Attacking Manual 1

British Champion Jacob Aagaard explains the rules of attack (the exploitation of a dynamic advantage) in an accessible and entertaining style. This groundbreaking work is well balanced between easily understandable examples, exercises and deep analysis. Five years in the making, this book will surely not disappoint. Volume I deals with bringing all the pieces into the action, momentum, colour schemes, strongest and weakest points, evolution/revolution.

This is the first thorough examination of the nature of dynamics in chess. The principles in this book are universal and relevant in every chess game played. The book contains great attacking chess. In lively no-nonsense language, Aagaard explains how the best chess players in the world attack.

Preface

I first started to work on this project back in 2001, when I was thinking about why I disagreed with one, and I stress one, of the ideas in John Watson's monumental work Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy - Advances since Nimzowitsch. The idea I found a little hard to swallow was the notion of "Rule Independence". What John writes is basically that strong players today allow their decisions less and less to be guided by rules. Although this is true if you understand it as, no modern grandmaster will shy away from playing something that looks tempting, just because there is a rule about the knight on the rim being dim, or similar simplifications of how you play chess well. I think this is the main point John wants to make, and I of course completely agree with him.

However, there is a much more complicated question underlying this, which is: why does the move look tempting in the first place.

Some people will like to tell you that developing an understanding of chess is only a matter of being exposed to a high number of positions. If this were true the oldest chess players would also understand chess the best, but as we know this is far from the case. Exposure to a great variety of chess positions is useful, but only if there is some sort of high quality interpretation as well. It is by pondering over higher and higher quality chess material that people in the past came up with observations of general value that they called rules. There was a time (1875 to 1935) where this approach was very popular.

After World War Two few have tried to propose new rules in chess. Those who have were in general chess trainers aiming at helping amateurs to improve, the same goal as a majority of chess literature.

There are of course notable exceptions, but in general the consensus about rules in chess today, is that they are aimed at beginners and have no relevance for high-level play.

Whilst I was thinking about why Watson's conclusion, though logical, did not appeal to me, I continuously stumbled over the word intuition. Being familiar with the books of Mark Dvoretsky and Artur Yusupov I knew that the awareness of rules in chess was not in itself silly. Mark's books are filled with rules, but not with a blind following of them. According to the best Russian traditions everything is analysed closely. Nothing is assumed. According to Mark we might discuss rules in training, but rarely will we find any use for them over the board.

If I ever heard a definition of how to develop intuition, this is it.

Whilst I was reading Watson's book I also noticed that all the rules he referred to were of a static character. It struck me that the understanding of chess that emerged with Steinitz, was born out of a world that believed there were no more important discoveries to be made and that all that remained for science was to fill in the blanks (a common view in the year 1900). Along came Mr. & Mrs. Einstein with their theory of relativity, starting a revolution in science, probably the most defining revolution in a period rife with them! What was meant to be the equivalent in chess was the revolution of the Hypermoderns. But though these ideas were revolutionary, they were still static in their thinking. They were still preoccupied with the dimension of space, though no longer through occupying it, but controlling it.

1935 was the year Nimzowitsch died. It is also the arbitrary year set by Watson as the year when chess started to become what we know today, rule independent.

I have come to the conclusion that a different perspective could be useful. If we see the classical period of chess as a time where the mechanic rules of chess were to some extent worked out, we can choose to see the time after 1935 as the period where the dynamic rules of chess were investigated. This is a simplification, but as something that distinguishes the two periods from each other, it is not entirely stupid.

Having thought this through to the end I started to look closely at the underlying rules of dynamics in chess.

Out of this I developed a set of "rules", first presented in lectures and on two DVDs from ChessBase. These rules should not be understood as a replacement for thinking, as they might have been in the mouth of Dr. Tarrasch, but as something that is worth thinking about at times, and something that is worth internalising in the process of developing your chess intuition.

When these two DVDs were released hardly anyone noticed. Danish IM Steffen Pedersen reviewed them, stating that there was hardly anything new in them. Having found a mistake in my analysias (his analysis engine was faster than mine) he was even a bit unhappy with the general quality of the product, stating, "from Aagaard you would expect more."

I was most likely the only one that saw this as a rave review! Not the least because hardly anyone else will have seen it. I know for a fact that no such comprehensive analysis had been presented on the basis of attacking chess. I accept that there was little that seemed new to Steffen. He is a strong player. But, just like Watson I did not set out to revolutionise modern chess, but to describe what is going on. Some parts of a descriptive theory will naturally be mundane.

There are ideas in here that have not been explained in the same way by anyone before and can therefore be said to be new, but this in itself is not my goal. I wanted to describe dynamics and I have done so by drawing on a lot of other people's ideas far more often than on my own powers of observation. I have tried to give credit in those places where I found it fitting, but most of the ideas are so general that there is no evident source. This is within the spirit of this book, as unlike John Watson, I have set out to write an instructional work. I do not aim to be scientific, like Watson, or to give a scientific approach. My main goal is to be instructive.

005 List of Symbols

006 Bibliography

007 Preface

009 Bring it on - an introduction

025 Bring all your Toys to the Nursery!

049 Don't lose your Breath!

077 Add some Colour to your Play!

093 Size Matters

117 Hit 'em where it hurts!

133 Chewing on Granite!

147 Evolution/Revolution

167 12 Great Attacking Games

219 Watch Yourself take the Next Step!

230 Possible Solutions

260 Index of Games and Fragments

"Attacking Manual 1" von GM Jacob Aagaard befasst sich mit den verschiedenen Methoden, einen erfolgreichen Angriff auf den gegnerischen König einzuläuten. Für die meisten Schachspieler ist ein erfolgreicher Angriff das Salz in der Suppe und so verwundert es nicht, dass sich ein Großteil der neu erscheinenden Schachbücher um Kombinationen, Taktikaufgaben und dergleichen handelt. Doch Aagaard gibt sich nicht mit einfachen Aufgaben und Tests zufrieden sondern geht gewissermaßen einen Schritt zurück und stellt sich die Frage: "Wie erreiche ich überhaupt Stellungen in denen es etwas zu kombinieren gibt?" Ich kann unzählige Taktikaufgaben lösen, aber was tun, wenn ich in meinen eigenen Partien niemals dazu komme, weil ich keine Angriffsstellungen erreiche, meine Angriffe sofort abgewehrt werden und/oder gar vollkommen inkorrekt sind? Hand aufs Herz, uns allen ist es doch schon so ergangen, man glaubt sich in der Rolle des Angreifers und spielt munter drauf los, opfert hier und da vielleicht einen Bauern oder sogar eine Figur, nur um am Ende festzustellen, dass zu einem Angriff a´la Tal eben doch etwas mehr gehört. Genau dieses "etwas mehr" versucht der Autor seinen Lesern zu vermitteln anhand von über 60 ausführlich kommentierten Partien. Nebenbei finden sich im Buch unzählige Partiefragmente und natürlich ... auch Aufgaben zum Selbststudium! Glücklicherweise bringt Aagaard überwiegend selten publizierte Partien als Anschauungsmaterial, in nachfolgender Partie demonstriert Weiß den perfekten Angriff:

Wippermann,T (2446) - Weiss,A (2209, Schwaebisch Gmuend 2006

1.e4 c5 2.Sf3 e6 3.b3 d6 4.Lb2 Sf6 5.e5 dxe5 6.Sxe5 Le7 7.Ld3 Sbd7 8.f4 0-0 9.0-0 Te8 10.Sa3 Lf8 11.Df3 g6 12.Sac4 Sb6 13.Sxb6 Dxb6 14.Lc4!! Lg7 15.f5! Tf8 16.fxg6 hxg6 17.Dxf6!? Lxf6 18.Txf6 Dd8 19.Taf1 b5 20.Lxb5 a6 21.Ld3 Ta7 22.Sxg6! fxg6 23.Txg6+ Kh7 24.Txe6+ Kg8 25.Tg6+ Kh7 26.Tg7+ Kh6 27.Txf8 Dxf8 28.Txa7 Df4 29.Th7+ Kg5 30.h4+ Kg4 31.Tg7+ Kh5 32.Tg5+ Kxh4 33.g3+ 1-0

Daneben gibt es auch ein Wiedersehen mit solch bekannten Angriffspartien wie zum Beispiel Kasparov-Gelfand, Linares 1993, Euwe-Keres, Niederlande 1940 oder auch Anand-Adams, San Luis 2005. Bemerkenswerterweise sind im Buch auch Partiebeispiele aus dem GM-Turnier von Wijk aan Zee 2008 vertreten, das spricht für höchste Aktualität.

Aber kommen wir zu der Frage zurück, wie man denn nun einen erfolgreichen Angriff plant und durchführt. Dazu geben vielleicht alleine schon die Kapitelüberschriften Auskunft: Bring all your Toys to the Nursery! (damit meint der Autor, man solle alle Figuren am Geschehen teilhaben lassen), Hit 'em where it hurts!, Don't lose your Breath!, Add some Colour to your Play!, Great Attacking Games, etc. Die meisten Beispiele kannte ich noch nicht und so war auch das Lesevergnügen mehr als ungetrübt, im Kapitel "Chewing on Granite!" beispielsweise ist eine Partie aufgeführt, die als Musterbeispiel für einen Angriff auf eine relativ feste Stellung wie geschaffen ist:

Ortega,L (2448) - Khenkin,I (2644)

Lido Estensi op 4th 2003

1.e4 c5 2.Sf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Sxd4 a6 5.Sc3 Dc7 6.Le2 Sf6 7.0-0 Lc5 8.Le3 d6 9.Dd2 0-0 10.Tad1 b5 11.Lf3 Lb7 12.e5! Dieser Zug ist der Beginn eines genialen Angriffsplanes 12 ... Lxf3 13.exf6 Lxd1 14.Sf5!! Jetzt wird die Hütte abgerissen!14 ... gxf6 15.Sd5!! Dd8 16.Lxc5 Sd7 17.Ld4 Lh5 18.Sde7+ Dxe7 19.Sxe7+ Kg7 20.g4 Lg6 21.g5 Tfe8 22.gxf6+ Sxf6 23.Dg5 e5 24.Sf5+ Kg8 25.Dxf6 Lxf5 26.Le3 1-0

Aagaard schreibt wie gewohnt locker und witzig (Once you pop you just can´t Stopp!), zugleich aber immer voll auf der Höhe des Geschehens. Seine Erläuterungen beschränken sich dabei nicht auf Verallgemeinerungen sondern versuchen, schwierige Themen so zu verpacken, dass es auch für den "Ottonormalschachspieler" verständlich und nachvollziehbar bleibt. Im Anhang gibt es dann noch 50 Stellungen zum Selbststudium, wobei hier der allgemeine Schwierigkeitsgrad doch recht heftig ist.

Nachfolgend ein kleines Interview mit dem CEO des Quality Chess Verlages und Autor des vorliegenden Buches, GM Jacob Aagaard:

1) Mister Aagaard, your new book \ " Attacking manual 1 \ " treats the attack in a chess game, was this subject neglected in the literature up to now?

There are many books on the attack already, most famously one by Vukovic, but also by Tartakower, Dvoretsky, Tal, Lane, Crouch, Christensen and others. The problem with all of these books is that they only deal with the situation where you already have an attack. Also, they tend to show examples of attacking chess without having a larger theory of dynamic play. Since the end of the 19th century we have had theories of positional play, but no one have ever sat down and collected the various ideas existing about dynamic chess. This is what I have tried to do in this book, it is up to the readers and reviewers to evaluate if I have done a good job.

2) What do you mean: Who was the best Attacking player of all times and why?

It would be strange not to say Garry Kasparov. And the reason is obvious, he has mated the best defenders!

3) Personally, I think the book is very well, but I (my ELO is only 2163) think the tasks are partially very difficult. For which strength would you recommend this book?

I do not believe that good books that explain things well have a fixed audience. If you found the exercises difficult you did not treat them in the way I suggested in the book! I suggest that you think for 10 minutes and compare your thinking to the "possible solutions" in order to learn about your thinking. If you put your ego on the line when working alone with a book, you will collect more defeats in this life than I find pleasant. I try to avoid putting too much pressure on myself when I am training, after all, I am training.

I think you can read and understand this book from the level of 1200 to 2700 and take something from it, though the ability to do it in practice will differ. 4) Our readers may expect what in part 2?

Where part one is dealing with the big concepts of attackin play, part II will deal with the techniques already dealt with in the books mentioned earlier. The readers can look forward to an update on these techniques, some new ones and most importantly, games and analysis they have not seen before. I have an aversion against this tradition of laziness in chess literature, where games from Zurich 1953 are used again and again, rather than including some of the great games that are played almost daily into the new books written.

5) Quality Chess has published books in top quality, could this level stability in future?

This is not entirely true, unfortunately. Out of our 26 books there are two that I would wish we had not done. I hope that we will have better taste in the future and avoid such mistakes, and then I think that we have not published our best titles yet. I really believe that. We will publish both ambitious books like San Luis 2005 and Learn from the Legends (the latter is now out in German), opening books that do not suggest that you play variations that lose by force - as with some of our competitors - and instructional books of high quality for players of all levels.

Fazit: Angreifen wie die Großen? Mit diesem Buch kommen Sie diesem Ziel einen großen Schritt näher!

Martin Rieger, April 2008