McCreadyandChess

A player can sometimes afford the luxury of an inaccurate move, or even a definite error, in the opening or middlegame without necessarily obtaining a lost position. In the endgame … an error can be decisive, and we are rarely presented with a second chance.  – Paul Keres

An eight-month period away from the board is about to come to an end, here’s a few reoccurring thoughts whilst out of action:

1. The endgame offers the club player much profit.

The endgame is a place where wow factor and whizzbangers are scarce but winning chances are aplenty: if a titled player can go wrong on a regular basis in the final phase of the game, why won’t your untitled opponent against you? In truth he/she will probably offer you a smorgasboard of opportunity without even realizing it. All you need to do is capitalize. And to capitalize, all you need to do is merely dedicate yourself, and in doing so, an emerging love of the endgame will help reacquaint you with an old flame you may have forgotten about -good, old-fashioned elbow grease….or not, as the case may be.

But seriously, considering that chess is a balanced and solid game, you may not get winning chances against your closely matched opponent until the endgame. The endgame may be your best, or even only hope, of snatching victory: if like myself, you are a club-player, your opponent won’t have the knowledge to play the entire endgame accurately. It’s not like in the opening, where you can copy moves out of a book blindly, concrete knowledge of the endgame is much harder to come by. Go to move 23 of the following game http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1111742 . It looks drawish yet Larsen didn’t think so and he didn’t even need his opponent to make a mistake.

Lastly, I’m inclined to believe that the endgame is the area of chess where the literature has improved the most with some great writers, such as Dr. John Nunn, Muller and Mark Dvoretsky, raising the standard. Not just by offering improved analysis but by questioning the often elaborate publications of previous generations. I was one of the many who owned series such as Averbahk’s yet found the scope of material and attention to detail to be so great that far too much information was left ignored. In general, terms a shift away from covering every single aspect of the endgame towards the general and more practical has helped no end.

2. A more cautious approach towards chess literature has emerged.

Without parodying some authors I have recently encountered, I’ve had to distance myself from a great many books on chess theory, especially those with cheap, gimmicky titles such as ‘Secrets of crap chess books’ by GM Der Brain. In general I find them to be sloppy on too many levels. There is often a lack of distinction in such literature between ability and knowledge, and a prevailing assumption that one necessarily follows from the other. This is naive to say the least and rather damaging considering that chess is often defined as an intellectual pursuit. Some publishers are guiltier than others, I have been appalled by some Everyman Publications I’ve come across in the last few months but have gained respect for Gambit as well as Hardinge Simpole. Coming from an academic background, I find it hard to accept literature which has a bibliography you could write on the back of a stamp, if that, does not cite or reference correctly, if at all, and is saturated by lazy generalizations, incoherent analysis and poorly thought-out remarks. Many titled players are quite frankly, charlatans: great chess players they may be, but great writers, communicators, researchers, or even instructors, they are not. I don’t want to be overly critical, there are some great books out there but they are few and far between. Furthermore, it is too easy and unfair to attribute blame solely on certain individuals: the primary purpose of producing a book on chess is profit, publishers are partly responsible for publishing material which is inferior and in need of substantial revision, but ultimately, if anyone is to blame it is the chess-playing public for buying such literature in the first place. It would be nice to think that given some on-line content is not only free but qualitatively superior in many cases, that this would help push literature upwards…but perhaps it is me who is being naive here.

3. Chess is furnished with a lavish history.

To really understand who a player really is or was, it is necessary to leave chess theory and enter into biography and chess history. Games and analysis alone are too easily subject to misinterpretation and are often used to support pre-existing views of the player in hand. You might get a game showing the brilliance of Capablanca in the endgame and how effortless his play is but using games purely to support your own ideas doesn’t teach anything significant. If anything it only shows how unimaginative the writer is. Moreover, chess players often have interesting lives and careers. Quite often it isn’t possible to understand a player’s game or tournament when it has been taken out of context. An obvious example of that concerns Spassky’s demise in his match with Fischer. Clearly the circus going on around him had a massive effect on his play and generated an unparalleled drop in results in a world championship match. It is sad that more effort isn’t invested in the background surrounding play as it often provides important clues on how to read a game. There are many semi-retired players & historians that write well about the history of chess, this I have learnt. I look forward to reading the 15 books I have ordered on-line as they offer a feint pulse of professional writing in chess.

4. The predilections of the Arabs are not conducive towards proper chess play.

Earlier this year, whilst in Al Ain and then Abu Dhabi UAE, I was disposed to play some chess. I noticed that the heads of the kings had all been cut off on every single chess set in both clubs, presumably for appearing ‘Christian’. In Al Ain, the kings’ heads had been replaced by a star and a crescent moon, which I found to be rather distasteful. Given the number of arguments going on and total lack of respect for tournament regulations, I have concluded that chess is not played in the proper manner by the Arabs.

Dubai is frequented by the current FIDE president. In truth the club itself is enormous in its global stature as a number of regional officials have positions at the club. But what, if anything, do the Arabs have other than money? The FIDE president has been friends with a number of rulers in the area, Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein spring to mind initially, though I am sure there are others. Much of the chess world has failed to understand these friendships but when you consider the perennial lack of funding in chess, befriending those ruling opulent nations isn’t such a strange maneouvre. Political instability and human rights issues are part and parcel of every oil-rich nation, it is only a matter of time before FIDE courts controversy once more if it continues to operate from the region with such surety and regularity. A sad reflection on a global level but understandable, since greater financial stability in chess ranks more highly than the occasional question mark concerning personal loyalties. Regionally, this is all wonderful news for the aspirational youngsters who have already fallen in love with chess.

5. Absence makes the heart grow fonder.

I do not return to chess feeling rusty or out of sorts, I return with more confidence than before. A deeper appreciation of the subtleties of the game has emerged through a slower and more careful study of the game itself. Facing a wealth of on line resources, I have invested enormous effort into establishing my own personal library. Approximately half of the publications I found on-line, the other half I purchased. Experience is the best teacher in chess but given the theoretical nature of the game itself, study plays an essential supporting role. Study, though, is never solely about studying what has been played, it is also involves comprehension of what has been played, analysis itself in chess is tethered to self-examination…I do hope that ‘Chess For Tigers’, my once-upon-a-time favourite book, reconfirms this when it arrives through the post. With this in mind, I will end with the following quotation:

 “If approached with an open heart, chess can become a fascinating channel of self-expression and self-discovery.” -Josh Waitzkin