
The following March, Jack gave a simultaneous display, which proved very successful.
The prizewinning Miss Nesbitt must have been Violet Ella Nesbitt Kemp, an architect’s daughter, who would, some three decades later, rejoin what was by that point Richmond & Twickenham Chess Club. Remarkably, being born in 1888 and dying in 1992, she lived to the age of 103 . I was led to believe she was an actress, but perhaps only on an amateur basis, which might have been where she met Jack.
In 1947 a match was played against Twickenham Chess Club, which had recently reformed, the previous club of that name having folded some years previously. Richmond seem to have dropped ‘Georgian’ from their name, now established as Richmond Chess Club.
Captain Samuel Ould (a civil servant in 1939, although he always used his military rank from the First World War) provided another link with the previous Richmond and Kew Chess Club, while Ted Fairbrother would remain a member into the 1970s.
A few months later Kingston and Thames Valley Chess Club staged a megamatch against a combined Richmond and Twickenham team (just as they did again in 2022). The Teddington club would have been the NPL, the Sunbury club British Thermostat and the Whitton club perhaps Old Latymerians.
You’ll see that Jack, as their club champion, represented Kingston on this occasion. By beating Blake, who had, many decades earlier, beaten Rev John Owen, who had beaten Morphy, this gave him a Morphy Win number of 3.
Being a member of three chess clubs wasn’t enough for Jack Redon. He also played for Twickenham in the London and Middlesex Leagues. (I haven’t found any online information about the founding of the post-war Twickenham Chess Club, but I suppose he might have been involved.)
Here he is, playing in a match against Uxbridge in 1950.
His opponent here, Harry Bogdanor, was a rather dodgy pharmacist (see discussion here) and the father of political scientist (and David Cameron’s tutor) Vernon Bogdanor. FG (Griff) Griffiths was still involved with Richmond & Twickenham Chess Club into the early 1970s. I also have an interest in SA Lester, who, I hope, was precision tool maker and amateur musician Sydney Arthur Lester. At any rate he was the only SA Lester I’ve been able to find in the Twickenham area at the time. Perhaps I’ll tell you more in a future article.
Richmond and Twickenham Chess Clubs were clearly working closely together, in 1952 sending a combined team down for a friendly match at Hastings. Jack scored a fortuitous win on top board against an English international.
You’ll notice endgame study expert John Roycroft on Board 2. I ‘m sure AL Fletcher was L Elliott Fletcher, author of Gambits Accepted, and Miss Fletcher his daughter Lesley, who would later marry Richmond & Twickenham Chess Club’s Robert Pinner. I lose to George Anslow in the corresponding fixture in 1974.
In 1954 the team visiting Hastings, although billed just as Twickenham, was quite a lot stronger, seeming to have recruited some players from other Middlesex clubs rather than Richmond for the match.
I don’t know much about Edgar Brown, whose club was sometimes billed as Wembley & Hampstead. He won the RAF Championship and 1944 and shared 1st place in the 1950-51 British Correspondence Championship. Another Twickenham player in this match was was chess administrator and bigamist Alan Stammwitz (see this thread).
Playing on second board in the 1956 Hastings v Twickenham match he defeated a highly respected opponent with an original sacrifice in the Max Lange Attack. Although it wasn’t quite sound, his opponent, a bank official who, like all the best chess players at the time, had retired to Hastings, was unable to cope, rapidly going down in flames.
Throughout this time, Jack remained very active in amateur dramatics. He never had the looks of a leading man, but excelled in comic and character roles. In 1946 his portrayal of Sir Andrew Aguecheek in Twelfth Night was ‘handled with a delightful touch and never over-played’, while in 1949 he was ‘well cast as the cowardly Oswald’ in King Lear. I’m not sure whether that was a compliment or an insult.
Although he was an enthusiastic participant in club and county chess, tournaments were, with one exception, not for him. In 1957 he successfully entered the qualifying tournament for the British Championship, held that year in Plymouth.
In 1956 he’d appeared in the BCF Grading List at 5a, about 2050 Elo, and remained round about that level for several years – a pretty strong amateur who could – and did – hold down a high board in club matches and a low board in county matches.
Here, he found the going tough, finishing on just 3 points out of 11.
He was well beaten in this game, where his opponent exploited his space advantage with a central breakthrough.
He demonstrated his tactical skills in this game, winning with a powerful kingside attack.
You can see him here, the bald-headed gentleman standing in the centre, with Milner-Barry and Franklin seated in front of him
1958 saw a merger between Richmond and Twickenham Chess Clubs. The result, Richmond & Twickenham Chess Club, is still thriving today. I’m not sure what part Jack played in the merger, but he must surely have been involved and given his blessing.
I’m not sure whether or not he was playing for Richmond & Twickenham in this game, a clash between the 1923 and 1962 winners of the Wernick Cup.
A few years later, Ray would treat the opening in more restrained fashion. Here, he gave Jack some difficult chances, but he was unable to take advantage.
It was only a few years later that Keene would publish his first book, Flank Openings, which I bought and eagerly devoured. It influenced my choice of opening when I faced Jack in the 1969 Richmond & Twickenham Club Championship. I called this system, a cross between a Réti and an Orangutan, the Yeti Opening.
It worked well here (I think the opening was never Jack’s strong point) and soon won a piece, but didn’t want to win hard enough against such an illustrious opponent and let him escape with a perpetual check. (If I’d won, as I should have done, it would have given me a Morphy Win number of 4, although I may well have beaten him in a casual game at some point.)
You might assume that chess players with artistic interests would play artistic chess, while those with scientific interests would prefer scientific chess. It doesn’t always work, but it was certainly true of Jack Redon. From the small sample of games here we can see someone who, at least with the white pieces, favoured dashing gambits and sacrifices, which, while not always sound, often worked over the board.
By now well into his sixties, there was inevitably some decline in his playing strength, but he continued to take part in club matches as well as serving on the club committee. In 1981 he designed a new logo for what was then the British Chess Federation.
His beloved wife Florence died in 1985, but he remained on the grading list until 1988, his clubs listed as Richmond Community Centre as well as Richmond & Twickenham. Suffering from dementia, he eventually moved to a care home in nearby Hampton Hill, where he died in 1994 at the age of 89. It appears, although there are some inconsistencies in the records, that his sister René died in Hastings in 1996, bringing an end to that branch of the Redon family.
Jack may not have been, as he believed, or wanted us to believe, the great nephew of Odilon, but I think he was something far more interesting. A man who was fortunate enough to be able spend the last fifty years of his life indulging in his favourite hobbies. He was a very good, but perhaps not brilliant, actor, playwright and artist, but he wrote plays and painted pictures not with the intention of making money but for the sheer joy of doing so. He played chess for many decades for the same reason: not a great player, but certainly a good enough player: champion of Kingston and Battersea, British Championship contender, achievements not to be taken lightly. Perhaps many of us can learn from the way Jack lived his life.
But more than that, he contributed an enormous amount to the local community in Richmond and Twickenham by founding and organising clubs and societies so that others had the opportunity to share his passions, and, through them, form friendships and enhance their lives. I believe that hobby clubs, whether chess, theatre or a thousand and one other wonderful things, are of vital importance for social cohesion, mental health and many other reasons. All of us at Richmond & Twickenham Chess Club have reason to be grateful to Jack Redon, who might justifiably be seen as the club’s founder. I hope he’s looking on benignly, delighted that, many years later, the club is still thriving.
