plik

FIDE Surveys – Dejan Bojkov

Dejan Bojkov:

Fictions and Reality.
Oppositon.

During my summer USA camps I often
have to teach various groups of players.
Some of them are stronger, some weaker,
often there are beginners. What is common
about all the groups is the desire to
demonstrate knowledge, in any given
position.
Another common thing is that the players
in all groups have their own fictions and
favorable mantras. And sometimes these
miss the point by about a thousand miles.
Here is typical example:

Theoretical Position

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+K+-+0
9+-+-zP-mk-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9r+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+R+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

I was trying to explain the importance of
the good placement of the defenders in the
Rook endgames. The Rook to the long
side, the King to the short. The question to
the kids was how Black should defend
now. The answer no longer surprises me.
1...Kg8??
The explanation - "opposition"!?
Black is saving themselves instead with
distant checks - 1...Ra8 2.Kd7 Ra7 3.Kd6
Ra6. Until the King leaves the Pawn
4.Kc5, then Black wins it. 4...Re6.
1/2

Fair enough, this mistake is usually done
by less experienced players. Young kids,
beginners, but not always. Every once in a
while you may stumble into a strong player
who uses a similar mantra that tries to
explain everything.
One explanation of the failure here could
be that the players were not familiar with
Lucena’s position/ the bridge building. But
this is not the case. It was presented to
them just before this example. They did
know how to win the position after
1…Kg8?? Nevertheless they suggest the
move which takes the opposition, attracted
by the magic power of the word itself.
For your young players is vital to make the
difference between fiction and reality from
the very early days of their lives. Let’s start
with the word itself. What exactly is
opposition?
Wikipedia uses Grandmaster Flear’s
explanation: “In chess, opposition

(or direct opposition) is the situation
occurring when

two Kings face each other

on a rank or file, with only one square in-
between them. In such a situation, the
player not having to move is said to "have
the opposition" (Flear 2004:12). It is a
special type of zugzwang and most often
occurs in endgames with only Kings
and pawns (Flear 2000:36). The side with
the move may have to move the King
away, potentially allowing the opposing
King access to important squares. Taking
the opposition is a means to an end
(normally forcing the opponent's King to
move to a weaker position) and is not
always the best thing to do.”
The key here is the opponent’s King is
forced to move to a worse square.

Panchenko,
Theoretical Position - Mutual opposition

If it was Black to move, he would need to
step to the left to the right and let the
opponent's King in. The uninvited guest
will munch the queenside or kingside
Pawns respectively and win the game. But

FIDE Surveys – Dejan Bojkov

it is White to move and he needs to "keep
the zone".

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9p+-mk-+p+0
9+p+-+pzP-0
9-zP-mK-zP-+0
9zP-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

1.Ke3
Or 1.Kc3=. Only not 1.Kd3?? Kd5, when
the opposition wins the battle for the
critical squares and the game.
1...Kd5 2.Kd3 Kc6
Or 2...Ke6=.
3.Kd4 Kd6
A case of mutual opposition. Both sides
avoided stepping on the "mined squares"
d3 and d5 and did not let the opponent's
King in. ½.

From this example we can teach that the
opposition is not a “magic word.” It is a
method. A tool to win the battle for the
critical squares, thus support our passer(s)
or penetrate into the opposing camp and
win material.
Dvoretzky and other endgame authors
acknowledged the importance of the “key
squares” and added the subject in the
explanation of the opposition. “Key
Squares are what we call those squares
whose occupation by the king assures
victory, regardless of whose turn it is
move.” (Dvoretzky)
A good example of this thesis is one of the
most important theoretical position in the
pawn endgames:

Theoretical position

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-mk-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-mK-+-+0
9+-+P+-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

In this situation White wins no matter who
is to move.
1.Ke6 Ke8 2.d6 Kd8 3.d7 1:0.

Opposition is irrelevant.

