WEBVTT 00:00.970 --> 00:01.900 Hi there. 00:02.410 --> 00:07.870 In this lecture, I want to introduce the idea of being practical in Chasse and why this is important. 00:08.050 --> 00:11.620 So what do we mean by being practical? 00:12.250 --> 00:18.550 Well, in a sense, being practical is respecting the constraints that we have. 00:18.550 --> 00:22.540 We have solutions that are practical if they respect the constraints. 00:23.200 --> 00:28.480 For example, what if you needed to have a car which is easy to park? 00:29.320 --> 00:31.120 You don't want to spend hours and hours parking. 00:31.130 --> 00:40.420 You might choose a little car or one which has good fuel consumption ratio four gallons. 00:41.200 --> 00:43.750 You know how many miles you can go for each gallon. 00:43.900 --> 00:46.690 So you want cars that are economical. 00:46.690 --> 00:48.730 They're not using too many resources. 00:48.730 --> 00:49.990 They're not damaging the planet. 00:49.990 --> 00:51.900 Maybe they're electric cars. 00:51.910 --> 00:57.670 Ideally, in the future, all cars are going to be as we it seems to be going, you know, more and 00:57.670 --> 00:58.810 more cars will be electric. 00:58.810 --> 01:07.990 So we talk about being practical sometimes in terms of the resources made, use of our solutions in 01:07.990 --> 01:14.590 general to things if they use a lot of resources, in other words, if they're not really respecting 01:14.590 --> 01:18.820 the constraints and constraints is a more fundamental type of resource. 01:18.820 --> 01:22.330 If we're not respecting the constraints, then it's not so practical. 01:22.330 --> 01:28.390 And in chess, there is an element of practicality because we play with chess clocks, for example, 01:28.390 --> 01:35.050 we have to play moves within reasonable amounts of time and we can't calculate as well as computers. 01:35.050 --> 01:37.510 We have to factor in our fallibility. 01:37.510 --> 01:38.830 We're going to miss things. 01:38.950 --> 01:41.380 There's going to be flaws in our variations. 01:41.500 --> 01:47.320 So how do we cope with the complexity of chess within the time constraints of having to play? 01:48.610 --> 01:54.210 The idea of positional play as a kind of practical tool actually is very, very interesting. 01:54.220 --> 02:01.120 If we consider, for example, a player like Capablanca for many years he went unbeaten and his play 02:01.390 --> 02:06.760 was very much intuitive and this was shown in his speed of play generally. 02:06.760 --> 02:13.480 He was very, very fast in playing moves and that actually meant, you could argue he wasn't really 02:13.480 --> 02:15.040 calculating that many variations. 02:15.040 --> 02:21.640 So that's like an extremely practical like electric car compared to, say, a huge calculator of variations 02:21.640 --> 02:23.680 like Kasparov. 02:25.030 --> 02:27.940 And so how can we be so practical in our chess? 02:27.940 --> 02:32.530 Well, if you check my camera blank course, you'll see a lot of games. 02:33.100 --> 02:38.590 So I've got two courses at the moment on Capablanca, but a lot of games he would, it seems, cash 02:38.590 --> 02:41.980 out, even small advantages through simplification. 02:41.980 --> 02:45.370 And if you think about it, simplification is a practical tool. 02:45.580 --> 02:49.690 In the same vein as minimizing the opponent's counterplay, the two are linked. 02:50.620 --> 02:57.340 If we simplify positions, we reduce the complexity, we reduce the number of pieces to actually be 02:57.340 --> 02:59.560 involved in the variations we're calculating. 02:59.830 --> 03:01.360 So we reduce complexity. 03:01.360 --> 03:03.070 And that's a very practical thing. 03:03.370 --> 03:09.550 And it's more ideal when we've got this more intuitive advantage that we saw from the slower aspects 03:09.550 --> 03:11.980 of the position, i.e., for example, the pawns. 03:12.490 --> 03:19.750 So we could say that great positional players, they can leverage the more intuitive advantages which 03:19.750 --> 03:25.660 we can visually see in the position and which are not going away that easily. 03:26.020 --> 03:27.910 And they kind of being practical there. 03:27.910 --> 03:31.000 They're respecting the constraints of chess. 03:31.000 --> 03:33.820 And Karpov also was very, very efficient. 03:33.820 --> 03:39.820 He wasn't always trying to find the very best moves in the positions because he realized early on that 03:39.820 --> 03:42.100 could lead to time trouble. 03:42.100 --> 03:44.590 And time trouble leads to blunders. 03:44.860 --> 03:50.710 So being a practical positional player is a very interesting proposition. 03:51.190 --> 03:56.800 So we can say simplification is often very practical because we're using less resources, calculating 03:56.800 --> 04:01.510 the complexity for many more pieces on the board, not giving counter players practical. 04:01.510 --> 04:04.000 So we might miss key moves as human beings. 04:04.000 --> 04:09.130 So if there's a choice between a smaller advantage or a bigger one, but the bigger one involves having 04:09.130 --> 04:14.140 to calculate a lot more and there's more complexity, there's a lot more things that could go wrong. 04:14.140 --> 04:22.660 Maybe we should be satisfied, satisfied with moves with a lesser advantage, which are less difficult 04:22.660 --> 04:23.620 to calculate. 04:24.010 --> 04:30.950 So as long as our moves keep control to some extent or slightly improve our position or, you know, 04:30.970 --> 04:38.230 there's this long, long term advantage we can say intuitively so we can play these moves knowing they're 04:38.230 --> 04:41.350 actually quite effective or very effective. 04:41.470 --> 04:44.500 And we don't always have to play the most accurate moves in a given position. 04:44.500 --> 04:50.170 We're not computers, and if we did try and do that, it's not very practical, as in we're going to 04:50.170 --> 04:55.840 use so many resources for our head, we're going to exhaust ourselves, we're going to use so many resources 04:55.840 --> 04:56.740 on the clock. 04:56.740 --> 04:58.840 We're going to exhaust our time resource. 04:59.170 --> 05:00.040 So respect. 05:00.100 --> 05:03.880 Saying constraints is really important. 05:05.540 --> 05:13.550 So positional play has been seen by some as if we look at the clouds for predicting it's going to rain. 05:13.550 --> 05:15.020 We can see, oh, it's thick clouds. 05:15.020 --> 05:17.050 It's going to rain soon. 05:17.060 --> 05:19.310 Did we use instrumentation? 05:19.310 --> 05:23.560 Do we have a lot of things to measure, measure pressure, etc.? 05:23.570 --> 05:34.640 No, we can sometimes be intuitive and it's what we see with our eyes rather than using our sensor technology 05:34.640 --> 05:35.150 in chess. 05:35.150 --> 05:40.370 That would be like calculating specific variations, specific moves, resources. 05:40.370 --> 05:44.570 If we can just see what's potentially going to go on, that's great. 05:44.570 --> 05:45.650 It's very economical. 05:45.650 --> 05:49.760 It's very practical skill to have in chess. 05:50.000 --> 05:52.970 Perfect moves designed for perfect. 05:52.970 --> 05:58.610 You know, the tactical nuances of positions to navigate can lead to try and travel later. 05:58.850 --> 06:05.090 And as I say, you know, human calculation is not as reliable as computers calculating. 06:06.290 --> 06:13.790 So ideally, we want to aim for clear variations with no counterplay, often practical choice or simplification, 06:13.790 --> 06:17.510 to cash out our small advantages and when end game sometimes. 06:17.510 --> 06:23.240 So here is an interesting game example Frank Marshall, known as a great attacker and tactician playing 06:23.240 --> 06:30.230 against Capablanca, who's known for his more intuitive, driven play and being able to cash out with 06:30.230 --> 06:32.510 simplification any small advantages. 06:33.200 --> 06:37.490 So Capablanca is like a role model for Karpov and Magnus Carlsen in a way. 06:37.910 --> 06:42.500 So in this game Capablanca with the black pieces. 06:44.400 --> 06:45.900 Place her 94. 06:45.900 --> 06:50.370 He doesn't mind simplification and he's got something in mind here. 06:50.370 --> 06:52.170 So Bishop takes E seven. 06:54.440 --> 06:57.860 We have Queen 67 and now 95. 06:59.520 --> 07:01.800 And here night 64 is played. 07:02.520 --> 07:03.850 And there's more simplification. 07:03.960 --> 07:08.600 It takes e4d, takes E, four, E three. 07:08.610 --> 07:10.140 And now it's our free check. 07:11.830 --> 07:17.560 So this is a very good move in any case, as well as encouraging more simplification. 07:18.010 --> 07:22.210 If 96 had been played, then Marshall could have taken on six. 07:22.270 --> 07:27.430 And this position is going to be maybe a small edge for white. 07:28.780 --> 07:32.440 And there's nothing in the long term here to look forward to as well. 07:33.340 --> 07:36.400 The way Capablanca played it, he's simplifying. 07:36.400 --> 07:40.360 And there's also something to look forward to in the long term. 07:40.450 --> 07:44.920 If we look at the possession, we could look up at the clouds in this position and see that there's 07:44.920 --> 07:47.290 a free to pull majority. 07:47.320 --> 07:54.730 Capablanca consuls here we have Rook FC one, which leaves that long term prospect in the possession. 