The BCC did repay me

hat wasn't actually going, or at least not for two or three days, which would have

been a bit tricky with the first round starting the next day. We were all rushing

around. Dave Norwood was the captain and he went off to British Airways and

tried to persuade them to give us free tickets. In the end we managed to find some

seats on a Croatian airline and 1 put all the tickets on my visa card, as no one else

had a high enough limit. The BCC did repay me; I have to say that, to be fair to

them.

Although it started off pretty badly, it all went well from then and we were lead‑

ing going into the last round and managed to win on tie-break against the Russians.

There was also another thing that happened. At this time Tara was at home and she

was basically filling in the pond in the garden. And on the day that we were actually

winning the gold medal on tie-break she found the Koi carp that 1 now have over

there, Alamo.

(Mickey points to his bilge fish lank, and the massive Kol Alamo, which always has a calming

and somewhat hypnotic Oa on dinner guests).

So 1 think that it was finding the fish that enabled England to win the European

Team Championship.

One of my most recent money-making ideas is chess Trivial Pursuit. Would

this appeal to you or do you like to completely separate chess and personal

time?

I'm not too big on thinking about chess when I'm not playing or working on it, but

it does sound like it might be fun. I don't think that I'd play too often but I might

try it a couple of times.

Do you seek to find beauty or simply victory?

I'm not interested in beauty too much when I'm playing; I'm just looking to win the

game.

What do you consider to be your best game?

There aren't too many games that I consider to be great from start to finish; it's

difficult to say. I quite like my game against Ivanchuk, quite a few years ago now,

just because at some stage he ends up in zugzwang with quite a lot of pieces on the

board. It's quite pretty. I would hope to play a better one, but wouldn't we all.

Michael annotated this game himself in Chess in the Fast Lane. I have included

some of his original annotations, which are marked MA and written in italics.

12

Michael Adams

Michael Adams

You have all of these amazing qualities as a chess player, but what do you

consider to be your greatest strength?

Like I said before, 1 think that I'm a pretty practical player and I'm pretty reasonable

in all aspects. I don't have too many obvious weaknesses. I think I'm sort of an all‑

round player and that's perhaps my greatest strength.

At the other end of the spectrum, what was your worst blunder and what

Ad you learn from it?I

 don't know if I've got one particular blunder, but I think that in general I've learnt

from the mistakes that I've made over a period of time. Particularly in tactical posi‑

ts, where my concentration levels weren't high enough. I know now the types of

positions that I tend to make errors in, particularly calculation, heavy positions; I

dicdicate more time to these positions and decisions and check things more care‑

flay There's not one particular blunder, but a number of games and a pattern that I

Nks recurring.

But I suppose that one of my worst blunders. was playing for England in the

Olympiad in Novi Sad (1990), where I dropped .a rook against Kozul. He played for

the `home' team so I was in front of about three or four thousand spectators, which

Ins rather tough. Then 1 was benched for the rest of the competition. It was a little

bit brutal but I was probably worse anyway, so it wasn't that bad.

an Michael and his father Bill's book, Chess in the Fast Lane, Bill recalls the consequence

se this loss.- Michael's disappointment sent him look for  revenge against Kozel. This can be a

any dangerous approach, although on this occasion it worked well and Michael registered three

sou against ibis opponent in the next twelve months, although be would skid* have swapped any

of them with the Olympiad result.

Hew important are tournament conditions to your play?

Obviously that's got to be a factor. I'm not really bothered about playing conditions

in the tournament hall, that really doesn't bother me, bad light, all this kind of thing.

Maybe if it's really hot I don't like it too much, but somehow things like lighting

sewer really bothered me. But the hotel is really important. If you're going to be

staying somewhere for a couple of weeks, if you've got a bad hotel room, that's go‑

 to be a problem. If it's very noisy, or very hot, if in general there arc problems

lath the hotel, that can be annoying. Normally the hotels that I stay in are pretty

seasonable. You don't really need deluxe conditions, just something fairly normal,

and usually the organisers do their best.

 is your most entertaining chess story?

nil talk about the time when England won the gold medals in Pula in the European

Tarn Championships 1997, which was a very special moment in my career, anyway.