It is the key squares that matter in most of
the cases. It is very useful to demonstrate
visually the whole process of the
opposition to our students.
Chessbase has done excellent job in this
area in their product Fritz and Chesster.
The Kings there are sumo fighters who try
to push each other from the ring.
Once that the players learn how to exploit
the opposition, the difference between the
normal, distant and bishop opposition and
the ways to turn the distant opposition into
a normal one it will be good to show them
examples where the opposition does not
work.

FIDE Surveys – Dejan Bojkov

Borge N. : Kishnev S.
Copenhagen 1991

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9p+-mk-+-+0
9+-zp-+-+-0
9P+K+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

According to my Megabase this exact
position appeared in eight cases. The
results were quite surprising - four wins for
the strong side and four losses for the weak
side. Here is a case of the strong side
winning:
61.Kc1?? Kd3 0:1.
Borge is a strong player and should have
known that this is a theoretical draw. If he
did not know it, he could have easily found
it. He might have been in time-trouble, or
he might have been very tired. Or both. He
might have been careless. In any case, his
hand led the king away from the
opposition. The word was standing there,
on the back of his mind.

Slavin A. : Williams S.
Hinckley Island 2009

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9p+-mk-+-+0
9+-zp-+-+-0
9P+K+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

Instead White can hold the draw with:

66.Kb1!
The key is to avoid the opposition until
Black runs out of moves. Equally good is
66.Kd1! Please note that 66.a3?? would
lose on the spot, after 66...Kc4.
After
66...Kd3 67.Kc1 c2
White makse his reserved Pawn move:
68.a3! Kc3
The point is shared equally. ½.
Slavin was more careful and saved the
game.
Here is another case in which the
opposition is wrong:

Dobias
Study, 1926

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-+p+0
9+k+-+-+-0
9-+-+K+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-zP-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

The winning move is:
1.Kd4!!
Portisch and Sarkozy explain it with
Knight opposition. You can explain with
shouldering. Or in a way that you like. As
long as the students understand the concept
that the White King needs to prevent the
opponent's one reach his Pawn all is fine.
The logic of the position is that White
needs a move to make the useful move f2–
f4. Not only that his Pawn will get closer
to the promotional square, but it will be
closer to the White King once that it
captures the Black Pawn on g6. After the
text move Black has no way out since.
Do not be surprised if almost everyone of
your students suggest the move: 1.Kd5?
Not only it is placing the King on

FIDE Surveys – Dejan Bojkov

opposition, but it shoulders the enemy
King. But after: 1...Kb4! The king is in
time to reach the white pawn. Say 2.Kd4
(2.f4 Kc3) 2...Kb3 3.f4 (3.Kd3 Kb2 4.Kd2
Kb1 5.f4 Kb2 6.Kd3 Kc1.) 3...Kc2 4.Ke3
(Or 4.Ke5 Kd3 5.Kf6 KPe4 6.Kg6 Kf4=.)
4...Kd1 5.Kf3 Ke1 6.Ke3 Kf1=.
The direct tries allow a chance to the Black
King to make a contact with the White
Pawn after 1.Kf4? Kc4 2.Kg5 Kd3 3.Kg6
Ke4!. Similar is 1.Ke5? Kc4 2.Kf6 Kd3
3.Kg6 Ke4!
1.f4? also leads White nowhere, after
1...Kc4 2.Ke5 Kd3=.
1...Kb4
Gives White the desired tempo to advance
the pawn. 1...g5 makes things easier for
White: 2.Ke4 Kc4 3.Kf5 Kd3 4.Kg5 Ke4
5.f4. If 1...Kc6 2.Ke5, leaves the Black
King away from the pawn.
2.f4!
And since the White King is where it is
needed he wins. 1:0.

Chess is too complicated to be explained
by a couple of rules. Still, we need a
system to guide is in the ocean of
possibilities.
Perhaps the best strategy for us as coaches
is to explain to our students that the
opposition is just one of the ways in which
the kings fight each other. The one which
wins the battle for the better position wins
the game.