INTRODUCTION AND PHILOSOPHICAL CONSIDERATIONS 13

INTRODUCTION AND PHILOSOPHICAL CONSIDERATIONS 13

new imbalances) which are themselves interde­   Richard Forster provides a third example.pendent, all to assess a particular move some­ In a fascinating article about Simon Alapin,how, is just as complicated as trying to juggle Forster presents him as 'more modern than theand weigh the influence of rules and generali­ hypermoderns' : "Alapin's general attitude is theties. The reality is that a strong player is using same throughout: fewer words, but more varia‑previous experience and analysis to attend to tions! Whereas Tarrasch, according to Nimzo‑the specific details of a unique position and to witsch, presents 'classical' principles, and Nim‑assess its implicit imbalances on some sub- zowitsch tries to refute them by his 'modern'verbal level. The same basic argument applies principles, Alapin time and again asks for con‑to the theory that the master is thinking in terms crete moves. He shows how all principles canof trading advantages. Can we come up with re­ have only relative validity and are even oftenalistic examples of how that might be done? I contradictory... his refusal of a theoretical bat‑just don't find any of these models convincing tle in terms of abstract principles alone, and hisas a reflection of actual thought over the board insistence on always examining the position atby even moderately advanced players.  hand and giving concrete variations, makes himNot surprisingly, the idea of playing accord­ the most progressive of the trio ... Alapin was ining to concrete analysis of the position on the fact the one closest to the modem point of view,board instead of by rules and principles is not which values nothing except practical exam‑new. In SOMCS, I twice quoted Richard Rai ples and practical success?'from Modern Ideas in Chess, written in the Of course, such quotes have little to do withearly 1920s, with respect to the ineffectual ap­    the actual practice of chess at these players'plication of 'so-called' rules to a given position.  respective times. That can only be assessed byWithout doing so again, I would bring the last examining games and their common character‑sentence of his exposition to the reader's atten­   istics. Reti, for example, lived in pre-moderntion: "The source of the greatest errors is to be times and I don't believe that the philosophyfound in those moves that are made merely ac­ expressed by him above had more than limitedcording to rule and not based on the individual influence on his contemporaries; nor did heplan or thought of the player." himself realize how thoroughly the invested in‑Going even further back we have this won­ tellectual tradition in chess would be changedderful quote from Mikhail Chigorin, which was as the years went along. His own play had onlybrought to my attention by Macon Shibut: "I do certain modem characteristics and I stronglynot consider myself belonging to this or that suspect from his notes to games that he would`school' ;Tam  guided not by abstract theoreti­ have rejected a great deal of what we take forcal considerations on the comparative strength granted today. These considerations naturallyof pieces, etc., but only the data as it appears to also apply to the two earlier players. Alapin'sme in this or that position of the game, which play is impressively independent but not al‑serves as an object of detailed and possibly pre­ ways modem in the sense that I have outlined incise analysis Each of my moves presents itself this book. At any rate, his influence on the chessas a feasible inference from a series of varia­ of his era is not apparent. As for Chigorin, hetions in which theoretical 'principles of play' was a very creative player, but his games showcan have only a very limited significance. ... little evidence of a modem attitude towards de‑The ability to combine skilfully, the capacity to velopment, flank pawn advances, exchange sac‑find in each given position the most purposeful rifices, pawn-chains, backward pawns or anymove, soon leading to the execution of a well- number of other prominent features of modemconceived plan, is higher than any principle, or chess. He was also, as pointed out in SOMCS,more correct to say, is the only principle in the wedded to a dogmatic view of knight play. In‑game of chess which lends itself to precise defi­ terestingly, he has been called an adherent ofnitions"  the Classical School and a disciple of SteinitzThat's about as accurate a description as can (e.g., by Romanovsky), but also the first 'com‑be wished for of the philosophy of the modem puter player' (Spassky). Ultimately we must goanalytical school!       by the games and to a lesser extent annotations