Et an started off slightly disastrously, when we headed off to Heathrow airport and,

unfortunately, the British Chess Federation (BCF) had booked us tickets on a flight

11

Interview with a Grandmaster

How much truth is there to the well-established story that you managed to

reach an extremely high level without working too hard?

I think that I was pretty lucky. 1 reached a good level without doing too much work

but, at some stage, you're always going to hit a level that you can't really improve on

without work. I found that level and had a few years where I didn't work too much

and didn't really get anywhere. I think that in the past five or six years I've put a lot

more work in and I've progressed, but I certainly managed to get to 2600+ pretty

quickly without doing too much work, so that was pretty good.

IF you ;pork harder for something you enjoy it mon' — Michael Adams, New In Chess

1999.

Was that because you have the amazing ability to 'sense' exactly where

your pieces should be? Is this a skill that you're born with or is it something

that people can learn?

I think that you definitely have to have some sort of talent and, obviously, some‑

how did have that talent. I think that I've always been a good practical player as

well, very good at turning in good performances in games and being tough when

things don't go my way. A good temperament, that's one of the things that's

worked for me.

What do you consider to be your greatest achievement and where do you

see your ambitions leading you?

I've been pleased with the kind of rankings I've had, you know, 2700+ on several

rating lists. Also my performances in World Championships, both in Professional

Chess Association (PCA) and World Chess Federation (FIDE) events. I've normally

done pretty well and been in the late stages of all of those. Basically, I've done well

in the big events. That's what I aim to do really. I'm just carrying on, trying to im‑

prove and do as well as I can and seeing what happens. The chess world is in a state

of flux at the moment. It's difficult to know what's going to happen. My immediate

ambition would be the FIDE World Championships in Moscow, which should be

in a couple of months, if all goes according to plan.

How do you prepare for the monster tournament that is the World Champi‑

onship?

Normally I like to play a few games before, because it's a very quick format and you

can be eliminated after a couple of days. I'll be playing in the European Teams in

Leon and that will be quite useful, especially because it's with the same time limit,

which I don't have any experience with at all yet, so that's going to be a bit of a

problem this time. In general, you just have to be very well prepared because it's

very hard to say who you are going to play, what openings you will get. It's really a

test of your general strength and your overall level of preparation, as there's no way

to focus on one particular opponent — the pairings aren't even out yet and the

CHAPTER ONE I

CHAPTER ONE I

Michael Adams

Michael (Mickey) Adams' meteoric rise to fame was assured from the moment he

picked up his first chess piece At every stage of his chess career he seems to have

set new records. He was the first player to win the British Under-11 title with a per‑

fect 100% score, the third youngest player (behind Fischer and Kasparov) to

achieve a Grandmaster norm and the third youngest player to obtain the Grand‑

master tide. Not content with these accomplishments, just one month later (August

1989) Mickey put his new Grandmaster title to good use, at the age of seventeen

becoming the youngest ever British Champion.

1991 saw him conquer new heights when he became the first player to score the

maximum 200/200 in the British Grand Prix and also saw his Elo rating break 2600

for the first time. Although 2600 is certainly not to be scoffed at, he has now left

this level far behind, being ranked fourth in the world with a raring well over 2700.

Tell me about your chess playing background? How and when did your

chess career begin?

I was about six or seven when I started but I don't remember too much until I was

playing at school and in tournaments. I won my first tournament, so I suppose that

Wasn't too bad to start with. I won the Cornwall under-8 and under-10 titles when 1

was seven (I won them both; they were joint tournaments) so I guess I was pretty

good then. 1 was quite into chess.

What is your earliest chess memory?

I definitely remember that tournament, and playing in school matches and so on

around that time. The thing that I remember most is stalemating someone in a

King's Gambit. I thought that I had some kind of mate after sacrificing my queen

and it didn't actually work, so I sort of took all his pieces instead. I was rooks and

pawns and a queen up and I stalemated him, so it was an eventful game!

7

INTRODUCTION I

INTRODUCTION I

I was extremely nervous when I began to write this, my first book, until I realised

that it actually had absolutely nothing to do with me. The fact is that this book is

about two very specific sets of people: Grandmasters, without whose co-operation

and words of wisdom this would be a very short book and, secondly, you — the

players. You are the people who follow Grandmaster games and aspire, if not to

play like them, certainly to play better chess.

