Caro-Kann Defense | THE WILL TO ATTACK!
#carokann #tactics
This was a very nice game that demonstrates a particular middlegame tactical approach. My opponent, a new friend from the UK, was experimenting with the Caro-Kann Defense (1. e3 c6) and played a relatively unusual move in the opening (2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nd7). I had a sense that Nd7 was probably a mistake, but as I wasn't sure whether it was some sort of tricky line, I opted to not take in the centre and developed more conservatively (4. Nf3).
On move 6, I short-castled and given Black's development thus far, I took the perspective that Black was probably going to eventually castle kingside. So, the general strategical approach - attack Black's king on the predicted kingside. Tactics: close the centre with a line of pawns pointing to the side of attack, and immediately mobilise my pieces to attack on the kingside.
I've recently discovered the many witty quips and aphorisms of early 20th century chess master Savielly Tartakower, and this one seems appropriate:
"The first essential for an attack is the will to attack."
You can often outplay your opponent simply by thinking about and planning the attack early!
So, with (7. e5) I "close the fence" to the centre before Black had even castled. I'm starting the planning of the attack of whether the Black king will be, not necessarily where they are now! The next couple of moves, I rotate my queen's knight to the kingside, and then really slam the fence shut with a connect four. The next couple after that, I rotate my knights, so they are ready to attack the h7 and f7 squares. Black does indeed castle on move 12 and this was a mistake [+4] as they have castled into my impending attack with both knights, the bishop pair, and my queen!
Immediately on move 13, I strike! Stockfish doesn't like my plan, but there is a psychological method here. I sacrifice one knight to punch a hole in Black's defences, and then immediately trade a bishop to knock out Black's only immediate defender, a knight. Then, I infiltrate with my queen with check. And then, infiltrate with an aggressive second bishop. The mental narrative this creates is one that I have an unstoppable momentum and that my moves are creating the initiative.
The second bishop (16. Bg5) was completely a bluff. I knew that Black could defend against it and I didn't have an attack. However, what Black would likely have calculated first was to trade bishops, drawn in by my momentum. They would likely have calculated that if they initiated the bishop trade, that I would have a winning position. At the same time, I was banking on the fact that they wouldn't want to move their pawns in front of their king as it would seem to be weakening the king's defence. And then when they looked further, but potentially without much depth, that if I initiated the bishop trade, their position was defended.
And I was right! Black spent over two minutes calculating the position, and eventually decided it was safe to push down the queenside. This was a blunder! Because after (17. Bxe7), Black only had one defender left of the g5 square - their queen! With (18. Ng5), checkmate was unavoidable unless Black traded their queen for my knight. Black couldn't bring themselves to do that and two moves later was looking at checkmate by knight and queen. GG!
The big takeaway from this game is the quotation from Tartakower's - "the first essential for an attack is the will to attack"! You are more likely to predict the future flow of the game and winning, by planning and creating that very position!
Game on chess.com: https://www.chess.com/game/live/89005267385