07:54.820 --> 08:01.420 If we don't try Queen Tang's B seven, then Black would still be okay taking the queens off and this 08:01.420 --> 08:02.950 position at least as a passport. 08:02.980 --> 08:05.680 Now it's still a 2 to 1 majority over here. 08:05.860 --> 08:13.660 So this situation is also it's approaching even perhaps why it should have played this way. 08:15.340 --> 08:23.830 It does give an evenness to the possession, but. 08:24.500 --> 08:30.680 Maybe black can do better than if Rook F.p. one is in play because that seems like an awkward move if 08:30.680 --> 08:33.200 say, rook here. 08:34.070 --> 08:40.060 Then this slight slip up actually gives technically a better position for black. 08:40.070 --> 08:44.150 So anyway, Frank Marshall he wasn't tempted to have Queen takes B7. 08:44.150 --> 08:54.170 So we end up with this long term prospect here in the position and we see Rook a bit so there's free 08:54.170 --> 09:06.530 to pull majority is a great prospect intuitively and though it's not pushed immediately if be five maybe 09:06.530 --> 09:15.320 Queen six as annoying is slightly annoying this position we're going we've wrecked things so we don't 09:15.320 --> 09:21.080 want to invite playing potential damage to our long term aspects assets long term assets. 09:21.080 --> 09:30.860 So Ruby eight we have Queen E for OC, so Quincy seven, Rook C for now, b5a3 now C four. 09:30.860 --> 09:35.000 So Capablanca games often really flow logically. 09:35.000 --> 09:36.740 They're beautiful really in their own right. 09:36.740 --> 09:39.040 The simplicity makes them super beautiful. 09:39.050 --> 09:42.590 Botvinnik has observed that of Capablanca games as well. 09:43.610 --> 09:48.860 It's the simplicity and effectiveness which create elegance, which creates beauty. 09:49.460 --> 09:52.010 So we see Rook 58. 09:52.310 --> 09:53.240 Rook D one. 09:54.480 --> 09:58.350 We see more simplification and ain't so. 09:58.350 --> 10:01.890 What can a big tactician like Frank Marshall do here? 10:01.920 --> 10:04.020 Not much because it's so simplified. 10:04.050 --> 10:09.930 Keeping things simple is often even more important against tactical, aggressive, dynamic players. 10:09.930 --> 10:13.200 But here, yeah, there aren't too many tactics. 10:13.200 --> 10:17.550 In fact, we have here now an accurate move. 10:17.550 --> 10:21.020 One of the most accurate moves it seems, in the possession which is actually Queen E five. 10:21.030 --> 10:24.840 So you might think Capablanca didn't simplify here. 10:24.990 --> 10:30.590 Well if he had played Queen 66, it is actually still possible to play this with Bishop H. 10:30.600 --> 10:33.240 Free for anything to mate white. 10:33.360 --> 10:39.570 And this position is still pleasant enough though for black, but Queen E five is even more accurate, 10:39.570 --> 10:43.050 it seems, according to Monarch engines. 10:43.050 --> 10:44.330 So we have Queen E for now. 10:44.340 --> 10:46.590 Queen size E for Bishop. 10:46.590 --> 10:50.370 Take C4 Rook D one, Shaq, King G two and now a five. 10:50.730 --> 10:54.750 So yes, White's poor majority is just not going anywhere. 10:54.900 --> 10:57.870 So yeah, we're looking up at the chess guy here. 10:57.870 --> 11:01.110 We're saying, Oh, there's a big problem here. 11:01.110 --> 11:05.550 Why is Black's majority threatening to create a passport potential? 11:05.850 --> 11:15.090 So Rook two we have b48x8x Bishop F3 and now rook b one We have Bishop e2. 11:15.540 --> 11:18.570 If rook d2 had been played here, then be free. 11:18.570 --> 11:27.660 This position is very pleasant for black indeed, and in fact black considers C free Hare, Rook, C 11:27.660 --> 11:30.570 one and Roxy two. 11:30.570 --> 11:36.750 This is going to be very, very troublesome for white because there's things like Bishop C four. 11:36.750 --> 11:38.070 It's not even about the passport here. 11:38.070 --> 11:42.870 It's about winning material that with the king on the rook on the seventh rank with juicy targets. 11:43.080 --> 11:45.300 So Bishop E2 was tried. 11:45.300 --> 11:50.010 We have to be free Rook d2 here again. 11:50.190 --> 11:54.630 If rook c free rook takes be2 this position, there's actually a crunching move. 11:54.630 --> 11:55.290 Can you see it? 11:55.830 --> 11:57.120 What is black play here? 11:59.450 --> 12:01.280 Yep, the hook of the pass -- can be used. 12:01.280 --> 12:02.990 That hook is very powerful. 12:02.990 --> 12:03.980 Roxy too. 12:04.610 --> 12:06.350 And it's just winning material. 12:07.580 --> 12:10.130 So fun stuff. 12:11.270 --> 12:19.850 So Rook dd two is played and we have Roxy one, Bishop RD one and now See Free. 12:20.900 --> 12:26.050 This breakthrough is winning material off to be to Black is frightening to Queen and White's overloaded. 12:26.060 --> 12:31.490 So yes, Frank Marshall is in a losing position a piece down now he plays on a few more moves so rook 12:31.490 --> 12:43.030 takes D one rook C2 we have Bishop at five wrote B to C, one wrote Be free Bishop E four check free 12:43.070 --> 12:46.220 if free we have rook to check and we can take out our free. 12:46.220 --> 12:49.040 So this isn't good news at all. 12:49.040 --> 12:56.840 Being a piece down against Capablanca so f4h5g4h takes g for Jack King. 12:56.870 --> 13:04.730 Take g for Rook Takes age to rook before f five check reinforcing the bishop And here. 13:04.730 --> 13:06.380 Yeah, it's all over. 13:06.380 --> 13:08.260 It has been all over for a while. 13:08.270 --> 13:15.470 So Rook takes ea free check against four King g7c7 check king of six. 13:15.470 --> 13:17.960 So here a major threat now to finish off things. 13:17.960 --> 13:21.440 Is Bishop G too difficult for wanting to do anything? 13:21.440 --> 13:30.380 Rook D seven Bishop G to check King G seven End of game if Rook D seven check King H six. 13:30.380 --> 13:32.570 There's no stalemate opportunity. 13:34.050 --> 13:34.650 Yeah. 13:35.070 --> 13:36.030 Or anything. 13:36.030 --> 13:39.330 And so C for, you know, cage free is checkmate. 13:39.540 --> 13:44.670 So anyway, the point of me showing you this game, I mean, there are many, many beautiful games of 13:44.670 --> 13:53.670 Capablanca, but he shares that practicality in my view, that quite often we don't need to calculate 13:53.670 --> 13:54.270 like crazy. 13:54.270 --> 14:00.420 In any case, we can see the longer term patterns in the position pull majorities. 14:00.420 --> 14:01.920 We can see a long way off. 14:01.920 --> 14:05.760 They're like looking up at the sky to see is it going to rain. 14:05.940 --> 14:10.110 We can into it a lot from the pawn structure. 14:10.110 --> 14:16.230 And if we base our play and ideas on the pawn structure, that pressure to use a lot of resources on 14:16.230 --> 14:21.210 the clock, desperately calculating variations as accurately as possible, knowing that we're flawed 14:21.210 --> 14:27.480 in our calculations, all of that is risk can sometimes be minimized through this positional kind of 14:27.480 --> 14:33.210 practical mindset, which the great positional players had. 14:33.510 --> 14:36.600 So Capablanca, in my view, is an absolute delight. 14:36.600 --> 14:42.540 The crystal clear, super elegant games with simplification, especially against Frank Marshall. 14:42.540 --> 14:44.430 There's a lot of fantastic games. 14:44.430 --> 14:50.940 He's really left Marshall without any tactical opportunities and just simplified cashing out advantages 14:50.940 --> 14:56.330 on numerous occasions and that's just wonderful to play through. 14:56.340 --> 15:02.100 Obviously it wouldn't have been fun for Frank Marshall, though, for his style to be nullified. 15:02.370 --> 15:06.660 But okay, so we have this idea of being practical. 15:06.660 --> 15:11.850 You know, it was once something I found the mysterious word, you know, what does it mean, practical? 15:11.850 --> 15:18.690 You know, you can look at ARP, but in chess terms or in general terms for me are great way of looking 15:18.690 --> 15:24.060 at things that are practical in real life is how how many how many much resources do they use? 15:24.060 --> 15:27.090 Do they respect the constraints that we have? 15:28.650 --> 15:34.110 You know, there's no point inventing something which uses tons of resources, which it's difficult 15:34.110 --> 15:35.850 to get hold of. 15:35.880 --> 15:37.290 That would be impractical. 15:37.290 --> 15:42.150 Practical solutions respect the fundamental constraints. 15:42.150 --> 15:44.040 And we're playing practical chess. 15:44.040 --> 15:48.540 We are respecting several different types of constraints. 15:48.920 --> 15:56.670 The use of our clock chess clock, the use of our brain not being too exhausted, calculating resources, 15:57.150 --> 15:58.530 use for calculation all the time. 15:58.530 --> 16:05.880 So yes, this is a very practical, human intuitive way of playing, to use our eyes eye an eye for 16:05.880 --> 16:12.510 these longer term advantages or plans based on the slowest aspects of the position, the advantages 16:12.510 --> 16:14.490 which are not disappearing that quickly. 16:14.730 --> 16:21.060 So this is a really great effective way of playing chess that's proven time and time again by the great 16:21.060 --> 16:26.130 positional players like Capablanca, like Karpov, like Magnus Carlsen. 16:26.340 --> 16:30.090 Okay, I hope you enjoyed this so much.