PROGRESSIVE THINGKING

PROGRESSIVE THINGKING

What should i undertake ? How am I to Continue ? Chessplayers are faced with such questions at every turn. To answer them correctly, you have to perform a specific task which comprises a number of steps :

1.Study the position, that is, identify all the tactical and strategic peculiarities of the configuration of pieces and pawns. Note the word study. We are not talking about “evaluating” the position but about “studying” it, because an evaluation just by itself (without study) doesn’t supply the key to further action. For instance it may be a case of “White stands better”, and a young player may give the correct assessment – but he won’t know what to do next. What is he to do with this “better” position?

2.Studying the position generates ideas with their corresponding “candidate moves”. These ideas aim at exploiting some particular characteriestics of the situation ( the characteriestics you previously identified!).

3.Now calculate the variations and assess the positions to which they lead. In other words, weigh up an idea and assess it for suitability.

4.If the verdict on the idea is positive, you carry it out, that is you make the corresponding move.

Let us take an example.

As we study the situation, our attention is drawn to the following :

a) The opposition of the queens, and the fact that the bishop on d6 is to some extent “hanging”
b) The alignment of the king and bishop on the a2-g8 diagonal (the pawn on f7 is pinned, which means the knight on g6 is unprotected),
such are the tactical features. Of the strategic ones, we notice :
c) White’s pawn superiority in the centre, and black’s on the queenside. From the above, some ideas and “candidate moves” emerge:

A. White could try to pick up the bishop on d6 by jumping to b5 or f5 with a knight : 1. Kcb5; 1. Kdb5; 1.Kf5.
B. He might attempt to win the knight on g6 after clearing the pawn from e4; thus, 1.e5.
C. He could prepare the advance of his e- and f- pawns : 1.Kde2; 1. Md2. You might ask about the order in which the candidate moves should be examined. The answer is, first of all look at the most promising ones, those which are forcing and tactical in character. Only then examine the moves which aim to carry out a strategic plan.

So let us proceed to the calculation of variations.
A. It’s clear that knight excursions to b5 promise nothing good, white 1. Kf5 doesn’t lead to a forced line of play, and would require detailed investigation.
So we switch to the following possibility :
B. 1. e5 – a fairly straightforward analysis shows that white wins. The verdict on the idea is positive. The move can be played.
As you see, then, we never got round to examining the strategic moves 1. Kde2 and 1. Md2.
In the game, the continuation was : 1. E5 ! Kxe5 2. F4 (the Knight perishes) 2.....Keg4 3. Hxg4 Kxg4 4. Gc1 Bad8 5. Ke4... 1-0
In the game, the continuation was “on the surface”, the variations proved very simple and white didn’t need to “dig deep”. Let us visualize the scheme of thought like this :

But is what we have said above realistic?

Usually it all happens a bit differently. When a player turns his attention to the placing of the queens and the vulnerability of the bishop on d6, and notes the corresponding moves 1. Kcb5 and 1. Kdb5, it’s hard to imagine him not looking immediately at the capture of the knight – 1. ... cxb5. In other words, a preliminary, cursory inspection of the elementary forced variations takes place as soon as the idea emerges. In this way, idea “A’ is discarded without more a do.

Next, the player will notice the opposition of the bishop and king, the pin on the f7-pawn and the unprotected position of the knight on g6. The move 1.e5 comes into his head, and he immediately starts working out the variations.
With this, the preparatory work is practically finished. The player will dispense with any further investigations. He will re-check his variations and play 1.e5.

It’s easy to see that this scheme differs substantially from the previous one. If idea “B” cropped up first (as well it might), the sheme of thought would be simplified still further :

We will agree to classify this sheme as progressive thingking, by which we mean a simple, straightforward train of thought.

In chess as in life, battles are fought between ideas. As a rule, the more sophisticated ones prevail. We now offer 180 positions for solution, which we hope will help young players to pursue their mental development and conceive new, interesting ideas.






Daftar Pustaka :
Paata Gaprindashvili. 2004. Imagination in Chess. London : B.T. Batsford Ltd.