BtM 11A: On the importance of knowing stuff

April 1988, Position C


White to play
Short - Ljubojevic, Reykjavik 1987

Contributions are welcome in the comments box. I’ll reply with what the Masters have to say about their choice to anybody who suggests a move.

Scroll down to see some commentary from me and the Masters’ feedback.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.



"Is this Short - Ljubojevic from somewhere last year?"
IM (at the time, now GM) Stuart Conquest


Yes it was. Reykjavik, in fact. "Last year" for Stuart Conquest at the time being 1987.

One of the things that’s really struck me reading the Beat the Masters Feedback articles is how frequently the panel recognise the positions.


Sometimes it’s a vague memory …

Position B, April 1988
"Isn’t this a Vaganyan game from somewhere?"
- IM Paul Littlewood

Position F, September 1988
"I’ve seen this one somewhere before and I remember that [redacted so I can use the position in the future - JMGB] was played, losing to [redacted]."
- IM (then, now GM) Keith Arkell


Very often they’re bang on …

"From Nogueiras - Tal, SWIFT World Cup 1988. White actually resigned after …."
- IM George Botterill

Position H, October 1988
"Godena - Seirawan, Lugano 1988. Black should be able to draw with …."
- IM (then, now GM) Nigel Davies.

Position D, January 1989
"Both Davies and Plaskett remembered this game ...."


Sometimes it’s not the position itself that gets the Masterly synapses twitching, but a (great) predecessor  …

"This looks similar to Karpov - Kasparov game 2 1985 ...."
- GM James Plaskett

"This looks like a famous game Tal - Larsen in which Tal played 1 Nd5 and won …."
- IM (at the time, now GM) James Howell


So my chess improvement tip for the day for is to be like them. Know more games.

No, you’re not going to be able to keep totally up to date with every game that’s played. That doesn’t matter. Actually, I’d say that for most of us learning the classics is much more important than being au fait with the latest theoretical developments*.

So get to know the classics. Know the thematic games in the systems you like to play.

It’s a job without end. There will always be another game we can learn. We could always know more.

The important thing from a development point of view is to make a start. Build your knowledge base.

It’s not enough to improve by itself, but it will help. One thing I’m sure of, the more games we know the better we’ll do.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


POINTS
10: h5
8:  Ne2
5:  g6
2:  Bh3, Kb1, Bg2

MASTERS
h5: Flear, Norwood, Conquest, Levitt, Pein, Horner, S. Arkell, Fidelity Mach 2
Ne2: Kosten, P. Littlewood, Howell
g6: J. Littlewood, K. Arkell

SOURCE
1 Ne2 Short - Ljubojevic, Reykjavik 1987









* Not that there are any in this lockdown world of ours, but there will be one day.

Comments

  1. 10 points for Angus yesterday. Nigel Short would have got 8 but apparently he was later unsure about h4-h5 needing preparation.

    The game continued 14 Ne2 d5, 15 Nd4 Bb7, 16 Bh3
    Norwood went for the immediate h4 on the grounds that Black was fine after 14 Ne2 d5 but Howell thought the pawn storm would be stronger with a knight on d4 so he wanted to go 14 Ne2 first.

    Conquest went for h4-h5 too, btw, but mentioned en passant the idea of Kb1 hoping for ... Qa5 and then Nc3-d5.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Incidentally, there were a lot of Short - Ljubo games in the Sicilian played in the late 80s. Most of them are well worth a look.

    ReplyDelete

Post a comment

Popular posts from this blog

BtM 1: Is the Sicilian Defence Different?