The Genius of the Combination

Alexander Alexandrovich Alekhine was born on October 31, 1892 in Moscow, Russia, the third son in a family where children and adults played chess. He learned at the age of seven, and from twelve Alekhine played seriously, especially by correspondence, and so he began to developing his analytical skills. His idols were Morphy, Anderssen, La Bourdonnais and of course, Chigorin.

In February of 1909, at sixteen, he won the Russian Amateur Tournament in Saint Petersburg with 13 of 16, in Stockholm in 1912 he won the championship of the Nordic countries with 8.5 of 10, and in 1913 he won a match against Lewitzky in St. Petersburg 7 to 3. The same year he won first place in the Scheveningen tournament, with 11.5 of 13, half a point ahead of Janowski.  A new star had emerged; Alekhine gradually began to conquer the world with his magical combinations that have delighted many generations.

In 1921 he won several tournaments, in Budapest with 8.5 of 11, The Hague, with 8 of 9, and Triberg with 7 of 8;  in 1922 he won at Hastings with 7.5 of 10,  and in Carlsbad 1923, with 11.5 of 17. He took  third place in New York, 1924 with 12 of 20 behind Laker and Capablanca,  first place in Paris, 1925 with 6.5 of 8,  first place in Baden-Baden, 1925 with 16 of 20, first place in Hasting 1925 with 8.5 of 9.  In 1925, Alekhine broke his own world record of blindfold play, and played 28 games blindfolded in Paris (+22-3=3).





The Path to the World Championship

In 1926 Alekhine beat Max Euwe in a match 5.5 to 4.5 and challenged Capablanca for the world championship.  Alekhine married for the third time, this time to Nadezda Vasiliev.  In New York 1927, Alekhine took second place behind Capablanca, with 11.5 of 20.

In 1927, Alekhine's challenge to Capablanca was backed by a group of Argentinian businessmen and the president of Argentina, who guaranteed the funds. Organized by the Club Argentino de Ajedrez (Argentine Chess Club) in Buenos Aires, the match was played from September to November 1927; all the games took place behind closed doors. There were no spectators or photographs. Alekhine won the title, scoring +6 -3 =25.  Alekhine's victory surprised almost the entire chess world, since he had never previously wrested a single game from Capablanca. Alekhine became the 4th official world champion of Chess after Steinitz, Dr. Lasker, and Capablanca.

In each of the following worth-solving puzzles, Black is to make a combination of good moves and make improvement.

Safety of Pieces

Nothing else in a chess game matters more than the safety of your pieces (and those of your opponent). In games between beginners, the player who wins more material through tactical errors will usually win the game, so simply keeping your pieces safe and noticing when your opponent’s pieces are in danger is usually a sure way to win the game. In games of masters, there are very minimum of tactical errors and blunders usually made by beginners only and the games usually decided by who makes the first inaccuracy or mistake. Of course, king safety is most important of all, and this is especially true when you are far ahead in a game. If you find yourself with a big lead, the most important thing you can do is take away anything resembling a threat to your king. Exchange pieces, secure your defenses, and give your king an escape from the bank ranked but just do not let yourself be mated by surprise, and you should win. In each of the following puzzles, Black is to make a move or combination of moves and win or improve.

Truong Son 3.3 Zonal 2013 Selected Games

[Event "3.3 ZONAL CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP"]
[Site "Tagaytay City, PHI"]
[Date "2013.01.23"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Nguyen, Ngoc Truong Son"]
[Black "Barcenilla, Rogelio"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2631"]
[BlackElo "2483"]
[ECO "A00"]
[EventDate "2013.01.22"]
[Board "2"]
[PlyCount "55"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "PHI"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 O-O 6.h3 e5 7.d5 a5 8.g4 Na6 9.Be3 c6 10.Nd2 Nd7 11.a3 Rb8 12.h4 Bf6 13.g5 Be7 14.Rg1 Ndc5 15.Rb1 Nd7 16.h5 Re8 17.Nf3 Nf8 18.Be2 cxd5 19.exd5 Bf5 20.Bd3 Qc8 21.hxg6 fxg6 22.Nh4 Bxd3 23.Qxd3 Qh3 24.Qe4 Rbc8 (see diagram below)

