Winning starts with what you know
The new version 18 offers completely new possibilities for chess training and analysis: playing style analysis, search for strategic themes, access to 6 billion Lichess games, player preparation by matching Lichess games, download Chess.com games with built-in API, built-in cloud engine and much more.
By Rasika Ratnaparkhi
Surya Shekhar Ganguly took the lead by scoring 17 points (3 wins and 1 'equal draw') on the first day of his match against Sam Shankland.
The first game featured missed chances and beautiful tactics, but Ganguly capitalised on a blunder by Shankland (29.Ba3?) to dominate the position. In the second game, Shankland missed a winning attack and suffered a significant loss. The third game was an interesting endgame with bishop and 3 pawns against a rook - it was a very hard position for Shankland and Ganguly ended up winning the game. The fourth game was what is described by the format as an 'equal draw'.
After the games, the event organizer, Venceslav Rutar, joined the livestream on the ChessBase India YouTube channel and shared his opinion. (Find all details about the scoring system below in this article).
The match started off with this wild game where both players missed many chances and there were plenty of beautiful tactics. Here's the first one of them:
White actually built up a better position out of the opening, but this was a serious error from Shankland. Ganguly did not spot the refutation, played 14...Re7 and White found the nice 15.Nxb7! Rxb7 16. Rxc6 winning a pawn and getting a better position. But here Ganguly had a beautiful idea with 14...Re6! 15. Nxb7 Qe7! and the White Knight gets trapped and eventually captured.
Sam couldn't convert his advantage well, and this was the final mistake by him. Can you figure out how Ganguly finished off the game here?
Shankland built up a completely winning position with the black pieces, but things went south for him towards the end. This is a big chance he missed, one that would have allowed him to finish the attack:
The beautiful tactical shot 41...Ne1! finishes the game here for White. 42.Rxe1 is met with 42...d3! and soon Black wins the rook by force - the resulting position with queen and bishop for Black against the white queen should be comfortably winning.
But Shankland played 41...Qe4? and after 42.Qxe6 White is back in the game.
49...Kb8 was the losing mistake for Shankland - do you see why? White to play and win.
This game featured a study-like endgame consisting of bishop and 3 pawns against the rook. Practically, this is very hard for the side with the rook - Shankland in this case. But the entire game had so many beautiful resources!
We would invite our readers to study this game deeply, and leave you with two positions.
61...f4 actually lets the win slip away from Black. Can you find what should White play to hold the draw, and what should Ganguly have played instead?
This was the last chance for White to save the game - how should Shankland respond to 62...Kf5 by Ganguly?
Shankland managed to outplay his opponent in the opening and entered a better rook endgame with the black pieces. At one point, he did get a big advantage - but the way to win was not straightforward. After trading one pair of rooks, the game went on to end in an 'equal draw' which meant both players got 2 points.
The final position.
Endgame essentials you need to know Vol.1 & Vol 2
In this video course, GM Surya Ganguly joins IM Sagar Shah and drawing from his colossal experience, shares some uncommon endgame wisdom. The material mostly features positions with rook against rook and a pawn, and starts by covering the fundamentals.
Find more videos on the ChessBase India YouTube channel
Ganguly kept his good form from the last day, and closed the match itself by winning the fifth game -Shankland had no way of coming back in the match.
But the games went on - as the main idea of the match was to test out the Venceslav Rutar scoring system. Game 6 was a draw, and Shankland struck back to score his only win of the match in game 7. The eighth and last game of the match was an absolute rollercoaster, where both players had winning positions at some point, but the game finally ended in a draw.
Ganguly won the match by a 26-11 score!
Shankland created a very sharp position out of the opening, a Bogo-Indian system. It was a question of who would break through first on the kingside - and it was Ganguly who did it:
Do you see how Black started the kingside attack after 21.Qe2?
Ganguly broke through with the very nice combination 21...Rxf3! 22.Qxf3 Qh2+ 23.Kf1 Ngxf2! 24.Bxf2 Nd2+! to win the white queen.
The Indian GM went on to win comfortably with the black pieces!
This game was more or less a stable draw, but with a big missed chance in the opening. See if you can find it:
Ganguly played 14.Na5? which is a big mistake. Shankland replied by 14...Nd4 missing the refutation - can you find the best move for Black?
This was the best game of the match for Shankland, and the only game he won. He outplayed his opponent right from the opening, and scored a comfortable win.
The start of the queen endgame.
This was an up-and-down game with many chances for both sides. Ganguly got a completely winning position in the rook endgame, but made an unfortunate blunder. Can you spot the problem with this?
Position after 71.Ke3?. Do you see White's mistake and how Black drew the game?
Improve your pieces - a winning system you need to know
In this course, we will learn how to identify passively placed pieces in any given situation and how to improve their health by bringing them into active squares.
Find more videos on the ChessBase India YouTube channel
The scoring system. Today, there are countless variations of chess. This is the first time that any scoring system has been developed which focuses on draws. The traditional scoring system divides the points equally between the two players. This rule has been followed for many centuries. Draws are an integral part of chess, and we cannot eliminate them ever. While no one can really convince the players to fight for a win, one person decided to change the rules. He created such rules that would make players fight for a win.
If they can't win the game, change the rules!
The traditional scoring system with 1 point (to the winner), ½ point (to both the players), and 0 points (to the loser) is replaced by a system with 5 possibilities.
| Outcome | Points | Abbreviation |
| Win | 5 | W |
| Favoured Draw | 3 | F |
| Equal Draw | 2 | E |
| Disfavoured Draw | 1 | D |
| Loss | 0 | L |
Points for the winner and loser are self-explanatory. But, when the game is declared as a draw, the tournament director will count all the pieces on the board. The material balance will be calculated by adding values as follows:
| Piece | Points |
| Pawn | 1 |
| Knight | 3 |
| Bishop | 3 |
| Rook | 5 |
| Queen | 9 |
The player who has more pieces on the board (material advantage) will get 3 points (favoured draw) and the other player will get 1 point (disfavoured draw). If the material advantage is the same for both players, then both will get 2 points.
Let's see some draw scenarios to understand this better:
| Scenario | Result |
| Rook against Bishop | Favoured Draw (5 vs 3) |
| Rook against Bishop + Pawn | Favoured Draw (5 vs 4) |
| Rook against Bishop + 2 Pawns | Equal Draw (5 vs 5) |
| Rook against Bishop + 3 Pawns | Firstly, why will the player accept the draw? |
Master Class Vol.17 - Boris Spassky
In this video course, experts including Dorian Rogozenco, Mihail Marin, Karsten Müller and Oliver Reeh, examine the games of Boris Spassky. Let them show you which openings Spassky chose to play, where his strength in middlegames were and much more.
This system does not change the following possibilities that result in a draw:
What about the "timeout vs insufficient material"?
Let's consider two scenarios to understand this.
Why this system?
If we take a closer look at the drawn games, we will notice that sometimes giving half a point to both players appears unfair. A draw might be unfair in the following two situations:
This scoring system tries to bring justice in such unjust situations. We must accept that all draws are not equal.
