Chess strategy from Nunn to Nimzowitsch

I recall the time when I  first faced future Grandmaster John Nunn . He was wearing short trousers and his face barely popped up over the board. Here is the critical position from our very first game, played in the 1963  Surrey Junior Championship.

Nunn (Black) has two passed pawns as meagre compensation for a knight, but White’s extra piece occupies a dominating position , while Black’s pawns provide the only protection for his king, and therefore cannot advance. The lack of  balance is, though, irrelevant, because I was able to force instant checkmate with a Queen sacrifice.

22.Qd8+!!Black resigns 1-0

Of course, 22… Rxd8 permits 23. Rxd8 checkmate

Now John has won the 65+ World Senior Championship held in Terrasini in Italy. Scoring 8½/11 with Lubomir Ftacnik, Nunn won on tie-break, a clear half-a-point ahead of Daniel Campora, Rafael Vaganian and others, in a strong field. Nunn’s final round win against Madeira exemplified the power that typically characterised this exceptional player.

Nunn vs. Madeira, round 11, World +65 Championship, 2023

Equally, I well remember a simultaneous display I organised in 1984, where 12-year-old Michael Adams, succeeded in holding the coming man, Garry Kasparov, to a draw.  This was a sensational success for Mickey, as he is better known, also the universal spider or syncoppi of the chess board, due to his delicately enveloping style.

Mickey also triumphed in a veterans event and is now the 50+ World Senior champion, again winning on tie-break over the Turkish Grandmaster Suat Atalik, with 8½/11. In his fifth round game with Black against IM Prasad, he denied his opponent any momentum, forcing him to resign on move 36 without any realistic possibilities left available.

Prasad vs. Adams, round 5, World +50 Championship, 2023

As the Neiges d’antan inexorably melt away, is the studying of the greats of the past now considered superfluous? With the world’s elite either addicted to offbeat openings such as the bong cloud , or mnemonically chained to vast reams of opening theory, what  could the classics, such as Paul Morphy, for example, teach us about the latest nuances in the Najdorf variation of the Sicilian Defence? Or, what could we learn from Howard Staunton’s games and writings about the most recent refined nuances in the Grünfeld?

Garry Kasparov himself has openly embraced the games of Alexander Alekhine, pointing out that his attacks came like thunderbolts from a clear sky. To crown it all, AlphaZero has been producing AI masterpieces, which are redolent of the slow-burning, strategically-based sacrifices of Mikhail Tal and Leonid Stein.

Most strikingly  of all, at a time when antisemitism is once again rearing its hideous head, it is worthwhile recalling the achievements of Aron Nimzowitsch, the great Jewish teacher, thinker, Grandmaster and writer. Nimzo introduced such memorable phrases as : “the passed pawn’s lust to expand”, “first restrain, then blockade, finally destroy’” and “the mysterious rook move”. Brilliant phraseology often aids comprehension, and Nimzowitsch was a master of the telling epithet.

Nimzowitsch elevated the interpretation of blockading strategy to new heights, as in his celebrated win with the black pieces against Johner from Dresden 1926. This was notably the forerunner of the Hübner system in the Nimzo-Indian, which Bobby Fischer deployed to such devastating effect in game five of his celebrated match victory against the world champion Boris Spassky in 1972.

Johner vs. Nimzowitsch, Dresden, 1926

Spassky vs. Fischer, Reykjavik, 1972

Nimzowitsch is regarded by many as the author of what might be termed the chess players’ strategic Bible, My System, but excoriated by others as irrelevant or at times even incomprehensible.

First of all, let me establish Nimzowitsch’s credentials as a role model.

In terms of opening theory, his most enduring contributions have been the Nimzo-Indian Defence and the complex of systems starting with 1. b3 or 1. Nf3 followed by b3. As a player he defeated Alekhine, Lasker and Euwe in individual games and won, or shared first prize, in such powerful events as Marienbad 1925 (11/15), Dresden 1926 (8½/9), London 1927 (8/11) and above all Carlsbad 1929 (15/21) where he triumphed  ahead of Capablanca, Spielmann, Rubinstein and Euwe.

So, why have some critics denigrated the Jewish Grand Maestro’s contribution to chess knowledge, science and practice?

Let us take four pillars of his thinking, the blockade, prophylaxis, centralisation and over-protection. Those in the anti-Nimzo brigade have pointed out that the blockade existed before Nimzowitsch, notably (and ironically) in the games of his arch enemy, Dr Siegbert Tarrasch. Nevertheless, Nimzowitsch elevated the interpretation of blockading strategy to new heights, as we have seen from the links above.

Centralisation, too, was known and practised well before Nimzowitsch came on the scene. To be fair, I do not think that Nimzowitsch claimed to have invented either centralisation or the blockade, merely to have observed such mechanisms and refined them. However, with chess being a game which simulates warfare, I do believe that the prime battle modes of the First World War, trench combat and naval strangulation, did influence Nimzowitsch’s blockade-oriented writings of the early 1920s.

This brings us to prophylaxis, the anticipation, restriction and prevention of the opponents’ potential for attack. Again, I think that Nimzowitsch observed this methodology in the games of contemporary masters, and his chief contribution was to identify and name it. Certainly, world champion Tigran Petrosian ( 1963-1969) made it completely clear that prophylaxis, as taught by Nimzowitsch through Petrosian’s trainer Ebralidze, was highly influential in forming his own chess style. His win in the following game against Bobby Fischer is a notable example of the genre.

