Peter Wells: Strategy and Tactics
Review by William Frost
"ChessBase have produced a number
of CD’s under the general title of "Fritz Training." These are
divided into opening, middlegame and endgame sections each consisting of
several CD’s. Among the middlegame section there is a CD entitled "Strategy
and Tactics" by Peter Wells.
Peter needs no introduction as an
author having produced many books and is a regular contributor to ChessBase
Magazine with his "Strategy" column. He is also an active
grandmaster playing in international tournaments as well as being a trainer
and coach at junior world championships. These impeccable credentials qualify
him as an admirable presenter for the topic of strategy and tactics in the
middlegame. This is covered in a three hour video that needs to be played on
the ChessBase media system and has not (as yet) been developed into a
"stand alone" product.

There are ten lectures on the subject, preceded by a five minute introduction in which Wells explains that
what follows cannot form a comprehensive course on the middlegame but is intended
to give an insight into two main themes being the employment of practical
skills and an understanding of some positional themes.
In the first lecture on practical
skills he leads us through the process of calculation he was involved in
during a game he played with D. Durnitracke at Balatonbareny in 1997.
Undoubtedly, for this subject, the choice of one of his own games is well
founded as who knows better than oneself of the thought processes employed in
such a game.

A critical point was reached
in the position opposite:-
Playing the white pieces and with the move, he now had to
decide whether or not the "Greek Sacrifice" of Bxh7+
would be successful. This is a subject minutely examined in the fine book
"The Art of Attack in Chess" by V. Vukoviċ, but he does not
mention the constellation of pieces reached in Well's game. Wells thought for
40 minutes before deciding how to continue, admitting that at various points
his calculations were faulty, but not exactly damaging. The result was a very
interesting game with many exciting variations.
The second lecture is entitled
"Commitment and Defence" a combination of terms that Wells explains
as embracing the idea that commitment confers an obligation which in the
event may also entail defence. Thus an attack on the king side could mean the
obligation to deploy many pieces to that wing, leaving the queen side rather
exposed and in need of defence. He illustrates this by means of two games –
Sax – Odeev, European Championship, 2000 and Herrara – Dominguez, Guilturino
Garcia Premier, 2000. In the former game, Sax launched a seemingly powerful
attack against the black king, but Black contrived such an accurate defence
that Sax had to bail out into a perpetual attack – defence!
"Zwischenzug" is a word
almost impossible to translate into English. In "The Oxford Companion to
Chess" a good explanation is given as "in-between move, a move
interspersed during an exchange of pieces or during a series of
exchanges".

This is the subject
of Well’s third lecture and is best illustrated by Pokorna against Maric at
the 2000 FIDE Womans World Cup (see diagram opposite with White to move). Here, in
fact, there are two examples in the same game. In the first instance
White answers a threat with a counter threat rather than the passive retreat
of an attacked piece. This is sufficient to secure the initiative and shortly
leads to another example that assists White in prosecuting her attack to
bring victory. In addition to this complete game there are two snapshots
illustrating the same theme.
The two lectures
following complete the practical section of the CD and comprise a study of
how and why blunders occur.
In the first of these Wells looks
at blunders caused for psychological reasons and cites a game that he played
against Barua in the Gibralter Masters of 2004. In the position shown
below, with White (Barua) to move, Black is well and truly lost and White
only needs to extricate his knights from a tricky situation on f7 and d6, before going on to
cement his material advantage.
Instead of achieving this with
36.Nb7, White tried to make the most of his king side pawns and release his
bishop from f1, by playing 36.h4? whereupon Wells removed his rook from the
attentions of a knight on b7 with 36..... Ra1 leaving the knights in very
uncomfortable positions. Barua probably realising the shortcomings of
his previous move and suffering from self-recriminations, continued
37.g4. This is the psychological state that Wells warns us about.
In effect he is saying that one should put a poor move already made, in the background and make the most of what
remains. This game
continued 37 ..... Rd1 38.f3 Bxd6 39.Nxd6 Rxd6 40.Bd3? Rxd3 31.cxd3 a5 42.Kf2
a4 43.bxa4 b3 and very much against the odds, Wells won.
Another game he cites in this section, is Bouaziz - Miles, Riga, 1979
where, with dogged defence, Miles
rescued a lost position because his opponent attempted to win with as little
inconvenience as possible. Another psychological state to be avoided,
as relaxing with a won game on ones hands can lead to disaster.
The second blunder lecture deals
with illusions in calculations. For instance, we put great store in pins, believing that the piece or pawn pinned is no longer in the
game. However, there are situations when the pinned piece does still play an active
part such as supporting another piece that is delivering mate. Wells
gives five examples of blunders that have occurred for various reasons,
predominately caused by an assumption that only a certain line of play is
possible i.e. the capture of a piece has to be answered by a recapture. This
may not always be the case as an "in-between" move may make bring
about an entirely different position.
This section of the CD presents
some pioneering work on the middlegame subject and the next five lectures are
rather more in keeping with normal middlegame motifs.

