How Chess changed throughout history, along with it's top players, strategy, and play

1.0: Introduction

I want to discover how chess as a game evolved throughout history in terms of FIDE rating, skill gap between the different hierarchy of positions and rankings over time. I also want to discover different strategies, analysis of post and pre-chess engine development. As a goal and a trustable input into my article, i want to input how my chess.com rating improved to my goal of 2100, i am about 1800 right now, we get about 2-10 rating every-time we win a 10 minute match timed match, so i would need to win about 200 times at a bare minimum so there's a huge opportunity and trials to see what i learned actually works in the present day skill rate.

I have current interest in chess because i have been taught chess by my grandfather while i was studying in Korea at the age of 4, even though my grandfather would keep a record book at every one of my loss; and he didn't give me any mercy, i remember the losses were over 120 for me and about 2 wins over the two year period we lived there. I think my grandfather's competitiveness is a part of the reason why I'm in love with timed competitive chess. although I haven't entered a FIDE supported official rankings in over 7 years, i still have a premium membership on Chess.com and i consistently watch every video of Hikaru-the #1 grandmaster in America, and Gothamchess- about the most famous youtube channel for chess and is an international master. I also have a friend from Mongolia who I have been close with for over 6 years. We weekly play 10 minute competitive mode chess on chess.com and have been playing each other since 2019. After this year and next summer when I come back to Mongolia, I have a personal goal of entering a FIDE supported competitive chess event after I learn and write the article.

THE ATL goals included is Identities and relationships and the dimensions of time and space, because I will explore how the chess community, chess culture and what kind of relationships for the game of chess as interested individuals, what we as teammates, rivals or opponents feel for each other duration of playing and involving the beautiful game of chess, and i will also as mentioned above, be diving deep about the turning points, revolutionaries, limitations, the system and different dynamics of the game of chess in history- before chess engines were developed specifically.

2.1:

ELO

source:“Elo Rating System - Chess Terms.” Chess.com, 2014, www.chess.com/terms/elo-rating-chess. Accessed 6 Mar. 2022.

‌The Elo system that rates players measures the relative strength of a player in some games, such as in chess, compared to other players. It’s creator; Arpad Elo, was a physics professor in the U.S. and a chess master who worked to improve the way the U.S. Chess federation measured their players’ skill levels. Elo was used in conjunction with “CMR” from 2000, up until the March of 2005; where it started being the official way to measure a player’s skill under FIDE’s jurisdictions. MORE info on its origins: The USCF changed its system of measuring a player’s skill to the Elo rating system in 1960, and it was later that it was adopted by FIDE in 1970.

CMR/EDO rating

source:“Elo Rating System - Chess Terms.” Chess.com, 2014, www.chess.com/terms/elo-rating-chess. Accessed 6 Mar. 2022.

The Edo historical chess ratings system is a novel approach to the active rating of chess players over time, and it was used for rating over the whole period to be calculated simultaneously by an iterative method. It’s rating system is similar to that used by Elo to initialize the international rating of a player’s strength in competitive chess. It was used from the earliest times of competitive chess; spanning from within the periods of November of 1820, up until the March of 2020.

2.1: Chess theory and development through the 19th century:

Chess theory moved at a slow pace until the mid 18th century. In 1749; the french master Francois-Andre Philidor stepped onto the scene with his book. This book covered new opening ideas (including the defense which still bears his name and is used by many today), and also contained Philidor’s famous defense in rook and pawn endgames (which is an endgame technique that is still used today). Philidor’s famous statement that “The pawns are the soul of chess” was first introduced to the world in this book.

The game of chess continued to gain momentum in popularity throughout the world as time passed on, and in the mid 19th century; the standardization of chess sets occurred in many public areas. Before the 1850s, chess sets in general weren’t uniform at all. In 1849, Jaques of London (a manufacturer of games and toys) introduced a new style of the game pieces created by Nathaniel Cooke. These pieces were later endorsed by Howard Staunton, the strongest player of this time period, which only helped the recognition of the still new style grow further. This new style of pieces, known as the Staunton pattern, instantly became popular and were used in tournaments and clubs all over the world as time went on. The Staunton pieces, and minor variations of it, are still considered the standard for tournament chess sets that we all know in present time today.

“Lot #655. Capablanca Commemorative Staunton Chess Pieces.” Chess Antiques, 17 Dec. 2021, chessantiques.com/product/capablanca-staunton-chess-pieces/. Accessed 6 Mar. 2022.

The 19th century also marked the introduction of chess time clocks or just “chess clocks” to competitive play. Before chess clocks became a norm for players to use in tournaments, a single game could last up to 14 hours. With the standardization of the chess sets and introduction of chess clocks, the total equipment needed for modern matches and tournaments as we know them were set in place.

2.2: ‌Chess figures and skill: Paul Morphy

Chess, itself, was a developing game that was greatly progressing during the 1800s. The most famous of games of this time period were “swashbuckling attacking games”; which insisted on strong attacking ideas, but not defensive ideas. If a player wasn’t sacrificing their pieces constantly to try to checkmate their opponent in a rather violent manner, then it wasn’t deemed a fun game. It was during this attacking style and era in chess that the American player Paul Morphy entered the competitive scene.

“File:Paul Morphy Standing New York 1859.Jpg - Wikimedia Commons.” Wikimedia.org, 2022, commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Paul_Morphy_standing_New_York_1859.jpg. Accessed 6 Mar. 2022.

‌Morphy was the embodiment of aggressive attacking ideas. During his tour of Europe, Morphy quietly crushed every major player in the world except Howard Staunton (who was past his prime and didn’t accept Morphy’s challenge and not because he beat or drew him in a game). Morphy steamrolled a number of famous masters at the time. In 1858, the famous “Opera House” game was played by Morphy vs the allies (the Duke of Brunswick and also a French Count), and is considered one of the “best games of all time” according to (History of Chess) “chess.com”. Morphy throws everything at his opponents; a beautiful game of the ages! Morphy in my opinion is a remembrance for the chess community about the wonderful style of romantical chess (which refers to open tactical ideas such as brash sacrifices), and the specific beauty of the different possibilities of the classical 1.e4 openings. Morphy often challenged himself to checkmate his opponents under 30 moves, and he succeeded a majority of the time.

To further provide what a genius Morphy was; it can clearly be illustrated within this graph which shows the rating of players through the history of chess, Morphy; during his time, was truly a beast among men.

Abacaba. “The History of the Top Chess Players over Time.” YouTube, 3 Apr. 2016, www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2DHpW79w0Y&ab_channel=Abacaba. Accessed 19 Mar. 2022.

‌

2.3: Willhelm Steinitz and the first world champions and the advent of positional chess

“File:Wilhelm Steinitz2.Jpg - Wikimedia Commons.” Wikimedia.org, 2022, commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wilhelm_Steinitz2.jpg. Accessed 6 Mar. 2022.

Steinitz Held the title of world champion until 1894, when Emanuel Lasker defeated him (10-5). Their rematch, three years later, was even more lopsided: Lasker won 10-2. Lasker was able to hold the title for 27 years, which is by far the longest holder of any chess world champion. 

Positional chess, as Steinitz and Lasker displayed, now became more and more popular. The prevailing theory until the 1920s was to occupy the center of the board during the opening stage of the game, and usually with pawns. The most common openings were the Ruy Lopez, the Giuoco Piano, the Queen’s gambit, the French defense, and the four Knights’ game. These are relatively quiet openings from which both sides slowly try to accumulate small advantages in space, key squares, diagonal squares, and files of the board.

In the 1920, a new school of thought entered general and top level chess; hypermodernism. The main idea of hypermodernism is to control the center of the board with minor pieces instead of leaving it up to pawns. These new ideas were then highlighted in the top geniuses of this generation: Aron Nimzovich, Ernst Grunfeld, Richard Reti. In this period, there were new openings and development schemes that were forming in many popular openings; like the well known Indian Defense, the Grunfeld, and the Benoni. 

Debatably the most hypermodern of all openings is Alekhine’s defense. The point of this defense is to invite white to advance his central pawns in the middle of the board, which would theoretically lead to black attacking the overextended center. Today, Alekhine himself is not remembered not so much as a hypermodern; but as the first dynamic style player. He could play extremely tactically and aggressively, as well as quietly and position wise. He held the title of world champion from 1927 until 1935, and he lost the title to Max Euwe. He is the only chess champion in history to pass away while holding the title of world champion. 

Source: “File:Alex. Alekine LCCN2014717091.Jpg - Wikimedia Commons.” Wikimedia.org, 2021, commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alex._Alekine_LCCN2014717091.jpg. Accessed 10 Mar. 2022.

‌

2.4:Soviet dominance in the 20th century

From 1927-2006, players from the Soviet Union and Russia held the world championship title. Alekhine, Botvinnik, Vassily, Mikhail, Tigran, Spassky, Karpov, Kasparov, Kramnik were the world champions and chess geniuses that proved the dominance of the soviets in the 20th century and early 21st century. This dominance is widely and cleverly represented in the famous ‘Queen’s Gambit’. The styles and the above-mentioned chess legends couldn’t be more different.

After Spassky defeated Petrosian in the 1969 match to become the 10th world champion. Spassky would hold the title for three years, before losing to Bobby Fischer.

Source: “File:FischerEuweAmsterdam1972.Jpg - Wikimedia Commons.” Wikimedia.org, 2021, commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:FischerEuweAmsterdam1972.jpg. Accessed 10 Mar. 2022.

‌

3.1:Game analysis: Fischer vs Spassky-pre engine development.

Bobby Fischer was one of the most energetic chess figures of all time, and is widely regarded as the only player able to break down the soviet wall in the second half of the 20th century. From 1970-1972, he feared Mark Taimanov in a Candidates’ match of first to six wins. Fischer won the first six games, without a loss or draw. Then a few months later he did the impossible against Bent Larsen; a giant among super grandmasters. The two accomplishments were unprecedented beforehand.

Fischer and Spassky in 1972, played the match that captivated the entire world, even people who knew nothing about chess. Among many even today, this was viewed as the most anticipated world chess championship event of all time. It also was apparent to many that it had a great geo-political ramifications as well. The U.S. and soviet union were not only fighting the cold war, but also were fighting for chess supremacy. By then in 1972, Fischer was known to be extremely difficult to work with, losing the first game by a strange blunder seen to many as a rookie mistake, which we will analyze now:

History- up until about for 20 consecutive years around the 1970's the soviets (russians) have dominated the competitive top levels of chess consecutively, year prior: Bobby Fischer's domination over 20 games against soviet grandmasters in a row the year before, proved the 120+ elo superiority of Bobby's elo over Spasky.

Title: Fischer, Robert James (2785 elo) vs Spassky, Boris V (2660)

ChessBase. “Breaking News: Fischer Loses First Game to Spassky in Reykjavik.” Chess News, ChessBase, 12 July 2012, en.chessbase.com/post/breaking-news-fischer-loses-first-game-to-spaky-in-reykjavik. Accessed 19 Mar. 2022.

‌

The games-Game one: started off with queen's gambit-declined version from white, which ended up having an overall peaceful game and by move 20, the queens have been traded and pawn structure was in a balance. The first game is not a game that seems to require a deep level analysis, most pieces just get traded, and each bobby and spasky are left with only the same color bishop, and 6 pawns on each side. Fischer by endgame decides to ignore sparky's attack with one pawn, and decides to eat an unguarded bishop at h2 black. Boras spasky now has trapped the bishop with pawn g3, now there was speculation people like garry kasparov thought fischer could've sacrificed his own h pawn to free his bishop and in-tune creates pawn islands which negates the endgame pawn structure for spasky. But Fischer sacrificed his bishop instead and he ended up resigning the match.

GothamChess. “1972: Bobby Fischer’s World Chess Championship.” YouTube, 5 Apr. 2021, www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCk3bC3XzU8&t=547s&ab_channel=GothamChess. Accessed 19 Mar. 2022.

‌I decided to write a strategy game on this because it shows how ideas are discovered and not as much seen often by human's own thinking, Fischer maybe could've sac-d a few pawns later and potentially drew, but he ended up sacrificing the bishop which ultimately tipped the scale to Spasky's favor, an overall very dramatic but peaceful game, and depended on a lot of pawn structure knowledge at endgame, back then, very few records have been published about deep professional level pawn structure, and now a days we can just assume and copy off of computer ideas, while geniuses like fischer make concept mistaken ideas a few times in pivotal games, however this does not happen often for him, it is one of the most famous games for Fischer and strategy development.

 There was a lot of drama after this, Fischer had complained that people were too distracting on the main stage, and set off a flight back to the U.S., but when his teammates desperately tried to talk him out of it, he changed his mind and demanded only in the condition that they play backstage, would he ever finish his matches against Spasky, Spasky accepted, and it was 2-0, putting Fischer in a hole.

Overall in my perspective: I think Fischer could've performed a lot better with chess engines if he had been born in this era, but in an interview in 2010, i remember him saying that he would've never took interest to chess if the thinking and innovation of best moves was given to you (like engines do) and therefore makes enjoying chess limited because of how much engines taught you about chess theory, he said this according to (Old RJF on chess. Why Fischer hated chess. Who’s the best ever) “youtube.com”. I think there’s some truth to that, did chess engines eliminate fun and innovation after it taught players theory? It’s a topic to discuss later within this post.

3.2: After these events:

The match was the best of 24 games for the world title, and Fischer mounted one of the greatest comebacks of all time, soundly winning by 12.5 to 8.5. However, Fischer refused to defend his title three years later personally. Due to Fischer’s seemingly ridiculous demands that FIDE could not grant, he was forced to vacate the world champion title. These demands were, according to (Bolya Uchigbaatar) “chess.stackexchange.com”, Bobby Fischers had three demands:

1. Not counting the draws, first to 10 to win wins the championship
2. If the result is 9-9, then the title goes to Fischer but the pierce money is split evenly
3. There will be an unlimited number of games.

The first was accepted and the other two were rejected by FIDE delegates. Hence the match was forfeited and the champion title was given to Anatoly Karpov, his challenger. Fischer then disappeared from the chess world, until resurfacing in 1992 to play a match with his old rival, Boris Spassky. After winning that match, Fischer again disappeared from the chess scene, leaving behind more question marks than any other world champion.

Karpov, Kasparov, rise of Computers, and Carlsen

At this point in time in 1975, Anatoly Karpov became the 12th world champion, he is known for his solid positional style and reputable fantastic technique, which has been described like a “boa constrictor” (History of Chess | From early stages to Magnus). Former Indian World Champion Viswanathan Anand stated that “Karpov isn’t interested in his own plan, but he will keep foiling yours”, which then became a focus of play style and influenced many games around the 1970s; solid positional style (History of Chess | From early stages to Magnus). Karpov reigned as the world champion for ten years, and was extremely active at the highest level of chess around up until 1998. Furthermore, in his career books were published under his name, and he became very active in Russian politics.

Twitter, 2022, twitter.com/dgriffinchess/status/830024155663839233. Accessed 19 Mar. 2022.

‌Karpov’s dominance in the 1970s and 1980s wasn’t overcome until the emergence of another Russian Grandmaster; Garry Kasparov. In 1984, the first of five Karpov-Kasparov world championship matches occurred. These two chess legends played a total of 144 games, 104 were draws, Kasparov won 21 times, and Karpov won 19 times.

Abacaba. “The History of the Top Chess Players over Time.” YouTube, 3 Apr. 2016, www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2DHpW79w0Y&ab_channel=Abacaba. Accessed 19 Mar. 2022.

Kasparov would hold the world champion title for 15 years after that, which was interestingly the second longest uninterrupted reign after Lasker’s 27. Chess theory at this point had advanced greatly between the early 20th century (Lasker’s reign) and the late 20th century. Due to the evolution of chess theory (few discussed within this video), Pasparov not only had more world class opposition, but considerably stronger opposition when compared to Lasker. Evidence of this difference in the figure above, shows just how amazing and how chess theory evolved and changed throughout history and how the playerbase learned along the way, but I think a part of the game stayed in the same way in the sense that people were always independent of their own discoveries and skills, even mistakes and blunders; there was no computer that told you you had a blunder on move 35 in that one pawn square based on the thousands and thousands of top level chess it analyzed, it was just you and the board, and the piece of paper you took home after your tournament while you sit there thinking for hours and hours of how you could be and do better. I think that’s an aspect we lost after chess engines; or it took a fundamental element of chess and the challenge behind the game. I think that was what Fischer was talking about when he said Chess engines stole the “fun” from the game, according to (Old RJF on chess. Why Fischer hated chess. Who’s the best ever) “youtube.com”.

Kasparov consistently remained head and shoulders above all competition until he was dethroned by Kramnik in 2000. However, he remained the highest rated player in the world until 2005, becoming the first person to ever breach 2800 elo.

“File:Kasparov-34.Jpg - Wikimedia Commons.” Wikimedia.org, 2018, commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kasparov-34.jpg. Accessed 19 Mar. 2022.

‌

4.0:The rise of Chess computers and the loss of World Champion Garry Kasparov

According to (Chess Champion Garry Kasparov Loses Game To Computer) “History.com”, Kasparov was the first major player to heavily use computers for preparation and study of the game, and he defeated the strongest computers of the late 1980s and early 1990s in several highly publicized matches (Chess Champion Garry Kasparov Loses Game To Computer). However, he was then defeated by a supercomputer Deep Blue in 1997, the first time a computer in history had defeated a world champion. This was then a match that changed the course of time for chess forever. Although Kasparov has always maintained that human collusion was involved in helping the computer select the correct move at crucial moments, the world champion did lose and this set the bases for the complete domination of computer engines in the game of chess. However, deep blue was dismantled after the match. Garry Kasparov used chess computers to improve his theory and play, so I will not be analyzing his games for pre-chess engine development games, although I will analyze his games for after chess engine development.

Analyzing how strategic thinking changed before and after engines came to prominence will allow us to understand how theory changed as well. So now we will be analyzing 2 games from before chess engine’s prominence in 2019

5.0: For the Analysis of games prior of Chess engines:

5.0.1: The Opera game-Paris 1858: Paul Morphy v.s Duke Karl

Paul Morphy begins with e4; development went with d6 from black after nf3 from white, this was Karl’s first mistake even though it’s a more engagive move played popularally from back then in that time period, but it blocks the black squared bishop’s development. Paul Morphy knew a little more ahead of his time about pawn development and placement; when he engaged black’s pawn again and again correctly to fight for the middle of the board. Do please be reminded that pawn structure wasn’t as known even at all in top level gameplay for a few decades to come so Paul Morphy was levels ahead of his time with his aggressiveness and good theory knowledge. Since that period of Morphy’s prominence, people played very aggressively to have fun back then. Morphy also shows good predictions of his opposition’s moves, forcing Karl to make moves that would avoid his king getting exposed but in return sacrificing some of his pieces like a few pawns, etc. Morphy also showed some knowledge of a concept known as danger levels, it can be shown in the image down below:

Source: GothamChess. “The Most Famous Chess Game of All Time.” YouTube, 16 Apr. 2021, www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzGTG04u1gs&ab_channel=GothamChess. Accessed 24 Mar. 2022.

‌Paul Morphy was not a strategic, he was an artist; he didn’t concern to play solid with just a pawn up, he wanted to knock this person right out so he can go to watch an Opera play that was happening in the other room as they were playing. He played knight plays c3 after the move shown above to block the threat of his king and queen being forked, he remained constant flexibility of his defense of his king, as we can see the queen and bishop isn’t very flexible because as Morphy played bishop g5, it bound his pieces, forcing Karl to watch as his defense comes crashing down hopeless to escape. 

Morphy kept engaging and exchanging his pieces until his king is more or less exposed, danger levels are increasing as more of Morphy’s pieces are cornering black’s king, then bishop takes d7, it might look like you have repelled the threat, queen to b8 check; the beautiful knockout check because now the king cannot move, the knight has to take and the rook can go d8 and Morphy wins. Morphy has shown why he is Morphy.

What to take away: Even though we mentioned it above, you get to really appreciate the chess geniuses throughout the game of chess and who has sat in the seat in front. Paul Morphy showed in this game that even though the style and play was very aggressive and peculiar; he cornered on his opponents lack of theory because a lot wasn’t discovered back then and he used that to his advantage. Even without engines people can notice and become good in a brink of time with or without the use of artificial intelligence. Because in a game like chess, you can’t hope to wonder there has to be that series of moves out of the billions of possibilities that one day beats modern day engines, and prodigies like Morphy; show those progresses ahead of their time and knowledge, and achieving that level of play in any craft is possible.

5.0.2: Game 3 of Spassky vs Bobby Fischer:

Spaskky got a 2-1 lead, and bobby fischer ultimately played really solid for the endgame, opposite colored bishops were played looking like a draw, but bobby fischer made some moves which the chess engine disagreed it was the best moves, but Bobby ended up winning and found a flaw in the database from where i'm looking at it. 

Spassky’s first mistake; is he put pawns on the center of the board with no solid structure, rather to just incubate those squares, and depending on how you look at it, it can still be okay because the middle of the board is the one of the most important elements to conquer in modern chess theory about pawn structure and development. Bobby starts with one of the most hard and newfound chess openings of that period: the Grünfeld opening; even for top level players today, struggle and stay away because it’s a very complex theory and in the modern databases which top players use. In this game Spassky uses the russian system, it looks weird because as a beginner: why would you use multiple one of your moves for your queen IN EARLY GAME to move around the board? As a beginner and even intermediate players; you are told not to do this. White actually has his pieces pointed towards black’s queen side which ultimately later comes to bite black in the foot. But Bobby Fischer is Bobby and has good knowledge of analysis and a fair amount of chess theory because it was around this time period that chess theory really became popular among top level gameplay according to (Gotham chess) “Youtube.com”.

White hasn’t finished progressing his pieces because he just spent a few moves pushing black’s queen side, he tries to be confrontational with Bobby Fischer as he played black bishop to g5. He plays knight to a4 after; Bobby’s first punch to Spassky during this game. Because it pushes white to take the knight but leave the pawn in the king’s line undefended, allowing several of black’s pieces get develop into not just the middle of the board, but towards his king trapping him in the back corner. A few moves after this interaction, you can see this position:

You might be saying: well isn’t the position equal if you count all the pieces? But white’s king is stuck in the middle of the board and as soon as bishop goes somewhere like b2 or c3, unless white does something blacks just completely losing, a few exchanges later white does escape this and castle but white (Bobby) has much more development and an extra pawn, and in that position, Spassky withdrew, giving it a 2-2 score at the championship.

Overall chess engines taught us the best moves based on databases, but there will always be a better move or a better way to play the game of chess. And so I am extremely confident that one day a genius will be born who surpasses his previous mastery of the game and surpasses and innovate chess engines and our understanding of the game.

Source of help with analysis and pictures shown above: 

GothamChess. “Best Chess Game of the 20th Century.” YouTube, 23 Mar. 2021, www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRoTJntvv_8&ab_channel=GothamChess. Accessed 24 Mar. 2022.

5.1: Game analysis of post engines:

‌ Now it’s time to Analyze the 3 games after the uprising of Kasparov’s/the world champion at the times’ loss to a computer, this is a point in time where computers really came to recognition in the play of the games of chess. What better way to analyze how chess computers changed the play of chess than to analyze the game that changed it all in the first place.

5.1.1:Game one: Game between the big event itself; Deep Blue Computer vs Garry Kasparov THE FINAL GAME (humanity vs machines)- 1996-1997: 

The game starts with Garry as black and Deep Blue as white, white plays e4 and black plays the Karo-o-khan defense, now up until this point, Garry has been known to not playing the Karo-o-Khan at all up to this point in tournaments and recorded games. Each side played good moves, do mind that back then computers were not as optimized nor as fast so each side had as much time as a normal FIDE- rapid game, and the overall event took a little over 3 hours. So they had a pretty solid game,  up until move 17 where they have this position:

Garry Kasparov knew that until this point since he had pressured the knight onto a sacrifice on the e6 square, it was a good move, but what he didn’t know was that deep blue had hundreds of openings already learned into great detail, and because back then opening moves were a fairly new concept, and so the computer understood that sacrificing it’s knight for 1-2 pawns on the e square as we see now, had a colossal long term effect onto the endgame, Kasparov was surprised because to the world’s knowledge, computer’s hadn’t had that opening book knowledge thus having no idea this was possible even though Garry went into it knowing that the previous move (pawn h6 for black) was dangerous, but he played it anyway and the computer made him pay.

Moves are played and we get the position above, now because white has castled and is pressing the king’s line on the e-file, the effect of that full knight piece which we just lost is not felt, in other words deep blue isn’t affected for now. Garry then tries to open up a pawn pushing it forward twice; which tries to give more mobilization to his back pieces and building upon structure and progress his pieces, but then Deep blue immediately pushes that pawn and punishes Garry Kasparov.

Forcing his bishop to fill in the back corner to protect the danger levels of the king side, deep blue, then puts it’s rook e1 and bishop f5, pinning the pawn and forcing the queen into being stuck in a dangerous position, if black’s queen moves away; white takes that pawn and would be detrimental as they would have complete control over the middle squares, as well as the king would be totally exposed. So after rook takes e6 and trades the bishop as well, forcing black to sacrificing their queen, and even a beginner would understand that when the world champion loses his queen against a computer who has a queen and has been playing good moves and a few best moves, anyone would see it’s the computer’s win. Finally, after that it was pawn to c4, because black had moved their knight to d5, and that pawn is now forking the knight and pawn with the queen’s help in this position below, and it was at this point that Garry Kasparov would resign because even if you take that pawn, you would trade until the queen is left with the king completely exposed on the c file and it’s a loss completely.

Conclusion of this game: 

Obviously this game was a rollercoaster, but out of all I think it shows the beauty and why chess is such a beautiful game. Garry Kasparov played a completely new opening based on his understanding in hopes that the computer would be caught off guard, but even though he made some mistakes, he included solid understandings of danger levels, pawn structure and good chess theory with respect to that time period. It shows the risk that humanity takes, if one is told that the safe option was the only way to win, we wouldn’t be enjoying chess at all. I think with regards to what Bobby Fischer said and I mentioned above as aswell; with all this theory, it really kills the fun of the game, and yes a computer harddrive that can analyze millions of positions in moments of time to find the best solid is amazing in it’s own right, Garry Kasparov came, he played a new opening on live TV, he applied what he learned over the years and risked a lot of things. I think Garry was one of the winners in that room for that event, and we should recognize his performance, rather than outline something that was bound to happen at the speed technology was evolving in the last few decades.

5.1.2: Post-chess engine game 2; ALPHA ZERO VS STOCKFISH (computer vs computer):

Deep mind team at Google created AlphaZero, they gave it 4 hours and the basic rules of chess after it finished development. The algorithm played millions of games with itself and was then pinned against the strongest computer at that time; stockfish. The game started off with white as alpha zero and black as stockfish, in playing against itself, it really likes playing d4, c4, knight f3, stockfish generally responds with a play known as queen’s indian defense, intending to go bishop b7 and bishop e7 to have VERY strong bishops, and later come in with center pawns as black.

We can see here black played bishop b6, letting your queenside pawns progress, then alphazero plays the move d5, they exchange two pawns and essentially white forces black to move his bishop back to b7, now it’s after this that Alphazero showed how much it love piece sacrificing, well you could just say black wins the d5 pawn after those two pawn trades, and then alphazero… castles, it showing here that it loves to leave material in order to progress it’s own play and pieces. We get a series of exchanges for the next 12 moves and we end up in this position:

In this position alphazero played rook d6, a shocking move to the naked eye, after black takes and white takes back on the f3 square, you might say where’s white’s attack, everything is protected, well it’s pawn h4, then black tries to progress his queen by moving to the a5 square in two moves, but alphazero rejects that idea of black progressing his pawns and goes rook d1, and after two moves we now get queen e1, we allow that for stockfish. 

It baited black to pushing it’s pawn forward in the c line, and trades it off, alphazero loves king mobility and as we can see, it’s completely safe. 

After they transferred to this position with a little back and forth play from both sides and as we can see, alphazero pushed it’s h pawn up to forcibly stop black’s king mobility, which according to (Gothamchess) “youtube.com”, is a concept Magnus Carlson (the current world champion) learned from Alphazero and applied it to tournament play in 2020. It’s a long term endgame weakness, alphazero sacrificed it’s rook, and progressed it’s pieces so it trapped and buchered black’s house and escape route.

Rest of the game is just AlphaZero moving its queen closer to the rook and pawn so the queen is in jail, something I have never seen in my life is a queen in jail. So if the queen is in jail it tries to break out and ends up sacrificing itself, and in that piece position, alphazero wins because white can just make another queen or take the rook with that a pawn’s progression and in a queen vs 1 rook endgame while white has a bishop as well, it’s completely stockfish’s victory.

Conclusion of the game:

I have seen things I never get to see, multiple sacrifices of pawns and pieces that would normally result in you losing the endgame piece war, multiple times the king was used as bait to lure the opponent’s pieces, and the way in general how Alphazero understands piece formation and long-term play is revolutionary, no human nor computer has sacrificed their rook to get their queen closer to the other rook. We can take away that these strategies contradict every book on piece value and solid play even between grandmaster levels, but that’s what makes Alphazero so deadly in my opinion, it sacrificed it’s pieces for time (which was not mentioned above), for formation and long term effect, it revolutionizes the idea of theory as a whole, and while humans may not be able to understand Alphazero’s understanding of those concepts, even something as simple as moving your pawns to cut off mobilization of the opponent's king, you can take away just like how the World Champion did.

Every picture and analysis help is from: 

GothamChess. “How AlphaZero Completely CRUSHED Stockfish.” YouTube, 13 May 2021, www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dT6CR9_6l4&ab_channel=GothamChess. Accessed 24 Mar. 2022.

5.1.3: Post engine analysis game 3-2006 toilet drama world championship match 2nd game

Vladmir Kramnik won the first game in a game that was 6 hours long, systematic opening approach by Kramnik was shown by slob defense

Normal slob opening and play with standard setup with the first 25 moves, all book moves. 

We have to give regard from this position as on move 26, Kramnik goes rook c4 and rook a1 takes, this rook was at the other side of the board to take this pawn. Some white pawn development is seen in white progressing to h4, and black rook b4 and queen b5, not to trade the queen, but he’s up two pawns while leaving his pieces at the king’s side. So white sacrifices his queen because Kramnik uses danger level knowledge and shows that if he doesn’t sacrifice his queen, in 10 moves, apparently both Gotham and stockfish (computer) in this position sees a mate in 10.

So after in this position, white queen sacrifices after black takes g6, queen takes back on g6 allowing black’s knight to take it, but king is cornered if Kramnik takes back with the pawn so he doesn’t do that, instead the queen remains on the board and takes the knight after moving sidewards to h6, and then bishop takes back on f8 after the knight is taken. After that encounter, they both trade off some pawn and Kramnik is up a pawn and rook, white has knight and bishop.

White’s pawn doesn’t mean anything because black’s pawns is on that side of the board. Kramnik won because he is up a few pieces and Toopalov resigned.

WHY HAVE I SHOWN YOU THIS MATCH?

The matches are now 3-1 in favor of Kramnik and it’s best of 12, so he has to win 6.5 to win. There was a day in between the games for prep and other reasons. However, the manager of Topalov filed a complaint that Kramnik was going to the bathroom too much and something had to be done. We have the restroom and the bathroom. They said they somehow got into the cameras of Kramnik’s resting room for the matches and said he was always going to the toilets in the middle of his matches. The way this works, is for a FIDE supported world championship tournament according to thechessworld.com (Kramnik Caught Cheating in Bathroom), each player (white or black) have their own delocated bathrooms, so it created a stir because a lot of people started to bring controversial opinion on the matter because we have to remember that Topalov was the man who brought down Garry Kasparov at his peak, the organizing committee shut down the individual bathrooms. Kramnik did not come and forfeited the game and it was now 4-2, president of FIDE flew in to the tournament and negotiated that to open up the restrooms, but what they didn’t tell the players was in the middle of the matches they brought a security team to literally tear apart the walls and search everything in the bathrooms and they found a little cable in one of the ceiling tiles of the bathrooms the players were using. The chess was unbelievable, Kramnik had sat down and played a very nice game of chess, and he explained during this drama that it would be impossible to make use of that cable if he didn’t have a computer with him and some special tools which he wouldn’t have in the middle of a match. Later it was figured out that Kramnik would barely win in this match by 0.5 points in the end, but I wanted to show this game to you all because in the history of chess, people have used chess engines like Iphones in bathrooms and using stockfish in there and people would be playing extremely well suddenly and the community doesn’t seem to be too accepting of this new technology and it’s progression of it’s portability, accessibility and other factors. Whether Kramnik actually cheated is still unknown but the lesson that comes with it is clear: chess engines has also introduced a new level of possibilities in regards with cheating and it’s something you can’t always catch, so this technology is possibly doing more bad behind the scenes while still helping players learn, just in different ways, regardless if used wrongly or morally correctly.

All images and analysis help is from:

 GothamChess. “2 Grandmasters. 1 Toilet Drama...” YouTube, 16 May 2021, www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap77WvxkotY&ab_channel=GothamChess. Accessed 24 Mar. 2022.

6.0:

Conclusion of engines: Engines are a revolutionary technology to the game of chess, it challenges players in ways where anyone would essentially be playing a grandmaster with top level theory and knowledge, and some other engines like alphazero and deep blue completely bring new ideas and knowledge not used or noticed at all by the chess world. It goes without saying that it might kill the fun aspects like Bobby mentioned about the game and theory development, and it can be used to cheat and help people unfairly win against others which is not okay. One thing’s for sure, for the last few decades this technology has progressed so far that I play against my treadmill every time I need to workout at the comfort of my own home and I still lose, I, a 1800 player, losing to a treadmill that was bought in 2016. We can’t say for sure if engines will lead to the downfall of chess or the benefit of understanding and a new way to understand chess as a whole. Chess engines are getting stronger and stronger, because they have to be.