Kotronias-Gufeld...A Work of Art!
L to R: Maia Chiburdanidze, Nana Ioselani, Aivars Gipslis, Nona Gaprindashvili, Nana Alexandria, Kasparov, Eduard Gufeld.

Kotronias-Gufeld...A Work of Art!


Looking for inspiration, to see if I play in the Icelandic Chess Club Championship at the end of February, I find myself looking at Gufeld's games....

And then I found this jewel!

I know, I know, beauty is a subjective thing....but when I went through this game, the final possible position (White resigned 2 moves before) is, for me, a work of Art!

Again, as I have mentioned in other posts, these games are found in Gufeld's book,
"My Life in Chess".

This is easily one of the best book in my chess library! Highly inspiring and instructive, with stories, deep reflections and ideas, and tons of great King's Indian and Dragon games!

This game is the first in a chapter titled: "What Kind of Games Do We Appreciate?"

Here are Gufeld's words of introduction to the chapter and the game:

"It is clear, the reader would say. First of all we appreciate pithy, profound, beautiful games.

All this is true. But as for me, I do not like the games-even beautiful ones- that are marred by mistakes on both sides. As is well known, Emanuel Lasker priviledged such chess duels, those filled with dramatic events, resourceful skirmishes and struggles. I do not deny that there is an original aesthetics to such games. But I prefer those in which victory is achieved in the absence of errors on the part of one's opponent- to say nothing about the winner: his play shold be irreproachable.

Let us take by way of example the following game. I like its finale. In the end I want to rejoice that I was in luck to create an impressive chess work, and I want to compare it with some famous creation in the fine arts....

But there is one thing in this game which still embarrasses me. It seems to me my opponent could have played much better, more dangerously. And if that it so it means that somewhere I was not playing in the best way. That is why this game loses a little in my estimation, though Lasker, no doubt, would have liked it. I am not even consoled by the purely sporting aspect of the game: that had I not played so recklessly, had I not taken risks and endangered my position, a draw would have been the likely result. Een the creative aspect is not entirely consoling- that without my earlier inaccuracy the fine endgame which ensued might never have been. the endgame is really perfect. But what about the game as a whole? Even in the post-mortem I could not find better moves for Black. Perhaps my rival also had no better moves, besides those made in the game? Then the honor of this game is saved!"