This book has demanded lengthy research, using many different sources. In this

technological age the Internet now presents us with an amazing wealth of informa‑

don and I've spent hours (when I should have been looking at facts and numbers)

reading through reams of endlessly entertaining and well-observed chess literature.

Here, for example, is one rather poignant excerpt that I felt 1 should share with you:

The Post Mortem: Many players specialise in this. Mary's the time I've swaggered into the

congress mom set aside.* this sort of thing with a defeated opponent (obviously 1 win all the time),

only. fir said opponent to demonstrate conclusively how unbelievably lucky I was. How they missed

fourteen wins in the first six moves alone, and how I managed to make a decent move on occasion

only through a combination of blind luck and Faustian chicanery.

The Over-the-Shoulder Comment: You know who you am. These people pass by your Post

Mortem, glance fleetingly at the board and then say something like 'Why didn't you do this? That

wins the Queen' or 'Oh, you missed a mate in Jive Mere.' Aare Even if these suggestions are

right, you an implying that in the past few seconds you have seen more deeply into the game than I

have, despite sweating over it, for four rotten hours, and finless your name begins with K and ends in

V that is not the case!...'— Mark Blackmore.

I have certainly gone through these emotions, as I suspect a large number of you

will have, but back to my research,

5

1.3 The Development of Development

1.3 The Development of Development

By the term 'development' various authors mean oversimplified advice. We will always have in‑

different things. Here I will be concerned with stances of both. To this day, for example, fixed

it in the simple sense of bringing one's pieces rules and principles are found in the annota‑

out, leaving questions of the quality of their dis­ tions of advanced players, and yet increasingly

position to be discussed case by case. SOMCS we also find remarks about ignoring those

emphasized the increasing number of openings rules. The play is the thing, and one can only

in which modem players choose not to bring use one's experience and judgement to discern

their pieces out in order to achieve other goals the changes (or lack of them) over the years.

such as establishment of a favourable pawn-       For all that, I think that the average player

structure. Increasingly, we see developmental might be surprised how ingrained certain prej‑

patterns that defy traditional conceptions. For udices were in classical times. One cannot

example, the same piece is moved repeatedly mistake the consistent aversion of top players

and ends up on a worse square (or even back at to openings that failed to develop the pieces

home) so as to provoke the opponent into a po­ quickly or to challenge the centre. Along those

tentially vulnerable situation. Or pieces are de­ lines, rules about how to conduct play took a

veloped to apparently awkward squares leading long time to fade from players' consciousnesses.

to inharmonious positions for purely pragmatic Rai, for example, is obviously serious when he

or prophylactic reasons. We also see pawn- talks about the prevalence in even the best of

grabbing sorties by the queen to the complete earlier games of "moves that seem self-evident

neglect of development, a strategy previously and which the master of routine made without

frowned upon by the textbooks.     reflection, because such moves were founded

Here I will be looking at these kinds of on rules of such long standing as to have be‑

strategies, but also at the evolution of attitudes come part of that master's flesh and blood". In

towards development in well-established posi­ the same vein, he finds that in the games of

tions. The latter is consistent with the idea of the hypermodern players, "moves that were

examining change that has become routine as earlier held to be self-evident, that every good

well as that which is exceptional. We will dis­ player made automatically, so to speak, must

cover an increasingly open-minded approach frequently be cast aside." As one of many illus‑

towards the problem of how to get the pieces trations, he emphasizes how the established de‑

out. velopmental rules were changing. He cites, for

First, however, I want to make a brief histori­ example, the multi-faceted rule that apart from

cal digression. Some of the rules and dogmatic a few moves by central pawns, each move of the

assessments that I discussed in SOMCS ap­ opening should develop a new piece, and it

peared in popular articles such as Steinitz wrote should be moved only once if possible (exclud‑

or in relatively elementary books such as Las­ ing captures, recaptures, and attacked pieces,

ker's 'Manual' or in other general works such of course). Reti finds counter-examples from

as those of Tarrasch. Others showed up in young players of his time, and with hindsight

high-level annotations. This raises the question we can see how the hypermoderns themselves,

of whether the writers themselves weren't nec­ by comparison with players today or even So‑

essarily adherents of the views expressed, but viet players in the 1940s, were extremely mod‑

were instead writing for the student. In fact, I est in their deviations from the old rules of

think that it's fairly easy to distinguish as one development. Today, Viktor Korchnoi can mis‑

reads these texts whether the author is ex­ chievously say "All obvious moves look dubi‑

pressing a fundamental belief or giving some ous in analysis after a game".