25.Rg4! (trapping the queen) Nd7 26.Rg3 Qh2 27.Qg4 e4 28.Qxd7 1-0


[Event "3.3 ZONAL CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP"]
[Site "Tagaytay City, PHI"]
[Date "2013.01.24"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Megaranto, Susanto"]
[Black "Nguyen, Ngoc Truong Son"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "2529"]
[BlackElo "2631"]
[ECO "A00"]
[EventDate "2013.01.22"]
[Board "2"]
[PlyCount "138"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "PHI"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 O-O 5.e4 d6 6.Be2 e5 7.O-O Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.b4 Nh5 10.Re1 Nf4 11.Bxf4 exf4 12.Rc1 h6 13.c5 g5 14.Nd4 Ng6 15.Ncb5 a6 16.Na3 Qf6 17.Nf5 Bxf5 18.exf5 Nh4 19.Nc4 Nxf5 20.Bd3 Nd4 21.Na5 Rab8 22.Qg4 dxc5 23.bxc5 Rfd8 24.Be4 Re8 25.Nb3 Nxb3 26.axb3 Re5 27.f3 Qe7 28.Red1 Rd8 29.h4 Qf6 30.h5 a5 31.Kh2 Bf8 32.Rd3 Qa6 33.Rc4 (see diagram below)

33... Qb5!! (zugzwang) 34.d6 cxd6 35.Rcd4 Qxc5 36.Rd5 Qb6 37.Rxe5 dxe5 38.Qf5 Bg7 39.Rxd8+ Qxd8 40.Bxb7 Qd4 41.Be4 Qf2 42.Bd5 Qg3+ 43.Kg1 Qe1+ 44.Kh2 Qh4+ 45.Qh3 Kf8 46.Qxh4 gxh4 47.Kh3 f5 48.Be6 e4 49.fxe4 fxe4 50.Kxh4 Ke7 51.Bf5 e3 52.Bd3 Kd6 53.Kg4 Ke5 54.Kf3 Kd4 55.Bb5 Kc3 56.Kxf4 Bd4 57.Ke4 Bb6 58.g4 Kxb3 59.Kd3 Kb4 60.Be8 Bd4 61.Bf7 a4 62.Be6 a3 63.Ba2 Kc5 64.Bb3 Kd6 65.Ba2 Ke5 66.Ke2 Kf4 67.Be6 Bc5 68.Ba2 Kxg4 69.Bf7 Kh4 0-1


[Event "3.3 ZONAL CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP"]
[Site "Tagaytay City, PHI"]
[Date "2013.01.25"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Laylo, Darwin"]
[Black "Nguyen, Ngoc Truong Son"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[WhiteElo "2491"]
[BlackElo "2631"]
[ECO "A00"]
[EventDate "2013.01.22"]
[Board "2"]
[PlyCount "104"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "PHI"]

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 Bf5 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nh4 Be4 7.f3 Bg6 8.Qb3 Qc7 9.Bd2 Be7 10.g3 Bh5 11.O-O-O Nfd7 12.Be2 Nb6 13.c5 Nc4 14.Ng2 Nxd2 15.Rxd2 f6 16.f4 Bf7 17.e4 O-O 18.exd5 exd5 19.Bd3 b6 20.Qc2 g6 21.h4 bxc5 22.h5 f5 23.hxg6 Bxg6 24.dxc5 Nd7 25.Ne3 Nxc5 26.Bxf5 Rxf5 27.Nxf5 Bf8 28.Rf1 a5 29.g4 a4 30.Qd1 Qa5 31.Rf3 Rb8 32.Nd4 Qb6 33.Nxa4 Nxa4 34.Qxa4 Bb4 35.f5 Qc5+ 36.Nc2 Qg1+ 37.Rd1 Qxg4 38.Qxc6 Qxf3 39.fxg6 Qf4+ 40.Kb1 Bf8 41.Qxd5+ Kh8 (see diagram below)