Petrosian vs. Fischer, Candidates, Bled-Zagreb-Belgrade,1959

Now we come to the more opaque concept of over-protection. Even ex-world champion Magnus Carlsen has confessed to a certain bafflement where this is concerned and — make no mistake — over-protection was very much Nimzowitsch’s primary strategic insight and was exceedingly close to his heart. Overprotection is to Nimzowitsch as E=mc squared is to Einstein or Mind Mapping to Tony Buzan.

Prophylaxis and the mysterious rook move are far simpler to grasp, even in the extreme mode of Garry Kasparov’s doubling of his rooks on e7 and e8 in the closed e-file in game 24 of the 1985 world championship match against Karpov, the game which crowned Kasparov as the youngest ever world champion.

Karpov vs. Kasparov, Moscow, 1985, game 24

Over-protection is less clear, both in terms of its relevance and its usefulness. What I think has been overlooked is that the concept of over-protection (concentrating force on a key point in order to maximise energy) has morphed into specific opening variations, where it is just second nature and disguised from its original function as a discrete strategic  device.

As is well known, Nimzowitsch favoured 3.e5 against both the French and Caro-Kann defences. The latter is now more in vogue than the former, though Nimzowitsch himself predicated the rationale for both as being over-protection of e5. A clearer instance of over-protection evolving into a popular opening variation is White’s control over d5 in most lines of the highly fashionable Sveshnikov variation of the Sicilian.

Perhaps the clearest manifestation, though, is White’s concentration of force behind his e5 pawn in many variations of the King’s Indian attack.

The example game which follows reveals a consistent policy of over-protection, with White over-protecting the pawn on e5 with knight, bishop, queen and rook. Once the e5 pawn advances, the forces in support break out with elemental fury and sweep Black from the board.

Raymond Keene vs Michael John Basman
Preparation Tournament for Student Olympiad (1967), Bognor Regis

(Notes by Raymond Keene)

1.e4 e6 2. d3 b5!?

An eccentricity quite in Basman’s style. However, the move also has some positional basis in that an eventual advance of the queenside pawns forms a valuable black resource against the King’s Indian Attack.

3.Nf3 Bb7 4. g3 Nf6 5. Bg2 Bc5?! 

But this is much harder to justify, since the king’s bishop is normally needed on the kingside for defensive purposes.

6.O-O O-O 7. Nbd2 d6 8. Qe2 Bb6

Necessary if Black is to mobilise his c-pawn.

9.Kh1 c5 10. Nh4 Nc6 11. c3 d5 12. e5 Nd7 13. f4 b4 14.Ndf3

White’s kingside attack proceeds unopposed, largely due to the absence of the useful defensive king’s bishop.

14… Qc7 15. f5! exf516. Bf4 Rae8 17. Rae1 bxc3 18. bxc3d4 19. c4 Re6

Although White’s e-pawn is blockaded there are other ways of prosecuting the assault.

20.Nxf5 f6? 

Threatening to destroy White’s strong point at e5, but the scheme is over-optimistic and allows the energy in White’s position to burst forth by means of a positional queen sacrifice.

21.Nxg7! Kxg7 22. exf6+ Rfxf6 23. Qxe6! Rxe6 24. Rxe6

White avoids 24 Bxc7? with only rook for two minor pieces. White has now given up queen and knight for two rooks, but Black’s famous king’s bishop is locked out of play, while his other pieces cannot participate in the defence of his king.

24…Qc8 25. Bh6+ Kg8 26. Ng5

Threatening Bd5 and Rf7.

26…Nce5 27. Bxb7 Qxb7+

Although Black gains a temporary respite with this check his queen must immediately return to the back rank to prevent Re8+.

28.Kg1 Qb8 29. Re7 Ba5 30. Rg7+ Kh8 31. Nf7+ Nxf7 32.Rgxf7! 

Threatening both Rxd7 and Rf8+.

32…Bd2?! 

Obviously desperation. If 32…Qc8 33 Rxd7+- or 32…Qd6 33 Rf8+ Nxf8 34 Rxf8+ Qxf8 35 Bxf8 with a simple win in the endgame.

33.Bxd2 Qd6 34. Rxd7 Black resigns 1-0

After 34…Qxd7 35 Bh6 wins at once.

To conclude: amongst those prominent individuals who fail to appreciate Nimzowitsch, I would, among others, include Yasser Seirawan, Jan Gustafsson and World Champion Max Euwe (1935-1937), with Magnus Carlsen somewhat ambivalent.

In the Nimzowitsch camp I would firmly place Bent Larsen, Tigran Petrosian and Mikhail Botvinnik (who loved the Nimzowitschian e4/c4 pawn structure in the English opening and who was also a staunch upholder of Nimzowitsch’s favourite response 3… Bb4 in the Winawer French). Not to be overlooked is Johann Hjartarson, who gave ample recognition to Nimzowitsch in a keynote lecture in 2019  at the Gibraltar Masters.

Ray’s 206th book, “ Chess in the Year of the King ”, written in collaboration with former Reuters chess correspondent, Adam Black, appeared earlier this year.
Now  his 207th, “ Napoleon and Goethe: The Touchstone of Genius”  (which discusses their relationship with chess and explains how Ray used Napoleonic era  battle strategies to develop his own chess style) has materialised, just in time to complement Ridley Scott’s new epic biopic , ‘Napoleon’.
Both books are available from Amazon and Blackwell’s. It is hoped that reviews will be appearing in the august pages of The Article. 

A Message from TheArticle

We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout these hard economic times. So please, make a donation.