Sources and Acknowledgements:
ancestry.co.uk
findmypast.co.uk/British Newspaper Archives
chessgames.com
BritBase
ChessBase/MegaBase
Surrey County Chess Association website
Battersea and Kingston Chess Club websites
Brian Denman
John Saunders
“Sergei Tiviakov was unbeaten for a consecutive 110 professional chess games as a grandmaster, a record that has only been broken by World Champion Magnus Carlsen. Who better to teach you rock-solid chess strategy than Tiviakov. He was born in Russia and trained in the famous Russian chess school. In his first book, he explains everything he knows about the fundament of chess strategy: pawn structures.
If chess players trust that their knowledge of opening theory and tactics is enough to survive in tournament play, they are mistaken. Once you settle down for your game and the first moves have been played, you will need a deeper understanding of the middlegame. And one of the most challenging questions is: how to navigate different pawn structures?
Sergei Tiviakov gives you all the answers in this first volume of his highly instructive series on chess strategy. ‘Tivi’ is famous for his deep chess knowledge and rock-solid positional play. He has gathered a rich collection of strategic lessons he has been teaching worldwide, drawing mainly from his personal experience. The examples and exercises will improve your chess significantly and are suitable for any reader from club player to grandmaster level.”
About the Author:
“Sergei Tiviakov is a grandmaster, winner of an Olympic Gold Medal, three times Dutch Champion, and European Champion. Yulia Gökbulut is a Women’s FIDE Master, chess author and sports writer from Turkey.”
Before we start, you might liked to inspect sample pages
This book has its origins in a recent series of lectures given by Tiviakov. His co-author was responsible for shaping the material into a book.
We start with a long introduction about the difference between human and computer chess, which is interesting in itself, but not directly relevant to the subject of the remainder of the book.
What you don’t get is a complete guide to pawn structures: if you want that you’ll need to look elsewhere. Instead, you get something very much based on Tiviakov’s own repertoire. In general you’d expect positional players to prefer queen’s pawn openings, just as Tivi’s hero Tigran Petrosian did, while tactical players will be more likely to choose king’s pawn openings. Tiviakov, though, has been almost exclusively a 1. e4 player throughout his career. With White he makes little attempt to secure an advantage, just aiming to reach a pawn formation he understands better than his opponent.
In the first chapter we look at positions with a pawn majority on one flank. Something like this formation, which Tiviakov often reaches after 1. e4 c5 2. c3, or 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. exd5 Qxd5.
He comments that he’s unaware of any book dealing specifically with this sort of position, and neither am I. If you’re likely to reach this sort of pawn formation in your games you’ll find this material very helpful and instructive.
In this position, from a game Tiviakov – Romanov (White to play), he discusses the idea of deciding, even this early in the game, which pieces you want to trade off for the ending. His conclusion is that ideally you should retain the dark squared bishops, so that you can attack Black’s queenside pawns, and try to trade everything else off. He managed to realise his plan successfully in this game, where he compared his style to that of Petrosian, Karpov and Carlsen.
I’ve thought for many years that perhaps the topic which, more than anything else, needed a book was that of doubled pawns. Naturally, I was delighted to see that Tiviakov devotes two chapters to this. Some of the examples were an eye-opener for me.
Here, he uses his game against Igor Efimov (Imperia 1993: it’s not in MegaBase) to demonstrate how he plays against the Trompowsky.
At first glance you might think that Black’s bishop on e6 looks like a rather useless Big Pawn, but Tiviakov explains that it’s actually more useful than its white counterpart.
But it’s important to understand that in chess a piece is labelled ‘bad’ or ‘good’ not by how it stands, whether it is blocked by pawns or not, but on its role in the actions that its army will carry out.
He explains that Black plans to swing his knight to e4, followed by b6 and c5, and, if White does nothing, by c4, b5, b4, Qd6 and Rb8.
A very instructive game, he claims, but you’ll have to buy the book to find out why.
It’s grandmasterly insights such as this, sprinkled liberally throughout, which make this book worthwhile.
Here’s another example. Tiviakov used to favour the Scotch against 1… e5, but dropped it after a loss against Mamedyarov in 2006.
