|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Chessville
Advertise to Single insert:
|
Gambit Play - Sacrificing In the Opening Reviewed by Phil Innes
I note that the back cover of this book states its opinion that the title is “A thorough education on gambit play” and adds “containing wild and aggressive play.” These two ideas are profoundly at odds with the Introduction of the book, where the Author takes some pains to explain that these particular gambits are not wild and speculative at all but sober investments in resulting play, and more a ‘taste’ than a thorough education, and the idea of putting some fun back into the game by assaying sensible gambits. In passing I also note that this is an expensive taste at $19.95 for 128 pages, covering by chapter 1. Time, 2, Open Lines, 3. The Initiative, 4. Outposts, 5. Disruption, 6. Structure, and 7 Miniatures. However, $19.95 does not buy you an index of players nor of openings. But it is illustrated by the games of world champions and completely unknown chess players. Anyway… on to the book itself and Chapter 1 which discoursed on Time: I wasn’t having any fun with Spassky-Osnos, Leningrad 1963, which occupies 5 pages of analysis before arriving at move 10, Black having grabbed a pawn or two via a Queen sortie. Then he makes an error at move 14 which would otherwise allow time to return the same pawn or two with advantage. But no analysis followed the sensible 14. …Bd7, and the error 14. …h6 became the justification for devoting seven pages of this slim book to the ‘lesson’ of this game. Chapter 2 begins with Anderssen-Dufresne, 1852, but doesn’t mention that it's an Evans gambit, [in fact no openings are identified throughout the book] Trying to follow the game by reading the text and looking at diagrams was difficult since there were more diagrams devoted to analysis than the actual game, but without being labeled ‘analysis’, making it difficult to play through without actually setting up a board. Advancing to Chapter 3 and addressing The Initiative, the first game, Yadasin-Kasparov, is a Sicilian where Gazza plays e5 at move 6 and the commentary goes:
Still attempting to have fun I progressed to Chapter 4 and Outposts, and a game Kramnik-Gelfand, Novgorod 1996, when the non-gambit player seemed to establish a better outpost than the gambiter. Kramnik admits that if 19. …Qc7 then the result would be ‘unclear’ while the actual game continued for another 32 moves to a very clear draw. Certainly nothing ‘wild and aggressive’ about this game and equally obscure was what chessic point it wished to promote on the subject of gambits.
The problem I am having with every illustrated game is that the main theme being established is that opponents make weak moves rather than this idea of ‘investing’ a pawn for future benefit – and the thesis of the book is not obviously established. Perhaps it will emerge in Chapter 6 ‘Structure’ which begins with a famous game Bronstein-Tartakover, Saltsjobaden 1948, and the seeming random inclusion of Bronstein’s quotation “The Bishop is stronger than the Knight”, which would be news to Spassky who made a living by playing BxN and whose games feature heavily in this book. Again we see the game resolve around a questionable move by the non-gambit player, in this case 13...Nxe3 which the text says is better than 13…Bxh5, but after looking at the diagram for as long as 20 seconds I found 13. …Nf4. I expect Bronstein saw it too and it may well be mentioned in Sorcerer’s Apprentice, but not in this book! In all, 5 pages illustrate the famous game’s pawn island theme, and another 5 pages complete “Structure” with other illustrations of pawn patterns. The book ends with 18 pages of miniatures finishing with a strange 7-move mate played, almost unbelievably, in a correspondence game! This book established in its introduction the fine idea of sensibly investing a pawn in the opening for later reward, but seemed fundamentally confused in prosecuting this idea, while completely misrepresenting it on the cover. A good editor should have written this review as feedback to the author, encouraging reworking the material, since the most expensive way for the publisher to proceed is if reviewers provide the same task. $19.95 is an expensive gambit for the purchaser of this title, which does contain some fine ideas though they certainly need to be honed to a more specific playing level, something in fact between players who could lose in 7 moves at correspondence chess and Garry Kasparov’s typical opponents. I
should also recommend to the publisher that their own blurb writer should at
least read the book’s introduction rather than indicate an almost diametric
opposite idea on the back cover – but the main recommendation is to employ
an editor to save a good writer from under-representing a good idea, and
producing another little chessic pot-boiler where the buyer makes the
wildest gambit in choosing to buy it.
|
The
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
This
reviewer, being somewhere between a beginner and Gazza, was left wondering
what level of playing skill was being addressed in this general way about
backward d-pawn systems, where Black often sacrifices a pawn or two.
The text acknowledges this aspect of things by continuing, “And should
Yudasin be less inclined to accept the gambit because the resulting
compensation might be more dangerous than usual in the hands of Gazza.”
Which at least alerts the reader to the playing skills of Gary Kasparov, if
by some means they found themselves playing against him having never heard
of his reputation. What this can mean for other opponents in unclear,
and the text speaks again in a diffident and inconclusive way about playing
the position or playing the man.
Chapter
5 on Disruption leads with Fischer-Spassky 1992 with RJF sacking a pawn at
move 7 in a [unnamed] Rossolimo Sicilian, and Spassky playing a weak move at
13 instead of Ne7, a move most experts would have found since it develops a
piece and promotes King safety. Again the moral of the story was lost
on me since the success of Fischer’s gambit relied on a weak move by the
opponent to establish its merit.
