7/5/2020 – “The most important thing is to choose the moves you want to play — not somebody else, let alone an engine. They may not ‘theoretically’ be the best, but unless they can palpably be refuted you will do better with them than something ‘better’ which makes your stomach turn”, concludes star columnist Jon Speelman after exploring a number of instructional examples, including a couple of his games against Garry Kasparov!
Chess Festival Prague 2025 with analyses by Aravindh, Giri, Gurel, Navara and others. ‘Special’: 27 highly entertaining miniatures. Opening videos by Werle, King and Ris. 10 opening articles with new repertoire ideas and much more. ChessBase Magazine offers first-class training material for club players and professionals! World-class players analyse their brilliant games and explain the ideas behind the moves. Opening specialists present the latest trends in opening theory and exciting ideas for your repertoire. Master trainers in tactics, strategy and endgames show you the tricks and techniques you need to be a successful tournament player! Available as a direct download (incl. booklet as pdf file) or booklet with download key by post. Included in delivery: ChessBase Magazine #225 as “ChessBase Book” for iPad, tablet, Mac etc.!
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.
Whether it’s a weak pawn, a vulnerable king, or poor piece coordination, this course will teach you how to pinpoint the critical targets, prioritise your attack, and execute a clear, effective plan.
€39.90
Energy and matter
[Note that Jon Speelman also looks at the content of the article in video format, here embedded at the end of the article.]
When I was Nigel Short’s second for his 1993 match in London against Garry Kasparov, I spent a lot of time sparring in ridiculously sharp Najdorf Sicilians against his other main second Robert Hübner.
At a time when computer chess was still in its infancy, analysis had to be attempted through human thought rather than with the (carbon directed) click of a mouse, and I invariably took the sacrificial side (energy) while Robert staunchly defended material (matter). Such was his prowess that perilous though the black positions looked to me, I was seldom able to split the atom.
Chess positions in general, especially in the opening and early middlegame, can often be seen as a conflict between dynamic factors (ease of development, ability to create viable targets quickly enough) and static ones (material and pawn structure). We humans evaluate these instinctively through some alchemical process of relatively slow but highly directed analysis driven by pattern recognition, while (pre AlphaZero) engines calculate almost inconceivable number of lines, most of them irrelevant, and then count beans (maximising the minimum value of each move) in order to decide on the best course.
As we are all too well aware, the bean counting — which is admittedly very sophisticated nowadays with pieces given different values depending on where they are on the board and complex evaluations of pawn structures — is sufficient to defeat humans the vast majority of the time. However, this is arguably still not because “machines play chess better than people”, but because they are superb error checkers.
In the absence of software bugs or hardware failure, machines simply don’t make tactical errors as such — or certainly not ones that we can exploit. But even the strongest human players do make the odd tactical mistake, especially when the move that exploits it appears antipositional — e.g. giving up a wonderful bishop for a useless knight to win significant material afterwards.
A marginal example of this occurred in the Armageddon game between Magnus Carlsen and Hikaru Nakamura in the semi-final of the Lindores Abbey tournament in May. In the diagram position, I did actually notice 22.Bxd5 at the time (I have no idea whether Carlsen did). In fact, engines like it, but I'm not sure whether I’d have played it myself in a must-win blitz game since it does take some of the pressure off Black.
Learn to master the right exchange! Let the German WGM Elisabeth Pähtz show you how to gain a strategic winning position by exchanging pieces of equal value or to safely convert material advantage into a win.
Carlsen (to play) vs. Nakamura
Position after 21...Bf8
Should White capture 22.Bxd5 when Nxd5 23.Rxc6 is forced since other recaptures lose to Nf6+?
22.Qg322.Bxd5I did see this repulsive move at the time.Nxd522...cxd523.Nf6+gxf624.Bxf622...Qxd523.Nf6+gxf624.Qg3+Bg725.Bxf623.Rxc622...f623.Bd6Bxd624.Nxd6Rf825.Ne4Qb826.Qf3Re827.g3Kh828.Nc5Rae729.Bc4e530.dxe5Qxe531.Rd2Qg532.Nb3Nb633.h4Qe534.Re2Qc735.Rxe7Qxe736.Nxa5Qe537.Nb337.Bf7Rf838.Nxc6Qxb239.Qd137...Nxa438.Bf7Rf839.Rc4Rxf740.Rxb4??40.Qe440...Qe1+41.Kh2Qxb442.Qxc6Rf80–1
One material balance, which is difficult to assess accurately and was a real problem for the engines in the early days, is the exchange.
In the same tournament, Sergey Karjakin, after losing the first game against Daniil Dubov in their quarter-final, in the diagram decided as Black to give the exchange for long term pressure:
Dubov vs. Karjakin (to play)
Position after 23.Qc2
Here Karjakin tried 23...Rxe3!?.
Such exchange sacrifices are really hard to assess, and in fact Karjakin got a very decent game but in the end he tried a bit too hard and was splatted on the white squares on the kingside.
Dubov (to play) vs. Karjakin
Position after 78...Rb7
Here 79.Rxf7! soon led to utter destruction.
The really interesting question is how you assess 23...Rxe3 and whether you'd try to avoid it as White. Some people really like being the exchange up whereas others, including me, feel mild nausea over the black square weaknesses.
When I consulted our lords and masters, Houdini had Rxe3 in its top couple of choices and quite liked it afterwards; Komodo didn't really consider Rxe3 and wasn't very impressed; and Fritz also didn't really consider Rxe3 or like it much. The lesson is that computer assessments (in this range at least) are only numbers and you have to decide for yourself whether you like a move.
Of course this applies to assessments in fairly unclear positions, but if an engine suddenly jumps from + something small to +3 or +4 then you know that an accident has happened and can either look yourself or consult the engine itself to find the tactical refutation.
Nigel Short takes us on an electrifying journey through a very rich chess career, which saw him beat no less than twelve world champions. His experience in tournaments and matches all over the world – Short has visited a total of 89 countries – can be seen in the narratives that precede the games which he annotates with humour and instructive insights.
Nigel got splatted by Kasparov at the start of their world championship match but fought back admirably, taking Garry on in some breathtakingly violent Sicilians and actually drew the second half of the twenty game match 5-all: +1, -1, =8.
The sort of chess he played as White in those Sicilians is something I couldn't have contemplated myself, and my own record against Kasparov is fairly miserable with a lot of losses and some draws (which I generally achieved when I managed to impersonate “Trickster” sufficiently well in bad positions) and just a single win in a rapid game.
But I actually enjoyed playing Garry — the games that is, not the results. I find naked aggression much easier to deal with than a more covert desire to win by the enemy. And when he showed his emotions, even when he was happy, it was far from unhelpful to be given an assessment by the best player in the world.
The game I won was sufficiently flawed that I didn't include it in my “Best Games” book, preferring instead one game where I managed to draw after playing a move which bamboozled him but that still eventually led to an unpleasant ending.
Kasparov vs. Speelman (to play) - Linares, 1992
Position after 21.0-0
Here I very much enjoyed playing 21...Be3 even though I suffered later.
In the game which I did win against Garry, I sacrificed/lost the exchange early on after a rather gruesome opening “experiment”, but fought on and then tricked him in an ending with rook and knight v two rooks.
I had been away on holiday before the tournament and so
prepared even less than usual. Faced with Kasaprov, I decided to try something
different and indeed this is the only time in my life I've played the
Lenengrad Dutch as far as I know though I did once try the "Christmas Tree"
(black pawns on d7, e6, f5, g6, h7 against Jan Timman in our Candidates match
in 1989).10.e410.c5Houdini10...Na611.h5g512.Ne6Bxe613.dxe6Nxe414.Bxe4Bxc3+15.bxc3fxe416.Bxg5Nc517.Be3Nd3+18.Kf1Rf319.Rh4
19...Rxe3Necessary but probably not quite sufficient.20.Qg4+Kh821.h6Qf822.Qg7+Qxg723.hxg7+Kxg724.fxe3Rf8+25.Kg1Rf3
26.Rf126.Rg4+Kf627.Rf1Rxf1+28.Kxf1gets the rooks off with the
g-pawn still on the board. This looks very dangerous for Black to me even if
Houdini is initially only giving White 0.4 of a pawn.26...Rxg3+27.Kh2Rf3Now the board is "small" since all the action will take place west of the
f-file which means that the knight is not nearly so much outclassed by the
rooks. In ending with rook and minor peice v two rooks, the player with the
minor piece usually strives to keep a pair of rooks on, but here I had to play
Rf3 to get my king out.28.Rg1+Kf629.Rh6+Kf530.Rxh7Kxe631.Rgg7Ne532.Rxe7+Kf633.Rxb7Rxe334.Rh6+Kg535.Rxd6Rxc336.Rb3Rc2+37.Kg3Rxa238.Rd4Kf539.Re3Ng440.Rexe4Ra3+
41.Kh4?A blunder after
which Black wins the exchange back with a winning position.41.Kg2Ra2+42.Kg3Ra3+43.Kg2was a draw.41...Nf2!42.Rf4+Ke5Suddenly the white
rooks are horribly awkward.43.c5Rh3+!44.Kg5Re345.Ra445.Kh4Ne445.Kg6Ne446.Rfxe4+Rxe447.Rd6a548.Rxc6Kd549.Ra649.Rc8a450.c6Re6+49...Re6+!45...Nh3+46.Kg4Nxf447.Rxa747.Rxf4Re447...Ne60–1
Chess is too difficult for even the best human players to not sometimes make mistakes. The most important thing is to choose the moves you want to play — not somebody else, let alone an engine. They may not “theoretically” be the best but unless they can palpably be refuted, you will do better with them than something “better” which makes your stomach turn.
Garry Kasparov's rise to the top was meteoric and at his very first attempt he managed to become World Champion, the youngest of all time. In over six hours of video, he gives a first hand account of crucial events from recent chess history, you can improve your chess understanding and enjoy explanations and comments from a unique and outstanding personality on and off the chess board.
Jonathan SpeelmanJonathan Speelman, born in 1956, studied mathematics but became a professional chess player in 1977. He was a member of the English Olympic team from 1980–2006 and three times British Champion. He played twice in Candidates Tournaments, reaching the semi-final in 1989. He twice seconded a World Championship challenger: Nigel Short and then Viswanathan Anand against Garry Kasparov in London 1993 and New York 1995.
In this 60-minute course, IM Andrew Martin introduces you to a flexible and refreshingly simple opening setup - that Grandmaster Hikaru Nakamura has used to rack up numerous impressive wins.
If you are looking for a practical, easy-to-learn system to sidestep the main lines and catch your opponent off guard, the Two Knights Variation is your perfect weapon against the French!
ChessBase is re-releasing this timeless classic in the modern ChessBase Media format - complete with brand-new training features. Get ready to rediscover a masterpiece of chess instruction!
How do you play the Queen's Gambit Accepted? Does White have promising variations or can Black construct a water-tight repertoire? The Powerbook provides the answers based on 300 000 games, most of them played by engines.
The Queen's Gambit Accepted Powerbase 2025 is a database and contains a total of 11827 games from Mega 2025 and the Correspondence Database 2024, of which 240 are annotated.
€9.90
We use cookies and comparable technologies to provide certain functions, to improve the user experience and to offer interest-oriented content. Depending on their intended use, analysis cookies and marketing cookies may be used in addition to technically required cookies. Here you can make detailed settings or revoke your consent (if necessary partially) with effect for the future. Further information can be found in our data protection declaration.
Pop-up for detailed settings
We use cookies and comparable technologies to provide certain functions, to improve the user experience and to offer interest-oriented content. Depending on their intended use, cookies may be used in addition to technically required cookies, analysis cookies and marketing cookies. You can decide which cookies to use by selecting the appropriate options below. Please note that your selection may affect the functionality of the service. Further information can be found in our privacy policy.
Technically required cookies
Technically required cookies: so that you can navigate and use the basic functions and store preferences.
Analysis Cookies
To help us determine how visitors interact with our website to improve the user experience.
Marketing-Cookies
To help us offer and evaluate relevant content and interesting and appropriate advertisement.