Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

The Diverging Roads

  • GM BryanSmith
  • | Apr 11, 2014
  • | 6989 views
  • | 18 comments

In a recent tournament, one game reached a certain ending which I had previously played a full eight years ago. That was a decent memory of a very different time. I wasn't even an IM yet, and I was still trying to establish a life in Philadelphia - times were pretty lean. That game took place in the 2006 Foxwoods Open, in the eighth round. In those days, the kind of prize I could hope to win - a couple thousand dollars - would make a huge difference in my life, perhaps even funding a trip abroad which would allow me to become an IM. There was a lot of pressure - indeed, I pretty much collapsed in the last round after this game. This tournament remains one of those memories from my (relative) youth, despite not even being a very good tournament on my part.

In the eighth round, I played a master named Dmitry Shevelev, and, as White in a French Defense, he went immediately into an endgame which is considered harmless. Indeed, White generally avoids this ending. This is not a theoretical article, and the assessment of this ending is not really up to debate since clearly Black is completely fine there. Nevertheless, it is the type of opening variation which someone might choose in a misguided attempt to make a draw.

In Shevelev's case, I doubt he was playing for a draw with white. This was an open tournament, and the players were fighting for prizes (including prizes for under 2500 rating, or something like that). He probably chose this variation out of a wish to exploit perceived weaknesses in my endgame play, or maybe just because he did not know the theory. If it was the former reason, he was probably disappointed because I played an ending which I can still be proud of today. So let's look at this first road:

One of the good things about chess is that even the most simple positions can diverge into an infinite number of different paths. So eight years later, in a round-robin tournament in Chicago, I faced the young player David Peng, who I believe is only ten years old. He was the lowest rated player in the tournament, but as is common with young players, his rating had not caught up to his strength. In our game, I chose the French Defense - which I had not played for a while - and he chose to go into the same ending as Shevelev had eight years earlier (when Mr. Peng was two years old).

Chicago | Image Wikipedia

Interestingly, the game with Peng was quite a bit more tense than the one with Shevelev, mostly because Peng came up with a much better arrangement of pieces early on. Individual factors aside (such as differences in the level of talent and dedication of these two particular opponents), I think a large change in the level of general chess ability can be observed in the last decade - probably largely due to computers. It confuses me somewhat, because differences in rating still mean the same, statistically. But all games with lower rated players are more tense and tend to be decided later in the game.

Now let's see the game with Peng:

This ending - while theoretically harmless from White's point of view - is great for studying the imbalances of bishop versus knight and opposing pawn majorities. Studying other games played from the beginning of the endgame (and there are many) you can find some similarities of the methods attempted. For instance, you can find the ...g7-g5 advance from my game with Shevelev, after White has played f4 - this pawn break puts pressure on White and is demanded by the pawn structure:

phpflRsJl.png

...g7-g5 in this structure ultimately leaves White with a difficult choice - allow the exchange of the f-pawn for Black's g-pawn, which gives Black a passed pawn and opens a kingside file, or support the pawn with g2-g3, which creates "positive tension" from Black's point of view (he can, at any moment, exchange on f4, creating an isolated pawn for White and opening the g-file; while for White, exchanging on g5 is still not desirable). This is a very basic structure, so learning such thematic ideas is very important.

Witness the following game, where White uses the same Nd2 idea as Peng, but continues with a later f4 move rather than Peng's f3. This gave Black the chance to chip away with the ...g5 break.

Furthermore, you might observe the Nd2 idea which Peng used, and which can be found in some other games from this ending. This idea was not even on my horizon when Peng played it on the board.

Despite the similarity of a few themes, you will find that every game diverges into an infinite number of paths. Eventually, none can even be called similar. In the diverging roads of two chess games, you can find the different personalities of the players, their momentary condition, their knowledge, the times in which they live. The forest of chess is indeed very thick. Two paths might run parallel for a little while, but eventually one leads to the mountains and the other to the river.


RELATED STUDY MATERIAL

Comments


  • 6 months ago

    gdaddio

    did that sign have anything to do with u.s. rt 13?

  • 6 months ago

    boardkeeper

    Awesome article! Love your analysis. Please write a book!

  • 6 months ago

    pm11081994

    Awesome endgame study article! Loved it. :)

  • 6 months ago

    Lawdoginator

    This guy is such a good writer. 

  • 6 months ago

    zrahman

    Very nice article! We are used to getting the best articles in chess.com from GM Smith.

  • 6 months ago

    chungle

    Double plus good!  Thank you.

  • 6 months ago

    bigknoll

    Great article. And what a poetic ending!

  • 6 months ago

    spikestars

    2000 rated 10 year old? he must be very well trained from a very young age

  • 6 months ago

    dzindzifan

    Very nice article! Thanks for sharing this!

  • 6 months ago

    Wavechaser

    Thank you for an interesting, instructive and philosophical article.

  • 6 months ago

    Nick

    You say that the games can't be called similar, but I think they were similar enough that viewing them together was really helpful. Good article.

  • 6 months ago

    Archos331

    Loved it

    Helped me a lot :D

    Thanks... a lot! :D

  • 6 months ago

    Alex91

    What a poetic explanation at the end! Smile

    Great article and very helpful. Thanks. 

  • 6 months ago

    Talonflame_Fan

    Lol I just realized that Smile

  • 6 months ago

    Catguy25

    Very nice!lol

  • 6 months ago

    Talonflame_Fan

    TWO roads diverged in a yellow wood,And sorry I could not travel bothAnd be one traveler, long I stoodAnd looked down one as far as I couldTo where it bent in the undergrowth;        5 Then took the other, as just as fair,And having perhaps the better claim,Because it was grassy and wanted wear;Though as for that the passing thereHad worn them really about the same,        10 And both that morning equally layIn leaves no step had trodden black.Oh, I kept the first for another day!Yet knowing how way leads on to way,I doubted if I should ever come back.        15 I shall be telling this with a sighSomewhere ages and ages hence:Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—I took the one less traveled by,And that has made all the difference.        20 

  • 6 months ago

    dokter_nee

    I love the last paragraph. Nicely phrased.

  • 6 months ago

    silverback96

    Very good article !!

Back to Top

Post your reply: