My Brilliant Win vs IM Jay Bonin via "Simple Chess" Method at Masters Event October 2007

In this blog post, I showcase my "Simple Chess" method in a brilliant win vs the Iron Man of Chess, IM Jay Bonin.

In the first round of this tournament, I defeated 3-time US Champion GM Nick De Firmian for my first-ever over-the-board victory against a Grandmaster.

I wanted to show everyone that my first round victory over a GM wasn't a fluke, that it wasn't "by accident". I had lost in round 2 to FM Asa Hoffman in fairly typical fashion: I won the exchange although he received some compensation, I got low on time, I played inaccurately, blundered, and he won. 

I had an opportunity to redeem myself now vs. IM Jay Bonin. Jay has played so many tournament games in his career that he is, without a doubt, the Iron Man of chess. I wanted to show that I had what it takes to defeat another strong-titled player, so I was especially focused on this contest.

An excellent chess book that I had recently read at the time was "Simple Chess" by GM Michael Stean. This book isolates basic elements and illustrates them through Master and Grandmaster games, breaking down the mystique of strategy into easy-to-understand ideas. More than a lesson in fundamentals, it illustrates the value of acquiring small, permanent advantages and saving the attack for later.

Thus, it was my goal in this game with the White pieces to play in the style of "Simple Chess". I aimed to acquire small advantages slowly but surely, building up my position in order to launch a later attack out of absolute strength. Simple yet Solid. It was GM Tigran Petrosian who said if you want to play for a big advantage, then it is best to play for a very small one. The reason for this is simple: if you have a very large advantage from the outset, you will tip off your opponent to your intentions, and he will be on guard. If, instead, you play for a very small advantage, he may miss the point of your plan, and you can catch him by surprise.

My opening choice of 1. g3 was for a few reasons. First off, I play the English Opening as part of my main repertoire. The English Opening is a Flank opening. White plays on the side of the board but directly influences the center, specifically the d5 square. In the English Opening, White places his pawn on c4, his knight on c3, and fairly typically fianchettoes his kingside bishop to all hone in on the d5 square. The d5 square is over-protected and serves as the strong point. White may either attack on the queenside by advancing his pawns there OR play e2-e4, transposing (or switching) into a Botvinnik structure for possible play on the kingside. White also often retains the option of transposing later to a queen-pawn game by playing d2-d4 at some point in the next few moves. g2-g3 is a move that is typically played in the English Opening, as it prepares a fianchetto of the kingside bishop.

Another reason I chose to play 1. g3 is because IM Jay Bonin has told me in the past that he personally likes playing the move 1. g3. He's mentioned that he has used it to good effect vs. GM Leonid Yudasin, scoring very well with it. It prevents Black from fianchettoing his queenside bishop against the English Opening set-up, which many strong players can be fans of. This method of play can often lead to Hedgehog-type structures for Black, which is a very tough defense to crack. This set-up by Black with a fianchettoed queenside bishop is an attempt for Black to neutralize White's control over the long diagonal in the battle over the key central square d5. 

So my move 1. g3 was chosen for psychological (Jay was a fan of this move, so he may not like facing it himself) and strategic reasons (it prevents Black from fianchettoing his queenside bishop while also perfectly fitting in with the English Opening set-up). 

Transpositions in chess are an important tool of the chess master. As the saying goes, "All roads lead to Rome!" There is often more than one way to reach a typical opening setup. 

The classic example of opening transposition is starting a game with 1. c4, and then transposing into a queen-pawn game a few moves later. Bobby Fischer used this move order to play a queen-pawn game vs. Boris Spassky in the 1972 World Championship Match, Game 6. Fischer wanted to play a queen-pawn game vs. Spassky, but he did not want to allow the possibility of facing the Nimzo-Indian Defense, which has a very solid reputation. Fischer was able to sidestep the Nimzo-Indian Defense and use his opening preparation vs. Spassky's Queen's Gambit Declined Tartakower Variation. The result was that Fischer played an absolute masterpiece of a game, culminating in a beautiful exchange sacrifice (38. Rxf6!) with his attack on Spassky's king crashing through.