WEBVTT 00:00.990 --> 00:01.860 Hi there. 00:02.160 --> 00:08.970 In this lecture, I want to talk about the notion of being over driven by principles and methods. 00:09.000 --> 00:16.590 I remember when I first read my system by Nimzowitsch, I got carried away and I probably increased 00:16.590 --> 00:22.740 my importance of making sure my pawn structure was good and the opponent had damaged pawn structures. 00:23.460 --> 00:29.730 Funnily enough, I lost a series of games where I had terrible pawn structures, so the very thing I 00:29.730 --> 00:35.280 was trying to avoid, I actually got I didn't know what on earth was going on. 00:36.060 --> 00:45.060 Later I tried to internalize more and be a bit more cynical about what is actually working in my game 00:45.060 --> 00:48.420 positions, what is actually an exploitable weakness. 00:48.420 --> 00:54.300 The whole notion of an exploitable weakness I explored as opposed to a general weakness. 00:54.360 --> 00:56.190 It doesn't matter if you've got double pawns. 00:56.190 --> 00:59.280 Maybe there's upsides and the same in life. 00:59.280 --> 01:02.610 Generally, it doesn't matter if something looks bad, maybe there's an upside. 01:02.610 --> 01:04.980 You might have to walk to the shops instead of drive that. 01:04.980 --> 01:06.090 Well, maybe there's an upside. 01:06.090 --> 01:07.580 You get a bit of exercise. 01:07.590 --> 01:10.290 So on the chessboard you might have terrible looking things. 01:10.290 --> 01:16.560 You might be, it seems, playing a completely anti positional knight move like knight on the rim or 01:16.560 --> 01:17.490 Knight into a corner. 01:17.490 --> 01:18.990 But even Nimzowitsch did that. 01:18.990 --> 01:26.130 Actually he demonstrated that sometimes paradoxically, you know, terrible looking moves, decentralizing 01:26.130 --> 01:28.980 might actually be effective in given situations. 01:28.980 --> 01:34.890 So even Nimzowitsch demonstrated that he often played what seems to be, you know, like mysterious 01:34.890 --> 01:35.340 rook moves. 01:35.340 --> 01:38.160 But they had an element of prevention where he'd move. 01:38.160 --> 01:46.350 ROOK But if the opponent did this, the rook would open up, did something, and we have to be in the 01:46.350 --> 01:51.960 driving seat in our own games and we're aware of the time limit, maybe the weaknesses of the opponent, 01:51.960 --> 01:57.480 maybe the tournament situation demands that you have to win so you can bias things as well. 01:57.480 --> 01:58.440 Like Emanuel Lasker. 01:58.440 --> 02:05.700 He biased the whole theories and principles to try and make it into a formidable winning weapon, adaptable 02:05.700 --> 02:11.760 to circumstances and the opponent, etc. If we remain in the driving seat, that is key. 02:11.760 --> 02:18.600 So you'll get a lot of principles and we could call principles as first class methods which seem to 02:18.600 --> 02:25.800 be universally accepted almost, you know, very well held beliefs, almost virtual laws of chess. 02:26.370 --> 02:34.140 But you have a license, a creative license in your given positions to find what works in that particular 02:34.140 --> 02:39.300 position and in the context that you're playing, you know, which opponent, the time, how much time 02:39.300 --> 02:40.530 you've got left, etc.. 02:40.530 --> 02:42.210 So you've got a factual all that in. 02:42.240 --> 02:46.980 You have to remain in the driving seat and take responsibility for what you're going to play. 02:46.980 --> 02:54.630 Don't be overly driven by any principles or methods given in this course and even the small wins. 02:54.630 --> 02:55.980 You've got to be cynical. 02:55.980 --> 02:57.930 Are they really small wins? 02:57.930 --> 03:01.380 What if you do get a pass pawn but it's easily blockaded? 03:01.380 --> 03:02.940 What if you do get the bishop power? 03:02.940 --> 03:06.360 But the knights of the opponents run rampant. 03:06.390 --> 03:13.440 This is a big disclaimer, basically on all the advice in this course, whether we call them principles 03:13.440 --> 03:20.040 or just methods, so not so alluring or we call them small wins or even gigantic wins, if there was 03:20.040 --> 03:26.790 a section on gigantic wins like being several pieces up, even that, you know, you might deliberately 03:26.790 --> 03:31.980 be several pieces down in a game because it's part of a force chap mate sequence you're going to make 03:31.980 --> 03:32.550 the opponent. 03:32.550 --> 03:38.850 So the key thing is you have to retain control over your decision making process, and that's a common 03:38.850 --> 03:43.440 pitfall for reading chess books on the theory of the game rather than something concrete. 03:43.440 --> 03:49.320 It's sometimes you see the theory as a hammer and everything else is nails and you just want to use 03:49.320 --> 03:50.730 the hammer now in your games. 03:50.730 --> 03:56.460 But you need to use the tool, the tools you pick up appropriately in the positions you have. 03:56.460 --> 04:03.660 So you have to remain in control and be kind of cynical about what is actually exploitable or not. 04:04.410 --> 04:10.020 I remember in my degree in computing in business, we were looking at functional languages and a lot 04:10.020 --> 04:15.960 of high floated concepts and principles, you know, like carried functions, you know, polymorphism. 04:15.960 --> 04:22.290 Some of those came to popularity today and are part of general languages, but some of them seems, 04:22.290 --> 04:28.380 you know, a bit impractical and maybe haven't lasted the test of time so much. 04:28.380 --> 04:35.040 So we get principles and advice in all sorts of domains and some of them might not actually be that 04:35.040 --> 04:36.960 useful and some of them are. 04:37.650 --> 04:40.530 And it really depends on your own circumstances as well. 04:40.530 --> 04:46.250 Is it actually appropriate and effective in a particular circumstance? 04:46.260 --> 04:53.580 So principles, they offer general guidance, but we in my view, have to be nerdy in our positions. 04:53.580 --> 04:54.960 We have to take interest. 04:54.960 --> 04:59.670 When I say nerdy, I mean taking a keen interest into particular nuances and down. 04:59.840 --> 05:04.310 Sides of the opponent's position, which we might exploit in capsulize on in particular. 05:04.340 --> 05:06.920 So I like that idea of being nerdy all the time. 05:06.920 --> 05:11.870 It doesn't matter how many principles you take on board from this course, which seem really, really 05:11.870 --> 05:18.440 amazing and almost like laws of chess explaining the way of how things work. 05:18.440 --> 05:20.300 Just blockade the opponents pawns and everything. 05:20.420 --> 05:21.110 Wonderfully. 05:21.140 --> 05:28.070 Maybe not, you know, in your current position that you have so concrete moves you find might completely 05:28.070 --> 05:32.720 run against principles like giving the opponent about counterplay deliberately, we say about not giving 05:32.720 --> 05:37.340 the opponent any counterplay, but sometimes you might have to in your position, you might have to 05:37.340 --> 05:39.980 give them something to play with to distract resources. 05:39.980 --> 05:40.820 There's an upside. 05:40.820 --> 05:44.570 You've got to find the upsides, basically, of whatever. 05:44.570 --> 05:49.580 You investigate what actually works, what has upsides, what actually works in your position. 05:49.580 --> 05:58.040 So I don't want you to fall into this big trap that I fell into that basically we need to be cynical 05:58.040 --> 05:58.700 about what we learn. 05:58.970 --> 06:01.730 You know, the big trap of nimzowitsch my system. 06:01.730 --> 06:07.340 Like me, I just found I was overly driven basically by principles. 06:07.340 --> 06:10.040 I expected them to win in my concrete game positions. 06:10.040 --> 06:13.040 No, you have to win in your concrete game positions. 