Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

The Best Moves Never Played

  • WIM energia
  • | Nov 23, 2012
  • | 11906 views
  • | 26 comments

Welcome to a new column called "The Best Moves Never Played" -- this article is a short introduction of what this column will or will not cover. During any real game some of the best moves were never played because the players did not find them over the board. And why is that? There are many reasons and there has been much discussion of which quality or qualities allow the player to get the gist of the position and find that very best move. These qualities include:

  • Precise calculation
  • Tactical vision
  • Ability to correctly evaluate the resulting position
  • Intuition
  • Knowledge of typical plans/openings/endgames,
  • Decision making and psychology

 These are just to name a few. In some of these categories one can improve more or less straight forwardly. For example, calculation - one can take any position with tactics, start the procedure of choosing candidate moves, then determine in which order to calculate them and for how deep, and after doing this activity for many hours one's technique of calculating will definitely improve. Moreover, the material for improvement is widely available and easily accessible as there are dozens of books and websites dedicated to calculations. The same goes for tactical vision, by studying different combinational motifs one can improve in this category.

To illustrate the above concepts let us take a look at the following example from my recent practice. White has a dominating position due to their control of the d-file, especially the key d5-square. Black has trouble with development, the knight on a5 is cut out of play and the king is weak. Black's next move would probably be e4: to chase away the knight, cut the bishop off on g2 and to open the g7-bishop. White has three candidate moves here: Bd2, Bg5 or Be3. Why these moves? White needs to complete their development and every move should attack something. Of course, there are many lines to calculate here and one cannot make the best move without precise calculations. Even after the worst choice white's position will be better, so the stakes are not high, but with the best decision the game can end very soon. Which one would you choose?

The tactics of the above position included the idea of Bd8, in order to win the Na5, as well as intermediate moves to deflect the overloaded queen first from the f7-square and then away from the e6-square. Seeing these tactical motifs was crucial in finding the strongest move, Be3. The ability to evaluate the resulting position includes correctly evaluating the Q vs. 2R position, as well as the end of the Be3 line where black's pieces cannot move and their king is under attack. Be3 is not trivial to find at the board but with the right training method such moves are possible to calculate and justify by properly evaluating the resulting position.

On the other hand, how does one train to improve intuition? There are books written on this topic as well but the authors generally have trouble separating intuitive decisions from non-intuitive. Intuitive decisions are usually the ones that do not include much calculation, and also the ones that are backed up by calculation but where the resulting positions are very difficult to accurately evaluate. For example, Beim in his excellent book "The Enigma of Chess Intuition" defines intuition in this way: "intuition manifests itself first and foremost in the ability, in a somewhat unconscious way, and with a high degree of accuracy, to choose between different lines of play". The word unconscious will send most of the readers into panic - how does one train their unconscious mind? Does it work in the same way that muscle memory works?

To illustrate the concept of intuition at work we will look at one of my favorite examples from Beim's book. The position is complex - it is impossible to rely on calculations or positional evaluations here only, one needs to rely on intuition! Fischer makes a mistake in the position where there are no specific guidelines to follow.

Fishcher did not find the correct solution and went down to Geller pretty quickly. There is an anecdote that when Tal saw the score of the game he suggested the correct move right away. Regardless of whether this story is true or not, Tal later faced Bogdanovich in this very same position and proved his analysis over the board. Here is the game:

The difference between Fischer's and Tal's play lays in a small intermediate move Qc2. From c2 the queen takes control of two important white diagonals and the idea of Qd3 for black does not work anymore. Neither player could have calculated the variations to the end or evaluated the resulting positions accurately but Tal's intuition proved to be superior.

The articles that will be part of this column will address the listed qualities and give recommendations on how to improve them. The articles will feature games where the strongest move was not played during the game and we shall discuss the possible reasons for why the player did not find the best move. The first few articles will feature the topic of precise calculations.   

Comments


  • 20 months ago

    shahrokh1975

    brilliant subject with a wide variety of discussion. you can write these series for a long time!

  • 20 months ago

    ethermeister

    Great article, thanks! Will be looking forward to the next in the series Smile

  • 20 months ago

    sapientdust

    Mikhail Tal.

  • 20 months ago

    Ansaldo_Commish

    Hi, could anyone please tell me who is the smoking gentleman in the picture at the top of this article?

    Thanks,

    Al

  • 20 months ago

    scaccodoppio

    Nice idea for a serie of articles. Thx.

  • 20 months ago

    Piyush23

    nice 1.......

  • 20 months ago

    sapientdust

    Nice article. Looking forward to more in this series.

    @AnlamK: just click the PGN button and copy the PGN, and then paste it into ChessBase or Scid or Arena or whatever program you use.

  • 20 months ago

    sofouuk

    btw, tal was surely the best player of intermediate moves of all time. just in this brief game segment there are 20 Qc2, 22 Qf2 and 28 Bd5, any one of which one might like to think one might have found if confronted with the position, white to play, but which are extremely difficult to visualise from further out. maybe kasparov was as good when attacking with all his pieces, but surely no one else

  • 20 months ago

    JoeTheV

    Looks like it's gonna be a nice series.

  • 20 months ago

    didiz1016

    There is an opening, the smith morra gambit. Almost no one plays the Chicago Defence.

  • 20 months ago

    Muyastuto

    if it was never played why tal played it? makes no sense

  • 20 months ago

    1ernie

    Great article.

    Intuition depends upon prior knowledge whether its called up consciously or subconsciously.

  • 20 months ago

    Silverfall

    Useless article. Shows the ignorance at chess of the poster.

  • 20 months ago

    manalgcor

    Fisher tried to penetrate the corass of Geller`s position and get material advantage and/or an attack. Problem was Geller also played, and soon got a dominant position

    The actual key behind Qc2 is that it aborted Geller`s potential for ameliorating his position. Instead, he had to play in a defensive manner, while Tal invaded his position. slowly but decisively.

    In other words: Fischer were too optimistic, and only thought of attacking, while Tal also considered what Geller could do. Whereas this was by intuition, or he really noticed the importance of ruining Geller's Qd3, we cannot know.

     

    ZoomInto: Pictures, Images and Photos
     
    ZoomInto: Pictures, Images and Photos
     
  • 20 months ago

    beardogjones

    Maybe they were not played because a brilliant solution did

    not seem to be required or was ignored for stylistic reasons.

  • 20 months ago

    dezsoracz

    Interesting.

  • 20 months ago

    Kornrade

    Nice idea, but it should come with a warning... I mean, how much do you all trust computers? :)

    To be fair, in (highly) tactical positions, computers may indeed offer brilliant alternatives. If this series only considers such positions, wouldn't it be more appropriate to call the series "Best tactical moves never played"?

    But there is also the other side of "brilliant moves", which I consider as important: strategical brilliances, moves in the style of Petrosian or Karpov. Here too intuition is a big asset. And computers are not at all reliable. Will the series also attempt to show such moves?

  • 20 months ago

    AnlamK

    I really like this article but the chess.com tool for viewing games is a little clunky.

    ChessBase has a much better tool! 

    Erik and other ChessCom overloards! It's time for an upgrade!

  • 20 months ago

    NM danheisman

    Great idea for a series. When I am reviewing games with a computer and it finds a fantastic move that it seems no human would ever find, then I put it aside and think about writing a series like this, too Smile.

  • 20 months ago

    cookie3

    Sounds like an excellent series.....can't wait!!

Back to Top

Post your reply: