Hi there.
In this lecture, I would like to introduce the modern era issues in positional play after Steinitz.
So having looked at many games in the Steinitz era because of the Laska course, which you might want
to check out, in particular, it's apparent that modern players, because we have greater communications,
greater technology and that vast central kind of community database, we can look at all the past historical
games.
We stand on the shoulders of past generations, basically.
And it seems in the Steinitz era, players were not so dynamic.
They weren't playing pawn sacrifices, for example, as much as modern players to create counterplay.
They often played commit or pull moves and pawns Don't go backwards.
That idea is much better understood nowadays about not making commits or weaknesses.
So chess is always evolving.
There's new games and useful exceptions to look at and we're so privileged nowadays compared to the
past that we can look at thousands and thousands of games very, very easily and the up and coming juniors
can become gems much more quickly nowadays.
So things are really ramping up in terms of managing counts, playing and complexity.
Nowadays prevention is just as important as ever before, especially against dynamic, aggressive players.
And the seeds of that might be set up in positional opening choices opponents are not making well at
the classic time controls many mistakes.
They're very, very solid.
There's so many grandmasters at a very high level today.
And so we need to well, at the high level, grandmasters need to sometimes have a lot of determination
and grit.
So it's no accident Magnus Carlsen is succeeding in today's climate.
He can grind and grind and grind until he wins sometimes.
So there are so many openings which offer counterplay generation in general.
And the positional players are often navigating this vast amount of opening theory and often choosing
second or third or even more engine moves.
Not not the best engine move because some of those would be less explored and some of those might offer
less counterplay to opponents.
So getting an edge and being quite crafty about it, not just going for the obvious best, you know,
choices of of engines is often helpful to positional players.
So positional openings, I mean, we see this in the games of Michael Adams and, and Karpov to some
extent, but more so more modern play, especially where position players do treat the openings very,
very seriously to try and avoid sometimes very, very sharp opening theory just to get those positions
where there's not much counterplay.
So that is a great tradeoff to think about When you're preparing in the modern technology context,
do you need to actually choose the top moves of an engineer?
What about if you customize your repertoire just to make sure that you might have an informational advantage
as well and a possession which is playable and you're happy with the levels of counterplay from the
opponent.
One E4 Nowadays, because of Vladimir Kramnik a great positional player, he neutralized Garry Kasparov
with the Berlin defense.
So the Berlin defense has been rising as a very solid, reliable weapon with the black pieces.
And because of that, a lot of grandmasters nowadays they've taken up the English opening more Catalan
systems, more and other non one E4 systems.
And even the London system has become a great weapon at all levels with especially Bishop F4 this move
order, which you can see in my London system, of course if you want a positional opening, you know,
previously in certain opening manuals like bats for chess openings, this was only given, you know,
a side note.
And now so many players are playing at all levels.
So this is an example of a positional opening which sidesteps the vast amount of opening theory, which
won't be associated with one E4.
And we can see a lot of positional plans from such openings are available.
So as an example, let's have a look at Magnus Carlsen versus Wesley.
So but to be fair, this was actually a blitz tournament.
A blitz is also hugely popular nowadays with games.
And it's interesting still in Blitz to try and manage the opponent's counterplay.
So Magnus Carlsen actually did play Bishop F4 against Wesley.
So and we see C five, e39, C six, C three.
So this position in the.
This hasn't been widely celebrated, but it's it's a position to play from.
And this is sometimes what we need in a modern context, just a solid position, reliable position without
too much hassle.
And here we have Bengals playing 90 2c4 and this is quite a comfortable decision for the pawns to be
potentially undermined.
Later, we have 95 and our Bishop G five trying to probe some light square weaknesses with pawns coming
on dart squares and Bishop Ito, a crafty move here, hitting the knight, not moving the bishop.
So we have G seven and that bishop is now preserved and it's a bit of a torture piece positionally.
So you can see how the London system is an example of an opening which is getting an annoying edge for
four.
So we name five, we have E four very dramatic to hit that pawn chain, Bishop H seven and now White
Castles.
Bishop E seven, Rookie one Black Castles are now 95.
So white with this opening choice has kept the position relatively closed and there are weaknesses to
try and make use of here.
Nine takes e five bishop takes e five.
We have f six.
This is weakening more light squares.
So you can see that if we can exploit the vulnerabilities of this pawn chain, there are gains to be
made potentially.
Bishop G Free Rook.
Cathy eight We have H four, B five, B four, Quincy eight and now A four.
So hitting the pawn chain here, as well as putting pressure on D five, we have a five.
So if a six was played, then Bishop three looks at the D five pawn and it actually this situation after
9f1 it's going to come under extreme pressure.
A bit of maneuvering here to intensify the pressure and why it's definitely getting a big advantage.
So a five was tried.
We have eight hp five eight HP for rook takes eight, Rook takes eight, he takes the five, he takes
the five.
And this is an unfortunate configuration for black.
So why a success of these sides that stepped a lot of mainstream opening theory to reach a very, very
decent, very, very pleasant position here.
Francine Knight take C4.
Now, I'm not saying the London system is a top recommendation for all positional players.
It's just the spirit of it being able to choose openings which are solid and reliable, which might
not be the engine's top choice, and where there's an element of pawns having an influence on the game,
a profound influence on the game rather than very sharp one E4 games.
So it's the principle here of the London system to sometimes play quieter openings which get positional
advantages, which we can use our positional skill set more easily.
So here we see B6 trying to learn the Queen away from D five.
B take C free, Queen t c free.
We have Queen takes B six and now black's been dismantled and off the bishop takes D five.
Check.
We have 9c4, Queen b59e3.
Protecting the Bishop D eight.
Queen seven.
We have Queen D seven, Queen a59.
Sage five.
Now Bishop C seven.
The rook moves, the bishop goes back four and now Bishop takes her four, G six and now nine.
C four.
So why?
It's ramping up things.
The structure is damaged.
This is just such an annoying opening nowadays for players at all levels because you black might have
had, you know, a lot of opening theory behind them.
But when players play the London system, they can sometimes it's just torture.
So Queen a seven looking at E seven, Queen 65.
This is a desperate situation.
If the bishop moved, there's Queen F seven.
Checkmate.
So Queen takes the five, Queen takes E seven check King J And now after 9b6 black resigns.
So systems like the London system are all the rage nowadays at all levels.
But also players can play C four with a view sometimes of English openings or Catalan.
So sometimes playing Catalan systems with a vignette of the bishop later.
So there are all sorts of positional openings which can bypass a lot of sharp opening.
The theory of E four.
So I guess I'm saying that it's good to consider other options other than E four because that could
lead to sharp games where it might be difficult to enforce a positional undertone.
So opening free does have a role for a positional player to choose carefully.
But there are some positional players like Michael Adams, and this is absolutely fascinating that he
finds positional lines within E four.
So sometimes for example, the so called anti anticipation to keep things quiet rather than an open
Sicilian.
So there are options even within E four if you're a positional player once play E four you can.
And so Michael Adams is a great role model.
And also we see some type of games with 1e4 as well and two of the main heroes of this particular course.
So we do see 1e4 with a positional kind of navigation to quieter lines which manage counterplay more.
So it's fascinating how modern chess is more dynamic.
We've obviously got more game examples that go on so we can find the useful exceptions more we're standing
on the shoulders of.
Previous generations and positional play is always evolving.
So I hope this is an interesting food for thought.
This introduction lecture has so much.