42.Rh1? (gxh7!) h6 43.Qd4+ Qxd4 44.Nxd4 Bg7 45.Nb3 Rb6 46.Rg1 Be5 47.Kc2 Rc6+ 48.Kb1 Rb6 49.Rg2 Kg7 50.Kc2 Rxg6 51.Rxg6+ Kxg6 52.Nd2 Kf5 1/2-1/2


[Event "3.3 ZONAL CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP"]
[Site "Tagaytay City, PHI"]
[Date "2013.01.26"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Nguyen, Ngoc Truong Son"]
[Black "Paragua, Mark"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2631"]
[BlackElo "2519"]
[ECO "A00"]
[EventDate "2013.01.22"]
[Board "2"]
[PlyCount "55"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "PHI"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.e3 O-O 6.b4 c6 7.Bb2 Bg4 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3 e6 10.Be2 Nbd7 11.O-O Nb6 12.c5 Nbd7 13.Qg3 e5 14.dxe5 Ne8 15.f4 Nc7 16.Rad1 a5 17.a3 axb4 18.axb4 Ne6 19.Bg4 Qe7 (see diagram below)

20.e4!! (strong breakthrough) d4 21.Ne2 g5 22.Bxe6 fxe6 23.Bxd4 Ra2 24.Qg4 Rxe2 25.Qxe2 gxf4 26.Qg4 Qf7 27.Bc3 Kh8 28.Rd6 1-0


[Event "3.3 ZONAL CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP"]
[Site "Tagaytay City, PHI"]
[Date "2013.01.27"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Antonio, Rogelio Jr"]
[Black "Nguyen, Ngoc Truong Son"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[WhiteElo "2541"]
[BlackElo "2631"]
[ECO "A00"]
[EventDate "2013.01.22"]
[Board "1"]
[PlyCount "74"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "PHI"]

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 Be7 8.Qd2 O-O 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Nd4 Bxd4 11.Bxd4 Nxd4 12.Qxd4 f6 13.exf6 Qxf6 14.Qxf6 Nxf6 15.Be2 Bd7 16.O-O-O Bc6 17.Rhe1 Rae8 18.Bf3 g6 19.g3 Kg7 20.Re2 h6 21.Rde1 Kf7 22.h4 Rg8 23.Rf2 Ke7 24.Ne2 g5 25.hxg5 hxg5 26.Nd4 Kd6 27.Rfe2 Bd7 28.b3 gxf4 29.gxf4 Rh8 30.c4 dxc4 31.bxc4 Kc7 32.Nxe6+ Bxe6 33.Rxe6 Rxe6 34.Rxe6 Rf8 35.Re7+ Kd8 (see diagram below)

36.Re3? (Rxb7!!) Kc7 37.Re7+ Kd8 1/2-1/2


[Event "3.3 ZONAL CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP"]
[Site "Tagaytay City, PHI"]
[Date "2013.01.28"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Nguyen, Ngoc Truong Son"]
[Black "Cao, Sang"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2631"]
[BlackElo "2488"]
[ECO "A00"]
[EventDate "2013.01.22"]
[Board "2"]
[PlyCount "45"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "PHI"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.Nc3 g6 7.Nf3 Bg7 8.Bg2 O-O 9.O-O Re8 10.Nd2 Nbd7 11.h3 a6 12.a4 Rb8 13.Nc4 Ne5 14.Na3 Nh5 15.e4 f5 16.exf5 Bxf5 17.g4 Bxg4 18.hxg4 Qh4 19.gxh5 Ng4 20.Bf4 Bd4 (see diagram below)