06:13.040 --> 06:20.120 You are the driver, not some amazing principles, which might be great advice generally, but we're 06:20.120 --> 06:21.260 talking generally. 06:21.710 --> 06:24.620 So yes, the specifics of your position. 06:25.610 --> 06:25.970 Are you? 06:25.970 --> 06:30.800 They give you a creative license for you to take the decisions. 06:31.580 --> 06:37.730 So a healthy cynicism for anything in this course or any other courses is useful. 06:37.730 --> 06:44.270 You've got to actually play a concrete move in your games and it might match the circumstances of your 06:44.270 --> 06:48.920 opponent, how much time you have, etc. There's no such thing in human chess is the best move. 06:49.460 --> 06:54.140 And even computers can't find the best move they need sometimes a bit more time to examine deeper and 06:54.140 --> 06:54.560 deeper. 06:54.560 --> 06:57.920 You know, it's very difficult to find the best move sometimes in any case. 06:58.950 --> 07:00.400 So be aware of that as well. 07:00.420 --> 07:11.070 So Adams Michael Adams did this podcast interview, Perpetual podcast, and he talks about players that 07:11.070 --> 07:12.780 seemingly, you know, they're too principled. 07:12.780 --> 07:18.630 It's like they've been stifled by their positional courses that they might might have been on and they 07:18.630 --> 07:20.130 miss out golden opportunities. 07:20.130 --> 07:25.050 Like maybe they could have accepted double pawns because their pieces would have been great after, 07:25.260 --> 07:26.820 you know, there's always these upsides. 07:26.820 --> 07:33.480 You've got to make sure, are they actually there for you if you follow the principles or rebel against 07:33.480 --> 07:33.900 principles? 07:33.900 --> 07:34.650 Totally. 07:35.250 --> 07:36.630 So be aware of that. 07:36.630 --> 07:40.350 The principles are just that, a kind of first class methods. 07:40.350 --> 07:45.060 You know, I could we could have just called everything methods and not touch the word principle, because 07:45.060 --> 07:52.650 it seems to be set in stone that, you know, you you want to minimize the opponents counterplay. 07:53.190 --> 07:57.480 You don't want to have unprotected pieces, for example, etc.. 07:57.480 --> 07:59.520 You pick up a lot of principles from all sorts of courses. 07:59.520 --> 08:03.120 So just be aware that sometimes you do want to leave pieces unprotected. 08:03.120 --> 08:05.250 It really depends on the situation you have. 08:05.520 --> 08:09.990 So, okay, we're basically acting like the hyper modernist. 08:09.990 --> 08:15.720 The hyper modernist for established theory of the game found the useful exceptions, and those useful 08:15.720 --> 08:19.020 exceptions were fed back into the theory to extend the theory. 08:19.020 --> 08:22.290 So that's why they influenced opening theory. 08:22.290 --> 08:29.700 We have ideas of controlling the center from afar, etc. All these dynamic ideas be more and more entertained. 08:29.700 --> 08:32.100 So chess is a very in context game. 08:32.100 --> 08:35.520 It's a very concrete game as my friend Costas carry on. 08:35.530 --> 08:37.860 And as mentioned, it's a concrete game. 08:37.980 --> 08:43.920 So any principles you have, just remember to be cynical, not be overdriven in your own games. 08:43.920 --> 08:45.000 You are the driver. 08:45.000 --> 08:47.880 Just remember that you are the driver in your own games. 08:47.880 --> 08:54.600 You need to find what works, what is actually a real weakness from what seems to be seven different 08:54.600 --> 09:00.390 wings of the opponent's position from an actual one might only be one and only if you wait a bit that's 09:00.390 --> 09:02.100 actually more even more exploitable. 09:02.100 --> 09:03.990 So just bear and bear that in mind. 09:04.020 --> 09:07.920 Don't be overexcited by all of these apparent downsides. 09:07.920 --> 09:10.170 You've got to find the exploitable ones. 09:11.100 --> 09:12.870 So night on the rim might be good. 09:13.080 --> 09:15.090 Having double pawns of back pawns might be good. 09:15.090 --> 09:19.050 Investigate concretely, find what is truly exploitable in context. 09:19.050 --> 09:20.520 Chances of concrete game. 09:20.520 --> 09:25.560 Now here just to show you this this game we see later on in the course, but I'll take you to a particular 09:25.560 --> 09:30.240 position Adams here with black against Grandmaster Gordon. 09:30.990 --> 09:35.220 So Steven Gordon, this is in the 2010 British Championship. 09:35.220 --> 09:40.860 Adams had just played Bishop Essex and we see F4 and it seems as though isn't why gaining space you 09:40.860 --> 09:47.880 know Rook had a and now isn't why also getting a kind of positional combination to double Adams's pawns 09:47.880 --> 09:51.390 Adams just retreats the bishop so pawns don't go backwards. 09:51.390 --> 09:55.260 That is a kind of universal law, but sometimes that could be good as well. 09:55.260 --> 09:57.990 If you can make use of the pawn advantage. 09:58.170 --> 10:02.820 Advances, you can see that the dark squares have been slightly weakened, this diagonal has been slightly 10:02.820 --> 10:03.660 weakened. 10:03.780 --> 10:09.090 So there are downsides creeping in in White's own play, but it seems to be designed for Knight G for 10:09.090 --> 10:13.500 with the excitement of damaging Adams's pawn structure with F6. 10:13.500 --> 10:15.300 So why does Adams entertain this? 10:15.300 --> 10:20.490 Well, this is class to entertain this because we look at the resulting position. 10:20.490 --> 10:23.220 And so what if black's got double pawns? 10:23.250 --> 10:24.630 Is it actually exploitable? 10:24.630 --> 10:31.470 In other words, in this given context, are these pieces relevant for exploiting the double pawns? 10:31.470 --> 10:35.490 Is there another knight on E free which makes 95 winning the Queen or something? 10:35.490 --> 10:39.000 No, there's a bishop protecting F5 in this particular context. 10:39.000 --> 10:41.790 We need to see what's working and what's not. 10:41.790 --> 10:46.850 Why did just extinguish the five square, which could have been a useful outpost square? 10:46.890 --> 10:49.170 But there's nothing else much to do here. 10:49.170 --> 10:52.770 Unless White wants to lose a piece 94, we just stamp it off. 10:52.770 --> 10:54.240 So 95 check. 10:54.450 --> 10:56.670 Bishop takes that five, E takes Black's king. 10:56.670 --> 10:58.020 Safety seems to be quite good. 10:58.020 --> 11:00.450 Black's control of the dark square seems to be quite good. 11:00.450 --> 11:05.130 In other words, if we're upside centric, we see that, oh, there are upsides here. 11:05.130 --> 11:12.450 And this bishop's still blunted by the pawn on C six, Adams plays Rook for gaining authority over a 11:12.450 --> 11:12.720 file. 11:12.720 --> 11:13.980 That's a great upside. 11:13.980 --> 11:14.220 Why? 11:14.220 --> 11:16.620 It doesn't really want to lose two rooks for a queen. 11:17.040 --> 11:20.670 So we see a pair of rooks coming off here and now Rook have one. 11:20.670 --> 11:24.150 And now rook d4 preparing actually to dominate the default. 11:24.150 --> 11:26.250 What a great upside here is what is extinguished. 11:26.250 --> 11:32.700 Rook F4 is a threat of wanting to entertain Rook f4 Black's can entertain rook dd too soon we have be 11:32.700 --> 11:41.070 free and now 97 and another upside emerging here you know this this sinful apparently accepting double 11:41.070 --> 11:41.550 pawns. 11:41.550 --> 11:47.520 What about this knight coming to E5 and in fact Rook d one here is played. 11:47.520 --> 11:49.770 And guess what Adams plays here which. 11:50.990 --> 11:56.890 Is really quite crushing, which causes resignation basically. 11:56.900 --> 11:59.090 Can you see blacks plan win? 12:04.070 --> 12:05.660 This was a terrible mistake. 12:06.760 --> 12:11.380 Because now Quincy five and all of a sudden White has to resign. 12:13.240 --> 12:16.720 If if Queen takes the five, Rook takes, the one is check. 12:16.720 --> 12:18.460 And then we're taking on C5. 12:18.640 --> 12:21.610 If Rook takes DD four, we're taking on C two. 12:22.120 --> 12:24.280 And this is easily winning off the check. 12:24.460 --> 12:26.620 The queen is too much for the rook and bishop. 12:27.850 --> 12:29.980 Yeah, it's just a. 12:30.770 --> 12:31.550 Terrible. 12:32.180 --> 12:36.870 And you know what else you know, Rook? 12:36.870 --> 12:37.250 See one? 12:37.250 --> 12:43.070 There's rook dd one, and that's a double check and a mate as an example. 12:44.270 --> 12:45.320 So, yeah, it shows. 12:45.500 --> 12:47.360 Sometimes you've got to investigate further. 12:47.360 --> 12:50.630 Concretely, in your own games remain as the driver. 12:50.660 --> 12:54.110 Doesn't matter what principles methods small wins. 12:54.230 --> 12:57.620 Even if there was a section absolutely gigantic positional wins. 12:57.620 --> 12:59.360 What if in your position. 13:00.780 --> 13:02.820 You know, it didn't quite win. 13:04.200 --> 13:05.940 There were upsides to the opponent. 13:05.940 --> 13:10.100 And apparently, you know what, Slade was, you know, part SPAWN'S on the sixth rank. 13:10.110 --> 13:14.750 You know, they're worth their weight in gold, as many books say, You know, But what if you get checkmated? 13:14.760 --> 13:20.400 You've got to make sure that your advantages are exploitable or the opponent's apparent advantages are 13:20.400 --> 13:21.210 actually exploitable. 13:21.240 --> 13:23.180 What upsides are you giving to the opponent? 13:23.190 --> 13:24.450 What upsides do you get? 13:24.810 --> 13:28.500 Be upside centric, be in control. 13:28.860 --> 13:31.500 So don't be overly principled. 13:31.500 --> 13:34.470 And it's another thing, just like this advice. 13:34.470 --> 13:36.300 There's terrible advice through chess history. 13:36.300 --> 13:38.510 Like a bad plan is better than no plan. 13:38.520 --> 13:42.960 Another one is we hear these commenters say, Oh, this is a principled move. 13:42.960 --> 13:44.520 Oh, this is a principled move. 13:44.520 --> 13:48.120 And you get the idea that if you're not, what are these principles? 13:48.540 --> 13:51.630 So you look them up and you kind of get driven by principles. 13:51.630 --> 13:55.680 Well, sometimes playing unprincipled moves is the way to go. 13:55.710 --> 14:01.650 It's like this allure of having to always have a plan or always having to play in a principled way. 14:02.310 --> 14:06.450 No, you've got to have a dynamic view of the game. 14:06.450 --> 14:09.090 Chess is a concrete game, a very concrete game. 14:09.090 --> 14:14.670 You just have to look at the engine competitions to see Stockfish playing what seems to be absolutely 14:14.670 --> 14:18.720 ridiculous stuff with treble pawns and bad pieces. 14:18.720 --> 14:19.980 But you know, it wins in the end. 14:19.980 --> 14:21.030 It's worked it all out. 14:21.030 --> 14:23.040 You know, it's got the cohesion to work it all out. 14:23.040 --> 14:24.000 We've got to be like that. 14:24.000 --> 14:28.050 We've got to be striving to take control of our positions. 14:28.050 --> 14:33.870 But the role of principles in general, they are useful guidance to check out. 14:33.870 --> 14:38.190 In the first case, if the principle says, you know, centralize pieces, that generally is good, 14:38.190 --> 14:42.840 for example, or having a nice support structure in general. 14:42.840 --> 14:48.870 In the general case, it's often valuable advice in general, but you need to do the investigations, 14:48.870 --> 14:53.360 the concrete investigations to make sure of what is working and what's not okay. 14:53.370 --> 15:00.780 So I hope this is inspirational, inspirational to you and don't be overdriven by principles, methods, 15:00.780 --> 15:01.680 etc.. 15:02.140 --> 15:03.750 Okay, So much.