Black has gone in for a deterioration of his pawn structure. From the viewpoint of classical chess strategy, he should stand worse, because of the doubled pawns, the isolated pawn on e6 and in general the three ‘islands’ against two for White. But in concrete dynamic play, Black is not worse. This is something you should understand.
We now move on to positions with semi-open files in the centre.
This sort of pawn formation can arise from very many openings, for example the Caro-Kann or Tiviakov’s favourite Scandinavian.
Here’s another instructive example, with White to play in the 2006 game Godena – Tiviakov. A Qd6 Scandi has resulted in an equal position. Now White chose the apparently natural (to me anyway) 22. c4.
It is possible to place the pawns side by side on c4 and d4, if White has definite dynamic prospects or if the opponent cannot organize an attack on them. In this concrete example, I can prevent the pawn advancing to d5 and organize an attack on it.
After White’s 32nd move this position was reached. Objectively it’s completely equal, but in practice it’s Black who’s pressing.
Tiviakov again:
After the exchange of rooks, the queen and knight are stronger than the queen and bishop team, because Black has certain secure squares available to him. For example, the queen can come to d4 and then manoeuvre such that he can switch the attack between the white king, the queenside pawns and the pawn on f2.
White’s position is very unpleasant.
Another insight into how a strong grandmaster will perceive a position which a club player like me would think of as just being equal.
The next chapter is about positions with seven pawns each and an open d or e-file.
In this position from a Tiviakov – Kasimdzhanov game, we can deduce from a piece comparison that White stands slightly better. His dark squared bishop is clearly superior, especially after a future f3 and Bf2. It’s perhaps less immediately obvious that his light squared bishop is also better than its opposite number as it’s looking at Black’s slightly vulnerable queenside, while the bishop on b7, once White’s played f3, will be ineffective. Furthermore, White has a potential square on d5, while Black doesn’t have an equivalent square on d4.
Moving on again, we have, logically enough, Two Open Files in the Centre.
Here’s a position from Tiviakov – Ibrahim (2015), with White to play.
If I had a position like this I’d be thinking about offering a draw and heading to the bar, but in fact White is much better here. Black already has a weakness on d5, and by playing Bg4+ now (as it happens Stockfish thinks the immediate Re1 is preferable) and provoking f5, he creates additional weaknesses on e5 and e6.
The final chapter is rather different, looking at the way Tiviakov defends against flank openings, using a double fianchetto system. Again, interesting, but it doesn’t quite fit in.
Summing up, we have four chapters, 1, 4, 5 and 6, which fit together logically, and three chapters, 2, 3 and 7, which, although equally instructive and interesting, don’t really fit in, as well as a long introductory chapter of only tangential relevance. Although it might not make a coherent whole, the quality of the material is very high.
However, contrary to Tiviakov’s claim in his preface that the book is aimed at players of all strengths, from beginner to Grandmaster, it really isn’t. At lower levels games are usually decided by tactical oversights rather than subtle positional advantages of the type we see in this book. I’d say it was suitable for players of, say, 1750 upwards. Again, if you favour kingside attacks, sharp tactics or heavy opening theory this might not be the book for you. But if you’re a strong player with a preference for positional chess, and especially if you share some of his opening choices, this is a book you really don’t want to miss. A second volume has now been published, which I look forward to reading in due course.
Production values are well up to this publisher’s usual high standards, even though a final read through by a native English speaker might have helped. As usual with books for New in Chess, active learning is encouraged: the reader is asked questions every few moves.
Perhaps this isn’t a book for everyone, but the content is excellent throughout, and, if you’re strong enough to appreciate grandmaster level positional concepts, the book can be highly recommended.
Richard James, Twickenham 12th August 2024
Book Details:
Softcover: 264 pages
Publisher: New In Chess; 1st edition (31 Jan. 2023)
“The astounding success of How To Study Chess on Your Own made clear that there are thousands of chess players who want to improve their game – and do (part of) their training on their own. The bestselling book by GM Kuljasevic offered a structured approach and provided the training plans. Kuljasevic now presents a Workbook with the accompanying exercises and training tools a chess student can use to immediately start his training.