21.Qf3!!+- Rf8 22.Qg3 Qxh5 23.Bf3 1-0

Piece Activities : Holes and Pawn Structures

Sometimes if things are going badly, the best reaction is to stay calm and centralize your pieces so they maintain maximum activity and flexibility. Indeed, centralized pieces that are working together are often a wonderful thing to behold. Creating holes in your position can have long-term repercussions, or can even lead to an immediate smackdown. If you must create a hole in your camp, be aware that you're doing so, and be  prepared to show why it's no big deal in that instance. If your opponent creates a hole in his camp, train yourself to notice it, and do everything possible to take advantage of it. Knowing as many pawn structures as possible is extremely important if you wish to reach master level. This kind of knowledge tells you, at a glance, whether creating a hole is or is not okay, what minor pieces to retain or exchange, and a host of other bits of key information. In each of the following worth-solving puzzles, Black is to play.

Middlegame : Transition to the Endgame

Not all games reach the endgame, since an attack on the king, or a combination leading to large material gains can end the game while it is still in the middlegame. At other times, an advantage needs to be pursued in the endgame, and learning how to make favorable exchanges leading to a favorable endgame is an important skill. The last thing that happens in the middlegame is the setup for endgame. Since many endgames involve the promotion of a pawn, it is usually good to keep that in mind when making trades during the middlegame. For example, World Champion Max Euwe considered a preponderance of pawns on the queenside (queenside majority) an advantage because this might be used to create a passed pawn. In each of the following worth-solving middlegame puzzles, Black is to move and conclude whether he should go for a win or draw or manage to survive to the endgame.

Energetic Players of Tournaments

Some chess players resort to illegal practices of putting pressure on the opponent. They can start making nasty noises, shake the table, stare at you aggressively non-stop, walk behind you and almost lean on you, etc. If you believe the opponent is misbehaving, you should consult the arbiter as opposed to making counter-moves or talking to your opponent which is forbidden. Also, no matter how kind and intelligent you are, don’t act as a martyr who can deal with anything: displeasure will grow and negatively affect your game. Playing against a motivated and energetic players is a real challenge. You should ensure your nerves are under control at all costs. Sometimes being too hot-blooded makes a person go berserk and self-destruct. Therefore, you should offer your opponent a chance to go wrong and try to use his energy against himself, martial arts-style. Stay alert and watch for counter-chances. Trust in your position and ability to handle it well. Some players even like to play cat and mouse with their opponents and let them dominate for a while. A bright example that jumps to mind is the legendary Viktor “I will accept your sacrifice and beat you” Korchnoi. If you know in advance that you will be facing an active and energetic player, you might want to reconsider your opening choice and choose something uncomfortable for him. To be an improving player, one way is to practice solving a lot of practical puzzles before playing real games of different time controls. In each of the following worth-solving puzzles, Black is to move. 

Simple or Simplification

There is a simple way to play perfect chess, write down all the possible games of chess, note if the final position is won, drawn or lost, and then working backwards assume each player choses the best line, you will eventually end up with a list of all the best possible games of chess. This is clearly impractical. A compromise is to grow the list of variations as large as possible, in the time permitted, and then evaluate, with the help of strong engines such as Houdini and Rybka, to try and decide the likely outcome from the final position of each variation. This is a gross simplification, but it captures the essence of the method, and allows us to understand a lot of what may go wrong. This method of growing a tree of possible moves, and then evaluating the resulting positions, in the time permitted, is practical. In each of the following worth-solving puzzles, Black is to play. Hopefully you find the best move or combination of moves or strong move or combination of moves by exploiting ways of the simplification ideas. Improve.

Capture

A capture is a removal of the opponent's piece or pawn from the board by taking it with one's own piece or pawn. Except in the case of an en passant capture, the capturing piece or pawn does so by occupying the same square that the captured piece or pawn occupied. In each of the following difficult worth-solving puzzles, Black is to make a move of REMOVAL and improve. Enjoy.

