Unopposed
Hi friends! This Olympic-edition of my blog is dedicated to short-track speed skaters. I couldn’t help but think of them as we consider our topic—winning unopposed. They train hard for four years, race in a crowd, and whoever has the best combination of skill, savvy, and more than a little luck will emerge as the victor.
While it’s always a relief to see blunders on the board where I can simply slide forward and coast to the win, I feel even better when I gain a dominant upper hand and outplay or outlast my opponent. Yes, we should always stay on high alert for loose pieces and miscalculations, especially by questioning our own moves, but once we notice a subtle weakness, can we make gradual improvements? If positional play is a bit of a mystery, or you find yourself losing in the middle game, you may need to spend some time learning about how to play unopposed.
Back to TopContents
A Grandmaster’s Solution with an Assist
The term “unopposed” implies an established, static threat for which there are no direct counters. It marks the moment when our opponent has run out of resources. Chess literature often describes pieces as unopposed because there is no enemy piece on their same color (in case of a bishop) or on their files (in the case of passed pawns). Knights can also reach unopposed outposts where they cannot be attacked by a pawn or another minor piece.
One key to unopposed play is the ability to perceive imbalances. Strong players can anticipate and create opportunities based on available squares, open or closed files, ranks, or diagonals. Long-term control of these resources allow them to exploit positions to create create new tactical threats.
In the opening of the under-14 Spanish championship, Santiago Garcia Jimenez gained control of the center, but he faced an interesting crossroads. What would you play if you were White?
The Jimenez mistake makes me think about several well-known openings that feature early minor-piece exchanges, hoping to catalyze an attack. The resulting positional imbalances suggest opportunities, but whether Black or White can impose their will on the game remains to be seen. Consider the following line in the Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense. After White seeks to create early pressure with 2. Bb5, Black responds with the steady 2..Nf6.
White could exchange the c6 knight, and after removing the guard, make an attempt to capture the central e5 pawn. It’s a simple plan but somewhat shortsighted because as the game wears on, White will miss their light-squared bishop, and the reality of the Black’s Bishop pair will be more than enough to overcome their early doubled pawns.
This is a primary reason the exchange variation as a whole has fallen from grace and is no longer considered a powerful option for White. This entire line leads to the simple advice that many coaches give to young players: don’t give up a bishop pair without a clear plan for exploiting that advantage.
If we think about simple imbalances between minor pieces, would you rather play the White or Black pieces from this position?
Black to Play
White has the pair of bishops, but the position is closed, especially in the center. If White could skip ahead three moves and freeze Black’s pieces while doing so, they could get a more open board. But as is, those pawns aren’t going anywhere. One careless misstep can flip the game in Black’s favor.
Black played Nd8, and White didn't assess that move all that well. What do you think Black has in mind?
White's reply was Rd2, giving Black an opportunity to reach an even stronger position. Can you solve the position from puzzle below?
Black to Play and Win
Now for a more sophisticated example: Consider this 1933 game between Salo Flohr and Mikhail Botvinnik in Moscow. I’ve included a combination of notes, my own reflections, Flohr’s published comments, and a few insights from NM Robert Ramirez, who has a lovely review of this match on YouTube. What’s important here is to see how Flohr converts his two-bishop advantage into an unopposed win, especially from moves 19 through 29. After the game, Flohr confessed, “I consider this endgame to be the best that I have played until now."
While most amateurs view bishops as either good or bad—depending on the pawn structure around them—Estaban Lund, the author of The Secret Life of Bad Bishops (Quality Chess, 2014), takes a different approach. He suggests that, in many positions, bishops are double-edged; that is, they could be either good or bad. In the following position, notice the awkward placement of the bishop on e7.
Lund contends that it is not a bad bishop because it fulfills a key role as a goalkeeper. Since there are many pieces still on the board, as long as the bishop has a workable function, it isn’t bad. In fact, as we’ll see White targets both the bishop and its charge (the pawn on d6) to generate a winning breakthrough. Weirdly, to win the "bad" bishop needs to go.
White to Play
FWIW, compare Lund's goalkeeper solution with our opening example. Taking out a goalkeeper only matters if there's a subsequent winning position.
A Grandmaster’s Solution with an Assist
with their choice of engines: Fritz 5.32, Junior 5, Nimzo 99 or Hiarcs 7.32.
Image: Chessbase
I found this fantastic example of unopposed play in Jacob Aagaard’s Grandmaster Preparation. Also, there are brilliant annotations by @dtimmerman online here. They are well worth your time.
Before deciding your next move, you might sit with this puzzle because Black, played by Viswanathan Anand, demonstrates a high level of understanding that we can all benefit from. I might add that notes from the event indicated Anand had twenty minutes on his clock, and he asked Fritz to dig down into this position. You might ask yourself, what’s Black's largest static advantage? If you can discover that, (and it's not apparent at first glance), you can build a plan that cannot be opposed.
In a recent game, I took advantage of an early blunder to go up a full knight. But as the game unfolded, my opponent challenged the center. Above is the position I reached.
My immediate instinct was to take the Rook. I’m up a full piece, why not? The answer is developing more pieces to better squares can lead to an easier win. It would be better to resist the temptation to trade out. This rook is not menacing. Why not push it away? The game notes offer a better approach.
Thanks for reading! I hope this inspires you to think more closely about how you can skate to victory. I'll leave you with one last puzzle.
Black to Play and Win
