Further Openings and Middlegames

31. Some Salient Points about Pawns

Before going back to the discussion of openings and

middlegame positions, it might be well to bear in mind

a few facts concerning pawn positions which will no

doubt help to understand certain moves, and

sometimes even the object of certain variations in the

openings, and of some manoeuvres in the middle

games.

In the position of the diagram we have an exceedingly

bad pawn formation on Black's side. Black's c-pawn is

altogether backward, and White could by means of the

open file concentrate his forces against that weak

point. There is also the square c5, which is controlled

by White, and from where a White piece once

established could not be dislodged. In order to get rid

of it, Black would have to exchange it, which is not

always an easy matter, and often when possible not at

all convenient. The same holds true with regard to

Black's e-pawn, f-pawn and g-pawn, which create

what is called a "hole" at f6. Such pawn formations

invariably lead to disaster, and consequently must be

avoided.

In this position we might say that the White centre

pawns have the attacking position, while the Black

formation of pawns occurs in the French Defence. In

such positions White most often attempts, by means of

f2-f4 and f4-f5, to obtain a crushing attack against

Black's King, which is generally castled on the

Kingside. To prevent that, and also to assume the

initiative or obtain material advantage, Black makes a

counter-demonstration by ...c7-c5, followed by ...cxd4

(when White defends the pawn by c2-c3), and the

concentrating of Black's pieces against the White pawn

at d4. This in substance might be said to be a

determined attack against White's centre in order to

paralyze the direct attack of White against Black's

King. It must be remembered that at the beginning of

the book it was stated that control of the centre was an

essential condition to a successful attack against the

King.

In an abstract way we may say that two or more pawns

are strongest when they are in the same rank next to

one another. Thus the centre pawns are strongest in

themselves, so to speak, when placed at e4 and d4 (or

e5 and d5), hence the question of advancing either the

one or the other to the fifth rank is one that must be

most carefully considered. The advance of either pawn

often determines the course the game will follow.

more passed pawns when they are isolated either

singly or in pairs. We might say that a passed pawn is

either very weak or very strong, and that its weakness

or strength, whichever happens to be in the case to be

considered, increases as it advances, and is at the same

time in direct relation to the number of pieces on the

board. In this last respect it might be generally said

that a passed pawn increases in strength as the number

of pieces on the board diminishes.

41

Having all this clear in mind we will now revert to the

openings and middlegame. We will analyze games

carefully from beginning to end according to general

principles. I shall, whenever possible, use my own

games, not because they will better illustrate the point,

but because, knowing them thoroughly, I shall be able

to explain them more authoritatively than the games of

others.

32. Some Possible Developments from a Ruy Lopez

That some of the variations in the openings and the

manoeuvres in the middlegame are often based on

some of the elementary principles just expounded can

be easily seen in the following case.

Let us suppose the game went on, and that in some

proper time, forced the exchange of both Knights, and

then afterwards both the Bishops were exchanged, and

we arrived at some such position as shown in the

following diagram. (I obtained such a position in a

very similar way once at Lodz in Poland. I was playing

the White pieces against a consulting team headed by

Salwe.)

Now we would have here the case of the backward cpawn, which will in no way be able to advance to
c5.

Such a position may be said to be theoretically lost,

and in practice a first-class master will invariably win

it from Black. (If I may be excused the reference, I

will say that I won the game above referred to.)

After a few moves the position may be easily thus:

The Black pieces can be said to be fixed. If White

plays 1.Qc3, Black must answer 1...Qd7, otherwise he

will lose a pawn, and if White returns with the Queen

to a3 Black will again have to return with 2...Qb7 or

lose a pawn. Thus Black can only move according to

White's lead, and under such conditions White can

easily advance with his pawns to f4 and g4, until Black

will be forced to stop f4-f5 by playing ...f7-f5, and we

might finally have some such position as the

following:

42
Now suppose that in the position in the preceding

diagram it were Black's move, and he played 1...Rf8.

White would then simply defend his f-pawn by some

move like 2.Qf3, threatening 3.Rxc6, and then he

would bring his King up to g3, and when the time

came, break through, as in the previous case. White

might even be able to obtain the following position.

Black would now be forced to play 1...Rc8, and White

could then play 2.Qc2, and follow it up with 3.Kf3,

and thus force Black to play ...fxg4, which would give

White a greater advantage.

A careful examination of all these position will reveal

that, besides the advantage of freedom of manoeuvre

on White's part, the power of the pawn at e5 is

enormous, and that it is the commanding position of

this pawn, and the fact that it is free to advance, once

all the pieces are exchanged, that constitute the pivot

of all White's manoeuvres.

I have purposely given positions without the moves

which lead to them so that the student may become

accustomed to build up in his own mind possible

positions that may arise (out of any given situation).

Thus he will learn to make strategical plans and be on

his way to the master class. The student can derive

enormous benefit by further practice of this kind.

The influence of a so-called "hole" in a game has

already been illustrated in my game against Blanco

(Example 52), where has been shown the influence

exercised by the different pieces posted in the hole

created at e5.

In order to further illustrate this point, I now give a

game played in the Havana International Masters

Tournament of 1913.

43

44

Chapter 7

Illustrative Games

From now on to the end of the book I shall give a

collection of my games both lost and won, chosen so

as to serve as illustrations of the general principles laid

down in the foregoing pages.

Game 1

Marshall, F – Capablanca, J 1-0

Game 2

Rubinstein, A - Capablanca, J 1-0

Game 3

Janowski, D - Capablanca, J 1-0

Game 4

Capablanca, J - Znosko Borovsky, E 0-1

Lasker, E - Capablanca, J 1-0

Game 6

Chajes, O - Capablanca, J 1-0

Game 7

Capablanca, J - Burn, A 1-0

Game 8

Mieses, J - Capablanca , J 0-1

Game 9

Capablanca, J - Teichmann, R 1-0

Game 10

Capablanca, J – Marshall, F 1-0

Game 11

Capablanca, J - Janowski, D 1-0

Game 12

Capablanca, J – Chajes, O 1-0

Game 13

Morrison, J - Capablanca, J 0-1

Game 14

Marshall, F - Capablanca, J 0-1