SPACE, CENTRE, AND EXCHANGING ON PRINCIPLE

SPACE, CENTRE, AND EXCHANGING ON PRINCIPLE      53

move, and shows again that there are no simple

rules) 16...acc8 17 thc2 eac5 18 t?ie3! and

White is ready to play taed5 with a standard ad‑

vantage. His e-pawn is protected in view of

18...tcxe4 19 ti)cd5! e5 20 Wixb61Lixd5?! 21

1?ixd5 eac3 22 ii(xd6!12)xd1 ? 23 iiiif64-sth6 24

xg2 25 4)6+ ith5 26 *Mt

9...bd7 10 :tad a6 11 'UM Mb8 12 b3

0-0 13 eh4

Again, White wants to exchange at least one pair of bishops, and maybe both, to limit the effectiveness of a black pawn-break with ...b5.Compare the Hedgehog games above. The g2‑bishop will often be exchanged by del, but White can also explicitly avoid its exchange by h3, allowing Black to double his pawns after •si xf3 in return for open lines and a throng bishop (this type of doubled f-pawn position is increasingly popular on both sides of the board; see Chapter 2, Section 2, on doubled pawns).13.0:te8!?

But now it's the cramped side that avoids ex‑changes, very much as Kasparov did versus

Kramnik  in a similar situation. The reader may recognize this idea from the Dragon Sicilian.14 h6 h815 h3!?

Perhaps 15 e4!?, since 15...b5?! 16 cxb5

axb5 17 b4 seems to favour White.

15...b5!? 16 cxb5 axl:o5 17 WM

Now 17 b4 is ineffective due to 17... xf3 18

exf3 ithe5.

17... xf3 18 exf3 12)1e5 19 g2 /c6 20

lith4 Via5 1/2-1/2

The Philosophy of

Exchanging in a Broader

Context

In the last two sections I have been particularly concerned with the issue of exchanges with relation to space. In part this arose because in collecting master annotations, I have often noticed comments such as 'Since he commands more space, White (Black) avoids exchanges’ or 'White (Black) follows the principle of seeking exchanges when one has less space'. On the other hand, I haven't seen the annotation

`Possessing more space, I sought simplification' or 'Confined to three ranks, Black avoids exchanges that would reduce his counter play', or anything similar. Yet in most of the games and notes above, we have seen exchanges favoring the side with more space. That is not to say that there aren't also plenty of examples that support the conventional wisdom. The points that no generality can be applied. An example of this attitude appears in Dvor‑etsky's book School of Excellence 3: Strategic

Play. The author, a favorite of mine, is one of the most insightful of theoreticians when writing about opening and middle game strategy. Nevertheless, even he is subject to classical oversimplification and, I think, errors about various old saws that we all grew up with. In his chapter on 'Advantage in Space' , he advocates the classical notion: "The side who has an ad‑vantage in space can freely maneuver with his pieces, switching them from flank to flank,

whereas his opponent often lacks scope for mandarin, and his pieces hinder one another.

From this it is clear that, if you have an advantage in space, it is advantageous to retain as

many pieces as possible, whereas in a cramped position, by contrast, you should aim for ex‑changes", soon adding "All these considerations are fairly obvious." But he then adds

scant evidence favoring, and some contradicting, his own thesis. Dvoretsky gives a single

game in which Black has surrendered the centre in a Pirc Defence resulting in a position struc‑ turally similar to those in the first chapter of this book. He criticizes Black, who has less space, for failing to exchange pieces and then White for encouraging exchanges on the very next move. Dvoretsky calls this "an astounding strategic mistake". That it is a mistake is clear, although White probably just missed the move sequence that followed the exchange and thus invalidated it. Be that as it may, one is left won‑

dering whether this example by itself is meant to justify the broad claim quoted above. After all, we have seen many counter-examples, particularly in this type of pawn-structure. The obvious problem with Dvoretsky's reasoning is that exchanges may simplify the task of the side with space, whose pieces are still more easily transferred from flank to flank, in some cases with greater or decisive effect. In Dvoretsky's next few examples, the issue of exchanging to free a cramped game isn't essentially involved,