Expert Chess Players

In a study, three types of chess player were shown mid-games from chess that contained around 24 to 26 pieces for five seconds. The players were then asked to recall the position of each piece by reconstructing it using another chess set. The master chess player recreated 16 pieces successfully, the intermediate player recalled eight successfully, while the novice recreated only four successfully. However, when the same types of player were shown random board configurations (24 to 26 pieces arranged in random positions on the board) there were no differences in the number of successful reconstructions between them (each recalled about two or three). The reason why the expert's recall of random board configurations was so poor was that such a configuration is unlikely to be a typical board state and hence its meaning for the chess expert was no greater than for that of the novice. This study shows that experts do not have superior memories but rather chunk information in meaningful ways.

Similar studies have been carried out in other domains with similar results. For example, expert hockey players could remember more player positions that could non-experts when briefly shown a photograph from a game. In addition, expert volleyball players, but not non-experts, are especially good at identifying the location of the ball when shown a photograph from a game.

Experts appear to have developed more advanced problem schemas, which are knowledge structures for understanding problems within a specific domain. Some studied expert versus novice physicists on a series of physics problems. They found that while the novice physicists grouped information about the problem in terms of their structural characteristics, expert physicists categorised information on the basis of the laws of physics (such as Newton's Third Law). Through extensive experience, experts have gained knowledge of specific configurations of information that they can apply to problems. Another examined expert versus novice radiologists in their ability to detect disorders in X-ray films. Interestingly, experts were not only able to spot an abnormality more quickly but could also entertain several plausible diagnoses than could the novices. Novices tended to work backwards from a possible hypothesis.

If we want to know how experts acquired their expertise then the simple answer is that they practised a lot. Simon in 1980 estimates that it takes about ten years or 10,000 hours to acquire expertise in one domain. He argues that practice leads to "automatic" actions in response to a problem. Problem-solving can promote learning. However, the use of some heuristics, such as means-ends analysis, can hinder learning rather than help it (Sweller and Chandler, 1994). This is because experts themselves use schema-driven problem-solving methods and not means-ends analysis. Undirected problem-solving strategies can help the learner. In one example, Owen and Sweller (1985) gave a series of trigonometry problems and compared students who were instructed to calculate particular angles and sides (directed instructions) and others who were told to calculate as many angles and as sides as they could (undirected instructions). Greater learning occurred with the undirected instructions than with directed instructions.

Play and Work

There are critical differences between play and work. Play is mostly a self-chosen activity by the child, rather than prescribed by a parent or teacher; it is a process, rather than a predicted outcome or product. Work, on the other hand, has a definite intent and a prescribed outcome. In order for an activity to be considered play, the experience must include a measure of inner control, ability to bend or invent reality, and a strong internally based motivation for playing. If parents and educators try to label experiences as play, but in reality have specific requirements for the activity, then it becomes work not play. For example, it is really impossible to play with flash cards whose purpose is to have a child memorize something on each card. This is not playing and children quickly differentiate between pure play and work being disguised as play.

Play is not wasted time, but rather time spent building new knowledge from previous experience. However, long term developmental qualities of play are difficult to research. There are various ways in which researchers may choose to look at the differences between work and play. Researchers may choose definitions of play or work based on the following.

Primary Activities: Even if a culture considers a child’s action is play, a researcher may choose to define the child’s action as work because it does add  immediate worth to the family unit.

The Parent’s Concept: Parents from different cultures define children’s actions of work and play differently. For example, a Mayan mother who’s daughter sets up her own fruit stand may consider this action as play. However, many westerners would consider this work if the child is actually successful at selling items from the fruit stand. A child in the United States who sets up a lemonade stand is considered to be working for money.

The Child’s Concept: Children have different ideas of what play and work are in comparison to adults. A child who is “pretending” to cook may have the belief that he or she is working and contributing to the family.