Kuljasevic wanted his exercises to mimic the decision-making process of a real game. His focus is on training methods that encourage analytical thinking. Most workbooks offer puzzles and puzzles only. But with this book, you will be challenged by tasks like:
Solve positional play exercises
Find the best move and find the mini-plan
Play out a typical middlegame structure against a friend or an engine
Simulation – study and replay a strategic model game
Analyze – try to understand a given middlegame position
The Workbook is designed for self-study, but is also useful for chess coaches and teachers and can be applied in one-on-one lessons, as well as in study groups in chess clubs, schools or online classes. This first volume is optimized for chess players with an Elo rating between 1800 and 2100 but is very accessible and useful for any ambitious chess player.”
About the Author:
“Davorin Kuljasevic is an International Grandmaster born in Croatia. He graduated from Texas Tech University and is an experienced coach. His bestselling books Beyond Material: Ignore the Face Value of Your Pieces and How To Study Chess on Your Own were both finalists for the Boleslavsky-Averbakh Award, the best book prize of FIDE, the International Chess Federation.”
Before we continue you might like to inspect this preview from the publisher’s website (product page here), which will give you an idea of the layout and show you some of the exercises. If you prefer, you can see sample pages from the Kindle edition here.
A quick word first. I have a large backlog of books to review and little time in which to review them, so, in an attempt to catch up, I will be writing much shorter critiques on the titles in my in-tray than I have done in the past.
I reviewed the author’s previous volume with some enthusiasm here, so was eager to see this workbook, especially given that, in terms of rating, but not interest in improving my game, I’m within the book’s target range.
The main body of the book comprises fifteen sets of eight puzzles. We start with five sets on tactics, gradually increasing in difficulty, each set including six ‘find the hidden tactic’ exercises, followed by two ‘tactical analysis’ exercises.
This seems excellent to me. My impression has always been that, at my level, games are much more often decided by spotting or missing exactly this sort of tactical point than by brilliant combinations and sacrifices. The Hidden Tactic exercises present a position and a three-move sequence, in which you have to find the tactical opportunity that was sometimes missed over the board. The analysis questions invite you to analyse several different lines and decide which is best.
Then we have five sets on Middlegame Training. Here we have six positions where you have to find the correct mini-plan, followed by two simulation exercises where you play through part of a game and are awarded points, in the style of Daniel King’s How Good is Your Chess feature in CHESS, for finding good moves.
Finally, there are five sets on Endgame Training to test you on this most important phase of the game. Here, each set gives you four endgame analysis questions where you have to analyse several lines. Then you have two endgame simulation exercises, followed by two positions for you to play out against a training partner, coach or engine. I’m very much in favour of this and believe that playing out endgame positions should be an important part of every player’s training.
In my day, 50-60 years ago, reading books was, for most of us, just about the only option for chess improvement. Now, of course, there are many more options. As was clear from his previous book, Kuljasevic has put a lot of thought into the most efficient training methods, and into what works best within the framework of a book, and has done an excellent job in selecting material appropriate for his target market.
If you think this book might appeal to you, again I’d refer you to the previews linked to above.
As is usual from this publisher, production values are high. The layout could have been more generous and easier to follow, but this would have necessitated more pages and cost you more money.
If you’re rated between 1800 and 2100, ambitious to improve your rating, are prepared to take time out for serious study and enjoy reading books, I can strongly recommend adding this to your library. Further volumes for lower and higher rated players are promised: I look forward to reading these in due course.
Richard James, Twickenham 26th July 2024
Book Details:
Softcover: 224 pages
Publisher: New in Chess; Workbook edition (31 Jan. 2023)
We focus on the British Chess Scene Past & Present !
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are as essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.