Novice Nook

Dan Heisman
[Find us on Facebook.]
Translate this page

Annotated Game Collections vs. Instructive
Anthologies
Quote of the Month: One common way to learn planning/strategy is to read
annotated games.
Few annotated game collections are written primarily for instructive purposes.
Most, but not all, game collections that are written for instruction are
anthologies. So what I aim to do this month is compare annotated game
collections that are instructive anthologies with ones that are not. The
difference is often important enough to separate a great learning experience
from a mediocre one.
The best way to begin is by choosing examples from almost any "normal"
annotated collection of master games. These are the works that are not
instructive anthologies, and most annotated game collections fall into this
category. Let's take two well-known and respected books, My 60 Memorable
Games by Bobby Fischer and My Best Games by Anatoly Karpov. We could
have used Alekhine's Best Games by Alexander Alekhine and Capablanca's
Best Games by Harry Golombek; it really doesn't matter. For our purposes
many of these books are similar in the type of annotation, the intended level
of reader, and what they are trying to achieve for that reader.
Here are some annotations taken at random from these two books. From My
60 Memorable Games, after White's move 13.h3 in Keres-Fischer (Game
Thirty-seven):

[FEN "r2q1rk1/p3npbp/1pn3p1/2ppP3/1P3Pb1/
P1PP3P/4N1B1/RNBQ1RK1 b - - 0 13"]
Black replies 13Bxe2 and Fischer writes, "Even stronger is 13Be6 14.
Ng3 Qd7 15.Kh2 f6. The absence of Black's QB makes it difficult to exploit
the white square weaknesses."
Another random remark from the same book is in the position after 11.Nf3 in
Fischer-Rossolimo (Game Fifty-two):
Purchases from our
chess shop help keep
ChessCafe.com freely
accessible:

The Improving Annotator
by Dan Heisman

Chess Secrets: The Giants
of Strategy
by Neil McDonald

The Art of Logical Thinking
by Neil McDonald

[FEN"rnbqk2r/pp3p2/4p1pp/2ppP3/3P2Q1/
2PB1N2/P1PK1PPP/R6R b kq - 0 11"]
Black plays 11Nc6, accompanied by the following statement: "According
to Modern Chess Openings, 11Qc7 is more accurate; the point being that 12.
Qf4 can be met by 12f5! 11Bd7 12.dxc5 deserves testing."
Here is a random comment from My Best Games by Karpov, in the game
Karpov-Kavalek Nice 1974:

[FEN"r1r3k1/1p2ppbp/p2pbnp1/6B1/
N1P1P3/1P3P2/P2KB1PP/2R4R b - - 0 15"]
Black plays 15Rc6 and Karpov writes, "The other defensive possibility,
15Nd7 (16.Bxe7? Bh6+), preparing f7-f6-f5 should also have been given
some attention."
These books were written with the primary purpose of showcasing the
player's best or most interesting games, providing analysis to the game, and
adding a dash of insight into the player's feelings. The latter is possible since
in both these books the author was also the player in question. This personal
view is one reason why, when buying such books, preference should be given
to ones authored by the player. Another important purpose of such books
(besides making money for the author and publisher) is to create a historical
record of those games considered by the player to be his best or most
interesting at a particular point in time.
If I took time to search and choose instead of randomly select, I am sure I
could find some comments that were more instructive for the average player
than the ones above. But the key point is that neither Fischer nor Karpov nor
most authors of similar well-known game collections are attempting to teach
players of a general level how to play better chess. If you are already a fairly
strong player, rated greater than 1900 FIDE/USCF, then it is likely that you
can learn a fair amount from these books, because you already have the
requisite understanding to "bootstrap" from the play and annotations
additional insight into playing better chess without explicit help from the
author. But if you are a much weaker player, while you can greatly enjoy the
play, and understand the annotations on a basic level, it is likely that the
instructive benefits of reading the book will be minimal.
One reason for this lack of benefit to lower-rated players is that the notes are
not written to provide a general understanding of what is happening. Most
notes are not only very specific to the position, but expressed in variations,
placing less emphasis on the text. Notice that this specificity is clearly evident
in the above annotations.
Yet there is a more insidious reason why reading good game collections
above your level can be counterproductive. Most annotated game collections
that assume a fairly high level of understanding will not confuse readers much
weaker than the intended level. Instead, these annotations often
unintentionally give them false hope that the subtle and advanced strategies
employed are just what they need to improve, when in fact much more basic
tactical and thought process skills and knowledge are really required. I run
into this confusion all the time when giving instruction to adults, who don't
understand why intense study of the 300 books in their library has not made
them expert level players. For more on the proper sequence of learning chess
material and the likely diminishing returns when encountering this material
out of order, see Chess Books and Prerequisites and The Three Showstoppers,
along with other Novice Nooks.
There is another, somewhat rarer, type of annotated master game collection,
the instructive anthology. The key here is instructive; it does not have to be an
anthology (a collection of games from different players). There are a few
game collections written for instruction that take the games of a single player
and use these exclusively. However, books of this type, such as A First Book
of Morphy by Frisco del Rosario or Capablanca's Best Chess Endings by
Irving Chernev, are comparatively few. The great majority of instructive
master collections are anthologies; this gives the author leeway to select any
games that best illustrate the topic at hand.
We have already discussed Irving Chernev's Logical Chess Move by Move, in
Chernev, Nunn, and Learning Chess, which also introduced the topic of
instructive anthologies. Let's look at some example annotations from two
other authors of instructive game collections, so we can contrast these books'
goals with those of the "normal" game collections given above.
Very welcome additions to this genre are Neil McDonald's Chess: The Art of
Logical Thinking and Chess Secrets: The Giants of Chess Strategy. The latter
presents strategic ideas from the games of Kramnik, Karpov, Petrosian,
Capablanca, and Nimzowitsch. Here is an example from his notes to
Capablanca-Blackburne St. Petersburg 1914, after 19Bf5?:

[FEN"r4rk1/4npbp/pq4p1/1p1pPb2/2pP1P2/
2P2N1P/P1BB2P1/1R1Q1RK1 w - - 0 20"]
Capablanca played here 20.g4! and GM McDonald writes,
"I can sympathize if you feel somewhat reluctant about pushing all your
kingside pawns in this fashion. After all, in books the moves h2-h3 or
h7-h6 are often condemned as a thoughtless weakening of your king's
shelter so goodness knows what the same experts would make of a
move like g2-g4! However, there is nothing thoughtless or gratuitous
about Capablanca pushing his pawns here. He is carrying out a strategic
plan that suits the requirements of the position; and with an invincible
center and the initiative on the kingside, his monarch has nothing to fear
from the black pieces. On the contrary, it is the black king who has to be
afraid of White's pawn roller.
"You will see many instances in this book of the aggressive use of
pawns in front of the king."
Hopefully it does not require extensive explanation to understand the
enormous difference between what GM McDonald is trying to do (similar to
When Is A King Safe?) versus the intent of the Fischer and Karpov
annotations. To reinforce this distinction, let's take another example from the
same book. This one is from Marshall-Capablanca, New York 1909:

[FEN"r4rk1/pp2qppp/4b3/2p5/8/
4PQP1/PP3PBP/R4RK1 w - - 0 16"]
GM McDonald:
"Black has a 3-2 majority of pawns on the queenside; White has a 4-3
majority on the kingside. In what follows, Capablanca does everything
possible to exploit the value of his majority, whereas the potential of
White's kingside pawns is entirely wasted.
16.Rfc1?
"Remember what we said above about working and non-working pawn
majorities? Marshall should have set his pawns to work with 16.e4!,
planning 17.Qe3 followed by a surge in the centre with 18.f4, 19.e5 and
20.f5. Naturally Capablanca would have taken measures against this, but
in doing so he would have been distracted from the smooth exploitation
of his queenside majority. A lively game would have resulted with, in
the phrase so beloved of chess commentators 'chances for both sides'."
These remarks are superbly instructive, and in tune with his chapter title,
"Understanding Pawn Majorities." I often see students making the same
mistake as Marshall did in this game. However, they would be more aware of
the correct idea without my intervention when practicing The Four
Homeworks; one of the key suggestions there is to read as many books like
this as quickly as you can for how best to do this, please refer to Reviewing
Chess Games.
As written in earlier Novice Nooks, and it bears repeating as much as
possible, a main goal in reading all these instructive books from different
authors is to develop a "chess conscience" which whispers in your ear as you
play, and gives their collective advice about how to play positions. Just this
week I had many new prospective students tell me they often reach positions
where "they don't know what to do." Of course, this is normal and actually
good; if you always knew what to do, chess would not be nearly as much fun.
But what was also implied is that not only did they not know what to do, they
did not know how to figure out what to do, which is quite a different
complaint, and much more addressable. Developing a chess conscience,
which includes abilities such as learning to recognize how and when to
mobilize a pawn majority, goes a long way toward solving this problem. As
one student emailed me a few years ago:
"Dan, I have taken up your suggestion to read lots of instructive
annotated games as quickly as possible. I would like you to know that
now that I have reviewed 700 games, I am starting to understand what
good players are trying to do when I watch their games."
The osmosis that he experienced contributed to the development of his chess
conscience. When I am asked how I learned to play endgames, I answer that
while I read theoretical endgame books, such as Yuri Averbakh's Essential
Chess Endings, most of my practical endgame knowledge came from either
playing strong opponents and reviewing the endgames with them or playing
through many annotated master games. These games often went into the
endgame, so they amounted to lots of vicarious experience, and the result was
I developed the endgame part of my chess conscience.
Readers of Chernev, Nunn, and Learning Chess will recall that Chernev is
unnecessarily harsh in criticizing moves like h2-h3, whose effects can run the
gamut from completely unnecessary and weakening to subtle restriction (see
A Guide to P-R3). Notice how GM McDonald, in his notes to Capablanca-
Blackburne, seems aware of his predecessor's viewpoint and not-so-subtly
addresses this issue head-on in an attempt to set the record straight. There are
a large number of complex issues that an aspiring player will encounter on the
way towards better general understanding of chess positions. That is why it is
important to read many different viewpoints; the consensus opinion is more
likely to be near the truth than any individuals. More to the point, reading
varying views, reasons, and conclusions should result in a much better
understanding of the specific issues that occur in various chess positions.
Let's take a final "instructive" example from an older classic of this genre,
Chess Master vs. Chess Amateur by Max Euwe and Walter Meiden. Black
has just played 22Rxe5 in Game Fifteen, Master-Amateur:

[FEN"6k1/pbp2p1p/2p2p2/4r3/8/
P1N5/1PP2PPP/3R2K1 w - - 0 23"]
Euwe and Meiden (converted from my edition's descriptive notation):
"What strategy will White now follow?
"Black has three weaknesses: (a) pawns (two sets of doubled isolated
pawns); (b) bishop (it is badly placed and can possibly be trapped; (c)
king (it is restricted on the one hand and unprotected by its Pawns on the
other). Each of these weaknesses is the result of the double isolated
Pawns. If the pawn on Black's c6 were on b6 and the one on his f6 on
g6, Black would be all right, even better off than White, because an
active bishop is, in general, superior to a knight.
"What plan can White conceive, given these weaknesses? I t is not
always possible to outline a single winning scheme(my emphasis).
Moves often depend on the opponent's possibilities of defense. Here, the
win will be based on opportunities arising from each subsequent
position, but all of Black's weaknesses will figure in the strategy.
"White looks at three possibilities: (a) the difficulties into which the
black bishop will come through Nc5 combined with several pawn moves
(the continuation will show what this means); (b) the possibility of
winning Black's pawns, all of which are very weak-though, if the white
rook makes a sally, the black rook can do the same, and this may mean
that White will exchange his sound Pawns for Black's unsound Pawns;
(c) the possibility for playing for direct mate.
"So it is understandable that White does not confine himself to a single
scheme. He simply waits for his opportunity."
Again, superbly instructive annotations, both in general and with regard to the
specific position. Is it any wonder that those who read the wrong collection of
annotated master games find the going tough and not very instructive?
Ironically, many of these same game collections are considered the best chess
books of all time, and they are but not for their instructive value, at least not
their instructive value to the overwhelming majority of the chess population.
Here is a list of instructive anthologies from my website's Book
Recommendation page. The books are roughly listed in ascending order of
difficulty. It is hardly complete, but it can serve as an excellent basis for
further study:
Logical Chess Move by Move Irving Chernev.
Chess: The Art of Logical Thinking Neil McDonald.
A First Book of Morphy by Frisco del Rosario he does not always do
a great job of identifying a game's losing move, but otherwise it fits as
an instructive game collection.
Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played Irving Chernev.
The Art of Planning in Chess Neil McDonald.
Chess Master vs. Chess Amateur Euwe and Meiden.
50 Essential Chess Lessons Steve Giddins.
Chess Success: Planning After the Opening Neil McDonald.
Chess Secrets: The Giants of Strategy Neil McDonald.
50 Ways to Win at Chess Steve Giddins.
Winning Chess Brilliancies Yasser Seirawan.
After reading one or more of these books the reader will be able to graduate to
individual game collections that may not be written specifically for
instruction. For example, the following anthologies are much more advanced.
I would suggest at least a 1700 USCF/FIDE rating before tackling these. A
good individual game collection is Marshall's Best Games of Chess, also
known as My 50 Years of Chess, by Frank Marshall.
Understanding Chess Move by Move John Nunn.
Instructive Modern Chess Masterpieces Igor Stohl.
Zurich 1953 David Bronstein.
Question Could point me to a resource that would help me learn how to
checkmate in a king vs. king and pawn endgame where the pawn is on the b-
or g-files. I always stalemate when the pawn is on those tricky file.
Answer I assume you mean "promote the pawn," rather than checkmate and
that you can checkmate once you get the queen. The key position (the hard
one for the side possessing the pawn on his move) is where the pawn is on the
fifth rank and the kings are on the sixth and eighth ranks:
White to move

[FEN "6k1/8/6K1/6P1/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1"]
The point to remember is that the offensive king, if moving first, has to go to
the rook file. So play should continue 1.Kh6! Kh8 2.g6 Kg8 3.g7 Kf7 4.Kh7
and promotes. If instead 1.Kf6, then after 1Kh7! White can make no
progress with 2.Kf7 Kh8 because 3.g6?? is stalemate. Even worse than 2.Kf7
is 2.g6+? Kh8! Draw. Therefore after 2.Kf7 Kh8 White has to settle for 3.Kg6
Kg8 repeating the initial position and winning with 4.Kh6!
If Black is to move in the initial position, the win for White is trivial: 1Kh8
2.Kf7 Kh7 3.g6+ Kh8 4.g7+ and wins. If instead 1Kf8, 2.Kh7 and the
pawn promotes.
With a bishop or center pawn a king on move in front of the pawn can go in
either direction to win; that's why the knight pawn is the hardest in this case
only going to the "outside" wins.
2011 ChessCafe.com. All Rights Reserved.
Dan welcomes readers' questions; he is a full-time instructor on the ICC as
Phillytutor.
Yes, I have a question for Dan!
Comment on this month's column via our Contact Page! Pertinent responses
will be posted below daily.



[ChessCafe Home Page] [Book Review] [Columnists]
[Endgame Study] [The Skittles Room] [ChessCafe Archives]
[ChessCafe Links] [Online Bookstore] [About ChessCafe.com]
[Contact ChessCafe.com]
2011 BrainGamz, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
"ChessCafe.com" is a registered trademark of BrainGamz, Inc.