WEBVTT 00:00.960 --> 00:01.890 Hi there. 00:02.460 --> 00:05.460 In this lecture, I'd like to talk about what's attacking plans. 00:05.460 --> 00:06.370 Dream about? 00:06.390 --> 00:11.490 Well, in the past prevention era and why it could have been beneficial for them. 00:11.970 --> 00:14.730 And actually how we can do this nowadays quite easily. 00:15.630 --> 00:16.410 I'll get on that. 00:16.440 --> 00:25.440 So in the past, certain players like David Bronstein and especially Alexander Alekhine had these games 00:25.440 --> 00:27.080 which were never actually played. 00:27.090 --> 00:29.010 They just dreamt about these games. 00:29.130 --> 00:35.550 Bronstein on occasion admitted it was actually just part of his preparation when he was awake. 00:35.560 --> 00:40.830 It wasn't in his dream and got traumatized a bit more, as if he'd dreamt it in a dream. 00:40.840 --> 00:48.180 It wasn't the case on occasion as as I've got a great example to show you of that one of Bronson's dreams, 00:48.540 --> 00:53.370 which is actually analysis for a game he was going to have against Viktor Korchnoi. 00:53.760 --> 01:01.020 So why would it be beneficial to create these variations which were never actually played out in real 01:01.020 --> 01:01.590 games? 01:01.860 --> 01:09.140 So a variation like a fictional game or made up variations can be treasures in their own right. 01:09.150 --> 01:10.410 There can be delightful. 01:11.730 --> 01:21.150 I have to say, I once had the pleasure of Natasha Regan and Matthew Sadler coming over and we talked 01:21.150 --> 01:22.680 about game changer. 01:22.680 --> 01:30.900 And I was absolutely, completely blown away by the amount of analysis. 01:32.770 --> 01:34.470 One game. 01:35.310 --> 01:36.270 It kind of. 01:36.480 --> 01:43.140 Actually, I couldn't put it in my my days if I had to change the restrictions in my software to accommodate 01:43.140 --> 01:44.300 this analysis. 01:44.310 --> 01:47.010 So I have evidence first hand. 01:47.010 --> 01:53.730 You're a top grandmaster in the UK doing an immense amount of analysis I would have never dreamt of 01:54.330 --> 01:57.210 for, say, YouTube video, You know, YouTube videos. 01:57.210 --> 01:59.580 They have to be like ideally less than 15 minutes. 01:59.580 --> 02:01.380 Otherwise you lose everyone's attention. 02:01.470 --> 02:02.910 Attention spans are going down. 02:02.910 --> 02:10.200 But you know, the top grandmasters, I would assume they have very, very detailed analysis of games 02:10.200 --> 02:15.600 and it gives access to all sorts of insights through those variations. 02:16.560 --> 02:21.840 And, you know, the analysis in this course compared to this course is like tiny. 02:21.840 --> 02:27.180 What he could do, I imagine, of each of the games that, you know, we have analysed in this course. 02:27.960 --> 02:35.690 So you know, there are limits of what you can take for analysing a game, all the variations so in 02:35.760 --> 02:42.420 back in the day without engines so insights in working out preparation for opponents could be training 02:42.420 --> 02:44.610 for exploiting certain tactical issues. 02:44.730 --> 02:51.120 It could give a deeper appreciation of king safety versus material, and it reflects the attacking plans, 02:51.120 --> 02:57.030 passion for king hunting that some of the variations may end in a beautiful checkmate. 02:57.030 --> 03:03.780 So we're talking about very, very beautiful variations where, you know, checkmate ends the game. 03:04.650 --> 03:12.930 And I made up several games of fancy and some people kind of took fun out Valentine for doing that. 03:12.930 --> 03:14.610 Was it his ego or something? 03:14.970 --> 03:19.890 So he had some classic games like Against Tenor, which were kind of beautiful but made up. 03:21.060 --> 03:28.530 But nowadays, yes, we can do such an immense amount of analysis and we can even take that even further. 03:28.530 --> 03:33.390 So Sadler has talked about running sort of computer tournaments from a particular position to arrive 03:33.390 --> 03:35.010 at more objective truth. 03:35.040 --> 03:42.270 You know, the search for objectivity, you can take it to to so many degrees, basically to get a lot 03:42.270 --> 03:44.700 of insight just from one particular game. 03:45.150 --> 03:50.400 So we have this Bronstein dream, which wasn't actually a dream at night. 03:50.400 --> 03:51.630 And it goes like this. 03:51.630 --> 03:52.920 So D4. 03:55.230 --> 03:57.000 In his actual preparation. 03:57.000 --> 04:04.530 It was against Korchnoi where he knew caution played C4 96, 93, 693 Bishop B Force. 04:04.530 --> 04:08.670 We have this position where D4 was played here and off the D6. 04:08.670 --> 04:14.520 Bronstein had his analysis for a very interesting variation because it seems, you know, the bishops 04:14.520 --> 04:15.680 are tactical issue. 04:15.690 --> 04:23.040 So that was the actual thing that he extended from analysis of a game against Viktor Korchnoi and the 04:23.040 --> 04:28.770 great chess historian Edward Winter, you know, uncovers this to separate, you know, fiction from 04:28.770 --> 04:29.610 reality. 04:29.730 --> 04:37.440 Anyway, in Einstein's dream game, we have the same position emerging, kind of kind of different move 04:37.440 --> 04:40.260 order, different removal of completely, actually. 04:40.260 --> 04:44.790 So we have this position with a3d6 head. 04:44.940 --> 04:51.090 So Roy, is that same kind of position, the same position as his preparation? 04:51.090 --> 04:55.470 So quite a four track going off to that tactical vulnerability. 04:55.710 --> 05:01.440 96 And you might think, well, D five, isn't this kind of dangerous? 05:01.440 --> 05:08.850 Four Black So one of the key tactical points here after E takes case, what do you think the first tactical 05:08.850 --> 05:13.560 point in here showing actually there are some downsides for White doing this. 05:14.280 --> 05:17.940 So this piece is kind of protective, but it's through that annoyance. 05:17.940 --> 05:20.010 Can we exploit this as a downside? 05:20.040 --> 05:22.290 What would you play here for 100 points? 05:26.810 --> 05:27.230 Yeah. 05:28.310 --> 05:30.860 Queeny for it sets a nice trap. 05:30.860 --> 05:34.190 So if three takes, we can play Bishop take C free check. 05:34.190 --> 05:34.850 And when the queen. 05:34.850 --> 05:40.190 So we're learning about, you know, tactical downsides being exploited, cleverly causing, you know, 05:40.250 --> 05:44.330 this major trap thing which might be tempting for white to play. 05:44.330 --> 05:48.630 So 92 is played giving the bishop handy. 05:48.640 --> 05:50.630 Take C6 and it looks as though well. 05:51.910 --> 05:54.460 Yeah, there are still some problems to solve. 05:54.490 --> 05:57.160 Black councils are afraid. 05:57.400 --> 06:00.770 And now we have this problem solved. 06:00.820 --> 06:03.220 We've just, you know, victim here of this pin. 06:03.220 --> 06:08.680 But now night g for looking at F2 and now Geoffrey is is played. 06:08.680 --> 06:09.940 If queen takes b4. 06:09.970 --> 06:15.010 The point is queen takes have to check candy one night every chat and the queen of night beautifully 06:15.010 --> 06:17.140 coordinate her to checkmate. 06:17.170 --> 06:19.420 It's a beautiful conclusion there in that variation. 06:19.420 --> 06:28.390 So we have g free Queen f six which is again looking at taking out F2 and taking out F2 and then E three. 06:28.840 --> 06:36.760 So OC we have eight X before being played, which keeps an eye on the D one square. 06:36.760 --> 06:39.040 So it doesn't whole notion of combining on D one. 06:39.040 --> 06:45.610 Isn't that extinguished now because the queen actually hasn't played Queen since before the Queen's 06:45.610 --> 06:52.090 looking at D one so we have Queen takes F to check King D1 but now there's a key move which makes everything 06:52.090 --> 06:52.990 work beautifully. 06:52.990 --> 06:59.440 This relentless idea, you know, you have downsides, but you got to be relentless about it to really 06:59.440 --> 07:02.170 make it work as the attacking player. 07:02.290 --> 07:08.740 So what is the relentless move which is going to factor out the key defensive resource Queen D one here? 07:09.010 --> 07:11.440 So what do you think that is for 200 points? 07:14.310 --> 07:21.390 It's the relentless move played is be fine because if 93 check can see one queen, one check, there's 07:21.390 --> 07:22.950 91 protected by the queen. 07:22.950 --> 07:23.520 Right? 07:23.910 --> 07:28.290 So B5 is played first trying to lure the queen away from D one. 07:28.680 --> 07:29.820 We have Queen B free. 07:29.850 --> 07:35.270 If Queen C two, then that just runs into 93 check and 92. 07:35.280 --> 07:36.330 So Queen B free. 07:36.330 --> 07:37.620 We have Bishop E six. 07:38.160 --> 07:42.940 Queen goes away from D one, and now we can have 90 free check. 07:42.960 --> 07:45.300 Can you see one queen E one check. 07:45.300 --> 07:46.920 And we get that beautiful mate. 07:48.240 --> 07:54.540 So, yes, this was actually just daytime analysis, but it shows that the attacking players kind of 07:54.540 --> 07:55.800 make one day chess fun. 07:55.800 --> 08:01.620 If you're going to invent all of these, make combinations as part of your preparation for someone that 08:01.620 --> 08:02.370 makes it fun. 08:02.370 --> 08:07.050 The whole thing about one day chess, if you could turn it on its head, it's not the act of playing 08:07.050 --> 08:07.710 the one day game. 08:07.710 --> 08:11.790 It's the amount of beautiful, fun preparation. 08:13.100 --> 08:17.170 If you can make things fun, what seems to be hard work and tedious, you make the whole thing fun. 08:17.180 --> 08:19.190 The process is fun. 08:21.250 --> 08:22.270 Then that's great. 08:22.270 --> 08:24.510 You know, life is a ride. 08:24.520 --> 08:25.870 It's not about the destination. 08:25.870 --> 08:29.760 So he's doing these fun preparations against Viktor Korchnoi. 08:29.980 --> 08:32.860 You know, that's another attraction perhaps, of one day chess. 08:32.860 --> 08:37.240 You pick your opponents, you start creating these fictional variations, you make them in all sorts 08:37.240 --> 08:38.260 of ways. 08:38.260 --> 08:45.160 But we pick up, you know, notions of soft spots, relentless, you know, aspects like taking things 08:45.160 --> 08:46.570 out of the equation to make things work. 08:46.570 --> 08:51.580 There's a lot to learn from this fictional game, and there's a lot to learn even from especially from, 08:51.580 --> 08:58.030 you know, Alexander Alekhine's fictional games because they are beautiful and they show similar kind 08:58.030 --> 08:58.510 of things. 08:58.510 --> 09:00.220 The king hunts the checkmate. 09:00.670 --> 09:02.350 The logical conclusion. 09:03.010 --> 09:03.580 Yeah. 09:03.580 --> 09:05.260 So it's fun stuff. 09:06.790 --> 09:13.840 And so as I say nowadays, that's why I like doing a detailed analysis of games. 09:14.500 --> 09:16.150 We don't want to just play for a game. 09:16.150 --> 09:21.100 We want to know as an attacking player, especially if you play chess, We want to know how things work. 09:21.100 --> 09:26.200 We need to look at the variations, what was not played and why We need to extract the insights. 09:26.200 --> 09:30.310 Even from the variations they are like pivoting around a particular game. 09:30.310 --> 09:33.790 We're trying to extract maximum value from a particular game. 09:33.790 --> 09:39.040 We want to ask the questions until we're satisfied that we've got all the beautiful variations, at 09:39.040 --> 09:44.170 least from that game, especially the beautiful ones, because that makes analysis even more fun. 09:44.170 --> 09:50.020 These variations, which end in Checkmate, is good to capture those ideas and be able to use them in 09:50.020 --> 09:50.590 our own game. 09:50.590 --> 09:56.380 So we're making the whole process of chess analysis, the search for objectivity, a fun process where 09:56.380 --> 09:58.780 we see the beauty of chess. 09:58.960 --> 10:04.810 So yeah, and if you want beautiful checkmate combinations, check out my checkmate course. 10:04.810 --> 10:11.170 But basically, yeah, there's a lot of richness to a game example, and the amount we can do with modern 10:11.170 --> 10:16.270 engine analysis makes investigating games very easy. 10:16.270 --> 10:20.200 Some have said, well, it's not as mental mentally challenging as in the old days. 10:20.200 --> 10:22.690 They didn't have the engines they had to analyze on their own. 10:22.690 --> 10:26.200 That's true, but I don't feel that's a problem. 10:26.200 --> 10:32.830 I like saying all the beautiful stuff when you analyze with engines that they create in seconds, it 10:32.830 --> 10:37.270 might take you like in a real game 3 hours to work out a combination. 10:37.270 --> 10:40.480 They might be wrong, but with engines they show you these beautiful variations. 10:40.480 --> 10:43.660 So it's enjoying the process of analysis. 10:43.930 --> 10:50.240 And you know, Alexander Alekhine was one of the great annotators, so he must have enjoyed, you know, 10:50.260 --> 10:55.360 analyzing these games, finding the tiniest of nuances, trying to enrich his understanding of chess 10:55.360 --> 11:00.760 generally to reach the objective truth as far as he could, the search for objectivity. 11:01.720 --> 11:07.000 So, okay, I hope you got a few points from this that the attacking players have these dreams Alekhine 11:07.000 --> 11:11.440 You know, it's a bit of a difference sometimes when Bronstein Alekhine kind of says the game was actually 11:11.440 --> 11:12.970 played when it wasn't. 11:14.050 --> 11:16.990 And you need historians to, you know, do a detailed check. 11:16.990 --> 11:18.460 Was it actually played this game? 11:18.800 --> 11:19.400 No, no. 11:19.420 --> 11:25.270 But yeah, so sometimes, you know, we need to cross-reference the magazines and publications, but 11:25.270 --> 11:27.970 even if they're made up games, we still get insights. 11:27.970 --> 11:32.560 It's like benefiting from the creative flights of fancy of Alekhine. 11:32.560 --> 11:36.490 He had this huge, you know, flight of fancy like David Bronstein. 11:36.490 --> 11:38.740 The attacking players loved the king hunts. 11:38.740 --> 11:40.360 They just dream of the king hunts. 11:40.360 --> 11:42.280 The king hunts come in the variations. 11:42.280 --> 11:43.330 We should celebrate that. 11:43.330 --> 11:48.010 We should appreciate that we learn more about the trade offs on the chessboard, especially between 11:48.010 --> 11:53.380 material and king safety, especially if we've got our King Castle, the opponents, kings, not castles. 11:53.410 --> 11:54.880 It's asking for problems, isn't it? 11:54.880 --> 11:55.750 Fundamentally. 11:56.140 --> 11:59.050 So it's like a proof, you know, of king safety there. 11:59.050 --> 12:04.780 So okay, so I hope you share my enjoyment of analysis. 12:04.900 --> 12:12.190 Analysis leverages games to the maximum from what we can learn, especially from the beautiful variations, 12:12.190 --> 12:14.650 we're creating a fun journey of analysis. 12:14.800 --> 12:16.960 Okay, That's so much.