The first two lectures in this
section deal with positional pawn sacrifices. He does not deal with
pawns that are sacrificed with the object of accelerating an attack on the
opposing kIng, but rather a sacrifice that promotes better
co-ordination amongst the pieces and assists in a more harmonious placement
of forces. In the first lecture Wells takes a look at the game Kramnik
- Vaganian, Horgen, 1995, when, from a rather unusual variation of the
Queen's Indian Defence, the following position was reached. White's
knight and bishop are not very active but Kramnik, on the move, found a
plan that brought them to life and helped him to win the game.
The second lecture continues this
theme via the games Leko - Bunzmann, Hamburg, 1999 and Glek - Nataf,
Halkidilik, 2002. Both games illustrate how a pawn sacrifice modifies
the pawn structure resulting in the enhancement of the activity of the pieces
of the player making the sacrifice and a reciprocal worsening of the
opponents mobility. In the first game, Leko inflicts a bad bishop on
his opponent in a situation where, if the bishop is exchanged, the pawns surrounding
the king will be weakened. There is no better example of the dictum
"bad bishops protect good pawns."
The second game is of
considerable interest in that Glek sacrifices a pawn in order to obtain a
fine outpost for a knight. He then sets about exchanging pieces to
reduce to a winning ending in which he just has the knight against a bad
bishop but is still a pawn down!
Two lectures follow on the theme
of "weak pieces" the first of which has two games to
demonstrate the subject. The first of these is a superlative
example of a seemingly "good" bishop being neutralised by opposing
pawns. In a game against Agrest at the European Cup in 2002, Eingorm
manages to incarcerate his opponents bishop on h8 and removes it from any
active participation in the game, despite the fact that the bishop was
fianchettoed and could otherwise have been considered as
"good". The second game is from Linares, 2003, in which
Kasparov forces Anand's bishop into adopting a passive role.
It is the rooks that get into
trouble in the next video and this is finely demonstrated by the games
Aronson - Tal, USSR ch. 1957 and Psakhis, Komarov, Benasque, 1995. In
the latter game the interesting feature is that one knight dominates two
rooks to an extent that they are unable to move without being either captured
or compromised.

In the final lecture, Wells deals with the
traditional middle game theme of blockade and in particular the blockade of a
passed isolated pawn arising in the Gruenfeld Defence. His choice of a
game to illustrate the strength of a blockade is particularly apt in that Van
Wely as White playing Leko at Corus 2001 having reached this position chose
to recapture on f3 with the queen. Eventually he was able to prevent
Leko from effectively blockading a passed isolated d-pawn and as a
consequence he won.
However, in a previous game, with
Keene taking the white pieces against Uhlmann, he recaptured with the bishop
and Black was able to set up a secure blockade with a knight in a classic
example of the theme.
The ten lectures are
delivered in videos totalling 3¼ hours and as one would expect from a coach,
the examples are very well chosen. This can only be the result of very
deep and thorough research. As could also be expected of Wells, he
touches on some pioneering aspects of a well documented subject and this
makes his presentations fresh and entertaining. It is not only his
exposition of the subject matter that is informative but also his penetrating
and instructive comments on other aspects of the games that he examines.
This CD can be
recommended to club, county and congress players who would undoubtedly
benefit from a close study of the contents. In addition, the CD is very reasonably priced at
€ 24,99."