I guess it’s known that “TN” stands for theoretical novelty. Could be only “N” as well. What is a theoretical novelty? The new move, never played before? Or, on the other hand, the move that stands behind the significant idea, never seen before?


Well, we could say that almost every game would  present some new move. In my opinion, what defines TN is the significance. However, who is the one who could estimate it?


Chess Informant has found the formula in 1971. Starting from 11th volume of this traditional publication, the jury has convened to vote on the best theoretical novelty from the previous volume.


The jurists? There were seventy of them! Let’s see the full list of jurists in a period of 1971-2011:


List of Chess Informant Jury members (70):

Timman (74 times), Salov (55), Anand (53), Benjamin (52), Lutz (50), Jussupow (48), Larsen (35), Bareev (26), Ftacnik (25), Hjartarson (24), Mikhalchisin (22), Uhlmann (21), Botvinnik, Parma (18), Keene (15), R.Byrne (13), Browne, Illescas (12), Florian, Krogius, Matanovic (11), Polugaevsky, Razuvaev, Ki.Georgiev, Beliavsky (10), Ivkov, Gligoric (9), Geller, Kavalek (8), Suetin, Miles, Marjanovic (6), Tal, Adorjan, Chandler, Hort, Ubilava, Wolff (5), Taimanov, Vasiukov, Sosonko, Gheorghiu, Vaganian (4), Shamkovich, Petrosian, Matulovic, Ribli, Chernin, Lautier (3), Averbakh, Gufeld, M.Gurevich, Dolmatov (2), Keres, Korchnoi, Stein, Balashov, Lilienthal, Gulko, Gipslis, Sveshnikov, Kotov, Tukmakov, Ciocaltea, Filip, Padevsky, Christiansen, Psakhis, Portisch (1).


Quote by Jan Timman:


"Chess Informant" has been a leading source of information for decades. In the past the emphasis has been mainly on openings, resulting in a tradition that a jury judges most important novelties of each volume. I have been part of this tradition for decades. It is important to establish which are the most important novelties, since it shows the development in various openings. I have always-and I still am! - been doing this work with pleasure.


Once, and only once, was the nine member jury in complete concordance regarding the winning novelty. It was like a once in a lifetime moment that the stars align in perfect harmony, where one game scores above all others as a clear winner with the maximum ninety points!




The game was published in Chess Informant 42. The winner, famous English grandmaster Anthony Miles, was the annotator in the book, too.  Here is raw version. Take a look at 18th move played by White! 




Our new book 1000 TN!! collects the best of the best 1,000 theoretical novelties from Chess Informants 11 to 110 and provides an adventurous journey through the development of chess openings during the last forty years. Moreover, in every theoretical line, we add the latest word on the state of theory.


 In the "contest" of TN's who actually won the game was of lesser importance than whose idea contributed the most to chess theory. There are sixty players among the winners, with current world champion Viswanathan Anand at the top of the list with nine novelties, one ahead of former world champion Anatoly Karpov. In a meantime, Anand won one more award (Informant 111) so the total number of his wins is 10!


List of TN winners from 1971-2011.(60):

Anand (9 times), Karpov (8), Kasparov, Kramnik (5), Topalov, Velimirovic (4), Shirov (3), Ljubojevic, Beliavsky, Timman, M.Gurevich, Adorjan, Korchnoi, Oll, Svidler, Morozevich (2), Petrosian, Spassky, Gligoric, Tseshkovsky, R.Byrne, Sibarevic, Perenyi, Vitolins, Portisch, Averbakh, Chiburdanidze, Polugaevsky, Geller, Browne, McCambridge, Tal, Miles, Seirawan, Alburt, Van der Sterren, Murey, A.Sokolov, Adams, Gelfand, Illescas, Khalifman, Atalik, Sakaev, Zvjaginsev, Grischuk, Milov, Gallagher, Rogozenco, Ponomariov, Leko, Nielsen, Shariyazdanov, Johannessen, Van Wely, Volokitin, Karjakin, Naiditsch, Dominguez, Riazantsev (1).


Quote by Viswanatan Anand:


"Chess Informant" has been the definitive source of chess information since its inception. Due to the high quality analysis by the best players, it is essential to opening preparation. The jury lists help the reader measure the pulse of the development of the game and the most important trends.


Complete list of Anand's best TN's:


1) Anand - Kamsky, Sanghi Nagar (m/1) 1994 - Informant 61/345

2) Anand - Tkachiev, Moscow (m/1) 2001 - Informant 83/326

3) Anand - Kasimdzhanov, Hyderabad 2002 - Informant 86/137

4) Anand - Bologan, Dortmund 2003 - Informant 88/77

5) Anand - Adams, San Luis 2005 - Informant 94/267

6) Anand - Kramnik, Bonn (m/6) 2008 - Informant 104/146

7) Anand - Leko, Moscow 2009 - Informant 107/132

8) Anand - Topalov, Sofia (m/4) 2010 - Informant 108/134

9) Topalov - Anand, Nanjing 2010 - Informant 110/243

10) Anand-Wang Hao, Wijk aan Zee 2011 - Informant 111/268


You would allow me to recommend you:


1000 TN!!, Paperback, 640 pages, January 2012.


Project officially supported by European Chess Union.


Additional info



  • 2 years ago

    NM adypady02

    I bought the book. There's no table of contents! The novelties are in no order (or at least one that I don't understand). Could someone shed some light?

  • 4 years ago


    he he he 

  • 5 years ago


    I'm still a noob with most of the complicated theory (although I have got about twenty-five variants on scholar's mate which all work for different stiuations). The only thing that was a novelty I've seen recently was somebody who doesen't take a pawn when it's right in front of them, and instead pushed pawns forwards to lock everything down.

  • 5 years ago


    is this an article or an advertisment?

  • 5 years ago


    When willl this be available as a download or on a DVD?

  • 5 years ago


    he he he

  • 5 years ago

    GM GMTadic

    @ streetfighter. Well, we should blame jury members :) However, there is parallel contest for best games that started even earlier, in 1966.  Right now, I don't have complete data but Judit Polgar is definetely among the winners, check the link.

    So, we could say that women players are producing the beauty in chess! Not bad at all :) 

Back to Top

Post your reply: