A good bishop on b2!
A good bishop on b2
Let me first make clear the difference between a good and a bad bishop on b2
Please look at the following position:
So would you like this position if you would have white? I do not think so!-
White has two ineffective bishops (hindered by their own pawns) and his small lead in development will soon be gone ( Bd7 and Re8) . Black minor pieces are better and could become perhaps a decicive plus in endgame!
Now look at this position!:
Yes, it is almost the same as in the previous diagram. With one difference. The pawn on c3 is missing. But it changes the evaluation of the position completly. Now the bishop on b2 has become a very strong one and attacks queen on f6. Black has problems to maintain the balance.
The second position is out of the game Tartakower - Tarrasch (Semmering 1926 ) and in his gamebook Tartakower said, that it was his best he ever played. So here the whole story:
1. The opening :
Will he be good, will he be bad?
After the opening phase it is not clear, whether the pair of bishops (white) will be more worth than the better pawn structure (black). The future of Bc1 will decide it!
2. the early middlegame:
White offers a pawn to free his bishop
Intuively Tartakower might have felt, that he has something to do for his Bc1. Therefore he offered a centerpawn to free the bishop. In retrospect we can say, he would have better declined the pawnoffer
3. The Finale:
pawn advance and decisive attack at kingside. Bb2 supports it from the background
White has the control of a1- g7 diagonal (bishop and queen) and e-file (rooks). But black stays deep in defense like in fortress.White comes at kingside forward with his pawns to break the wall around the black king.- Then he uses e- and f-file for the final attack. - Bb2 is effective out of the background
In this game the strong Bb2 made the difference. So here another game, perhaps for another reading day,- with a strong Bb2. It is my best game :