What it Takes to Become a Grandmaster (eBook)

Introduction

After the 2014 world championship match, former champ Garry Kasparov offered a striking insight into what he had seen.

“Seventy percent of the moves could have been made by any competent player,” he said.

Now, you can dispute the exact number. But Kasparov’s main point was valid: Many of the moves played by remarkable players are not very remarkable.

He had more to say. “Twenty-five percent” of the match’s moves could have been played “by any grandmaster,” he added.

Kasparov was leading up to the punch line:

The five percent that remained were world-champion quality moves, he said. Only players like the match contestants – Magnus Carlsen and Vishy Anand – could find them and be confident enough to play them on the board.

Many fans wondered which moves comprised that five percent. But in this book we’re concerned with another question that Kasparov’s insight inspires.

What characterizes the twenty-five percent? That is:

What are ‘grandmaster moves’?

What distinguishes them from the moves that average players can find? Are they the result of superior calculating ability? Are they the fruit of years of experience against very strong opponents? Do they stem from clicking through thousands of database games?

If these are the necessary factors, then a non-GM may have little chance of ever playing a grandmaster move. He will have trouble even understanding one. He can only play over a GM game, stand back and marvel.

But there’s another answer to the question:

Grandmaster moves are not beyond the understanding of average players. Many of those moves are based on principles, on the positional techniques we call priyomes or on different ways of thinking that are unfamiliar to non-GMs.

We see these move-motivators repeatedly in grandmaster games, like this:

Vitiugov – Bukavshin, Chita 2015

1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ♘c3 c6 4 e3 ♘f6 5 b3 ♗d6 6 ♗b2 0-0 7 ♗d3 e5 8 dxe5 ♗xe5 9 ♘f3 ♗g4

While these moves were being played, the world-class computers Houdini and Stockfish had already concluded that Black was better. They didn’t consider 10 ♕c2 to be among White’s four best options.

Black tried to punish White for taking liberties, with 10 ... ♗xf3 11 gxf3 d4.

Then 12 exd4 ♕xd4 would leave White with serious weaknesses on dark squares and weak pawns (13 0-0-0 ♕f4+ 14 ♔b1 ♖e8 and ... ♘a6).

Moreover, after 12 ♘e2 ♕a5+ he had to move his king (because of 13 ♕d2? ♕xd2+ 14 ♔xd2 dxe3+ 15 fxe3?? ♗xb2).

What Black – and the the super-engines – failed to appreciate at first was 13 b4! ♕xb4+ 14 ♔f1.

White has violated all sorts of basic principles in just 14 moves. But there were valid reasons for White’s play.

Yes, the doubled f-pawns are a weakness.

But control of a file – provided it’s a half-open file – is often much more important. There’s a hierarchy of positional advantages and disadvantages that grandmasters understand well and they justify 10 ♕c2!.

Yes, White failed to castle.

But early castling is often a wasted move, which can be delayed in favor of something that takes a much higher priority, as Mikhail Botvinnik liked to say.

And, yes, White’s king looks highly vulnerable.

But without a light-squared bishop, Black has little chance to attack it. A grandmaster’s acquired sense, called “king feeling,” tells him that it is Black’s king that should be in greater danger. A GM may not be able to verify this by calculating. He just feels it.

White got his pawn back with 14 ... c5 15 f4 ♗d6 16 exd4. The power of his rooks and bishops became evident after 16 ... ♘bd7 17 ♖g1 g6 18 ♖b1 ♕a5 19 f5!.

For example, 19 ... ♔h8 20 fxg6 fxg6 21 ♗xg6! (21 ... hxg6 22 ♕xg6 and mates or 21 ... ♖g8 22 ♗xh7! ♘xh7 23 dxc5+ ♗e5 24 ♗xe5+ ♘xe5 25 ♖xb7 ♘f6 26 ♕f5 and wins).

Black tried to neutralize the b1-h7 diagonal by shedding a pawn, 19 ... g5 (20 ♖xg5+ ♔h8).

But he was losing after 20 ♕c1! ♔h8 21 dxc5! in view of 21 ... ♗xc5? 22 ♕xg5 and mates.

The game went 21 ... ♗e7 22 ♗d4 ♕c7 23 ♗e4! ♖ab8 24 ♘c3 h6 25 ♘d5 ♕d8 26 h4 ♗xc5:

And 27 hxg5 ♗xd4 28 gxf6 resigns (28 ... ♘xf6 29 ♕xh6+ ♘h7 30 f6 and mates).

Did you notice any grandmaster moves?

“Yes, 27 hxg5,” many amateurs would say.

And they would be wrong.

“Any competent player,” to use Kasparov’s words, could have found the final combination. The star moves, the ones that made a game-changing difference, began much earlier, with 10 ♕c2! and 12 ♘e2!.

These kinds of moves are difficult to appreciate. But with the proper approach and study you can understand them. You can learn to apply the reasoning behind them – and enjoy the rare satisfaction of playing a grandmaster move in your own games. That’s what this book is about.

Mysterious

There are so many different kinds of moves that can be called “grandmasterly.” But what characterizes many, if not most, of them is they are counter-intuitive. Sometimes they are downright mysterious.

Smyslov – Lombardy, Monte Carlo 1969

1 c4 ♘f6 2 ♘c3 d6 3 d4 e5 4 dxe5 dxe5 5 ♕xd8+ ♔xd8 6 ♘f3

Black retreated his only developed piece, 6 ... ♘fd7!. It looks bizarre. But it is quite logical:

Black wants to play ... f6. That would solve the long-term problem of defending his e5- and f7-pawns. It would also prevent tactics based on ♘g5. Black could continue ... c6, ... ♔c7, ... a5, ... ♘a6 and ... ♘dc5 with smooth development, a safe king and no real weaknesses.

White’s reply, 7 g4!, is more of a head-turner. But once again, it’s a move whose strengths become clearer upon inspection:

White expects to see ... f6 and already is planning to exploit it with a timely g4-g5 and gxf6. If he follows up with ♖g1 and ♗h3 he may have a serious advantage because he would control key lines like the g-file and h3-c8 diagonal.

Black was one of the 100 top players in the world when this game was played. Yet he admitted he was stunned by 7 g4. After 29 minutes of thought he concluded that his position was “if not actually lost” then “very bad.” He eventually lost.

In truth, he was far from lost. But White would simply have a position any GM would be delighted to play after, say, 7 ... f6 8 b3 ♗b4 9 ♗b2 ♖e8 10 0-0-0.

Another GM game went 10 ... c6 11 g5! ♔c7 12 ♗h3 ♘a6 13 ♖hg1 ♗f8 14 ♗f5 h6 15 gxh6 gxh6 16 ♗xd7 ♗xd7 17 ♘e4 ♗e7 18 ♖g7 and White won.

What helped make 6 ... ♘fd7 and 7 g4 grandmasterly is that they were counter-intuitive.

Intuition is a refined sense of what the best move in a position is likely to be. It is what enables good, experienced players to play good, experience-based chess moves. If those players develop this sense further they might become masters. They will be able to make master moves.

But to go further, beyond master, a player needs to appreciate the moves that his intuition rejects out of hand:

He needs to consider developing a rook on a closed, rather than open, file. He must resist occupying an appealing – but actually worthless – outpost square. He should learn to make an “I pass” move or even a retreat. He must be willing to create a backward pawn that supports a strong center. He needs to learn when a “bad” bishop is really good and when an “equal” position isn’t.

In short, to get beyond master he needs to go beyond master moves.

Grandmaster Mystique

Before we go any further, let’s make something clear: This book will not make you a grandmaster.

There is much more to learn, many other skills to master than can be described in any one book. It takes years to achieve that level of insight, precision and understanding. Even if they invest years, very few students will reach the GM level.

Nevertheless, I believe that...