Incentive Theory

A reward, tangible or intangible, is presented after the occurrence of an action with the intent to cause the behavior to occur again. This is done by associating positive meaning to the behavior. Studies show that if the person receives the reward immediately, the effect is greater, and decreases as delay lengthens. Repetitive action-reward combination can cause the action to become habit. Motivation comes from two sources: oneself, and other people. These two sources are called intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation, respectively. Reinforcers and reinforcement principles of behavior differ from the hypothetical construct of reward. A reinforcer is any stimulus change following a response that increases the future frequency or magnitude of that response, therefore the cognitive approach is certainly the way forward as in 1973 Maslow described it as being the golden pineapple. Positive reinforcement is demonstrated by an increase in the future frequency or magnitude of a response due to in the past being followed contingently by a reinforcing stimulus. Negative reinforcement involves stimulus change consisting of the removal of an aversive stimulus following a response. Positive reinforcement involves a stimulus change consisting of the presentation or magnification of a positive stimulus following a response. From this perspective, motivation is mediated by environmental events, and the concept of distinguishing between intrinsic and extrinsic forces is irrelevant. Applying proper motivational techniques can be much harder than it seems. Steven Kerr notes that when creating a reward system, it can be easy to reward A, while hoping for B, and in the process, reap harmful effects that can jeopardize your goals. Incentive theory in psychology treats motivation and behavior of the individual as they are influenced by beliefs, such as engaging in activities that are expected to be profitable. Incentive theory is promoted by behavioral psychologists, such as B.F. Skinner and literalized by behaviorists, especially by Skinner in his philosophy of Radical behaviorism, to mean that a person's actions always have social ramifications: and if actions are positively received people are more likely to act in this manner, or if negatively received people are less likely to act in this manner. Incentive theory distinguishes itself from other motivation theories, such as drive theory, in the direction of the motivation. In incentive theory, stimuli "attract", to use the term above, a person towards them, as opposed to the body seeking to reestablish homeostasis pushing it towards the stimulus. In terms of behaviorism, incentive theory involves positive reinforcement: the stimulus has been conditioned to make the person happier. For instance, a person knows that eating food, drinking water, or gaining social capital will make them happier. As opposed to in drive theory, which involves negative reinforcement: a stimulus has been associated with the removal of the punishment: the lack of homeostasis in the body. For example, a person has come to know that if they eat when hungry, it will eliminate that negative feeling of hunger, or if they drink when thirsty, it will eliminate that negative feeling of thirst.

Breakthrough Training

In the following puzzles, Black is to make a combination of breakthrough. For repetition, a breakthrough is a destruction of a seemingly strong defense.

Sandbagging

Sandbagging is hiding the strength, skill or difficulty of something or someone early in an engagement. Sandbagging in billiards, chess and other such games are deliberately playing below one's actual ability in order to fool opponents into accepting higher stakes bets, or to lower one's competitive rating in order to play in a future event with a higher handicap and consequently have a better chance to win. Sandbagging in golfing is playing poorly until establishing a handicap and then raising bets, using the established handicap to gain advantage. Sandbagging in racing is deliberately qualifying slower than what the car can actually perform.

A player is sandbagging when the player in any game chooses on purpose to not play their best. Normally this is because they are too superior, they want to hustle you, or they are too lazy to play their best with nothing on the line.

In the following puzzles, it is White to play and win. This training hopefully may reduce the tendency of sandbagging.

Focal Point

The focal point is the square upon which a player focuses an attack such as repeatedly attacking that square or sacrificing a piece there. For example, in an attack upon an uncastled king, Black's f7-square or White's f2-square is a common focal point. Examples of attacks on the focal point f7 include the Fried Liver Attack initiated by a knight sacrifice on f7 and the primitive Scholar's Mate ending with checkmate on f7.

In the following puzzles, find the best improving (direct or  indirect) focal point for Black to play and not neccessarily win.

Centralization

Centralization is moving a piece or pieces toward the center of the board. In general, pieces are best placed in or near the center of the board because they control a large number of squares and are available for play on either flank as needed. Because of their limited mobility, knights in particular benefit from being centralized. There are several chess aphorisms referring to this principle: "A knight on the rim is dim" (or "grim" instead of "dim") and "A knight on the side cannot abide."

In the following worth-solving puzzles, White is to make a move of centralization or indirect centralization and improve.