Book Reviews

A Champion's Champion
Hanon W. Russell

Garry Kasparov on My Great Predecessors, Part I, by Garry Kasparov with

Dmitry Plisetsky, 2003 Everyman Chess, Hardcover, Figurine Algebraic Notation,
464pp., $35.00

When one thinks about Garry Kasparov, what comes to

mind is powerful, dynamic chess – brilliant talent with
a slash-and-burn style. Any idea of the world’s
strongest player as an historian simply does not
compute. Until now.

Kasparov, with the assistance of Russian historian

Dmitry Plisetsky, has written a three-volume series
dedicated to the examination and historical
appreciation of the world champions. Entitled Garry
Kasparov on My Great Predecessors, Volume 1 has
just been released.

From the Introduction:

“For quite some time I have been wanting to write a book on the new
and modern history of chess. And moreover, deviating from the
traditional approach, to demonstrate the continuous progress of the
game through the play of the world champions. Since it is this elite
group of super-stars (only 14 in 117 years!) that has made the
greatest contribution to chess: to win the supreme title, they had to
overcome the best of the best, discover something new, and catch
highly experienced and talented opponents unawares…

“Awaiting you is a wonderful collection of masterpieces, created by

the best chessplayers in the world and studied the microscope of the
latest analytical computer programs; hence – a great number of
amazing finds and discoveries. I hope that this work will make it
possible to see the colossal evolution of chess during the past one
hundred and fifty years, which is fully comparable with scientific
and technological progress…”

The production and layout are top notch. It is a large format hardcover edition with
a double-column presentation, clear diagrams with figurine algebraic notation. The
material is divided into five chapters, an introduction and two indexes, to wit:
Introduction; Chapter 1: Chess Before Steinitz; Chapter 2: Wilhelm the First;

file:///C|/cafe/Reviews/books.htm (1 of 8) [07/14/2003 8:47:01 AM]

Book Reviews

Chapter 3: Emanuel the Second; Chapter 4: José Raúl the Third; Chapter 5:
Alexander the Fourth; Index of Players; and Index of Openings. There are 148
games or game fragments, most very heavily annotated and each game is
introduced by text of at least one paragraph (sometimes much more) putting the
significance of the game into perspective for the reader.

There is an enormous amount of historical information and material contained in

this book. However, when asked how many worked on the book, Kasparov stated
that it was only he and Dmitry Plisetsky. The concept for and the eventual
production of this series was more of an evolutionary process rather than an idée
fixe. Kasparov explains how it came about in some detail in the ChessCafe
interview now posted in the Skittles Room.

The reader may get a good idea of the presentation of the games from the following
excerpt, taken from pages 132-135 of the book…

And then came the day of the fourth meeting between the leader
and the world champion, 4 January 1896. Had Pillsbury won – and
he was playing White – the outcome of the match-tournament
would have been practically decided. The ultra-talented American
would have clearly become the No. 1 challenger, and Lasker would
possibly have had to play an official match with him for the world
championship, under conditions highly unfavorable for him… But
things turned out differently.

Game 41
H. Pillsbury-Em. Lasker
St. Petersburg 1895/96
10th round
Queen’s Gambit D50

1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 c5 5 Bg5

Pillsbury’s favorite move. Nowadays 5 cxd5 or 5 e3 is preferred.

5…cxd4 6 Qxd4

After 6 Nxd4, as was established only in the 20th century, 6…e5

equalizes.

6…Nc6

Quiter is 6...Be7!? (Lasker) 7 cxd5 exd5 8 e3 Nc6 and …0-0.

7 Qh4

7 Bxf6! is correct – Game No. 42.

7…Be7

The pedigree of this variation extends from the game Blackburne-

Showalter (New York 1889), which went 7...d4? 8 0-0-0 e5 9 e3

file:///C|/cafe/Reviews/books.htm (2 of 8) [07/14/2003 8:47:01 AM]

Book Reviews

Bc5 10 exd4 exd4 11 Nd5 Qa5 12 Bxf6 gxf6

13 Nxf6+ Kf8 14 Re1 Be6 15 Rxe6 fxe6 16 Qh6+ with crushing

threats.
8 0-0-0?!

A risky idea. However, if 8 e3,

then 8…Qb6 is unpleasant, for
example: 9 Rb1 h6! 10 Bd3
dxc4 11 Bxc4 0-0, and 12
Bxh6?! gxh6 13 Qxh6 is bad in
view of 13…Qc5! Instead 8
cxd5 exd5 9 Rd1 is perhaps
more solid, but it was not for
this that Pillsbury played 5 Bg5
and 6 Qxd4.

8…Qa5 9 e3

In one of the simultaneous displays he gave in 1900, Lasker risked

9 cxd5 exd5 10 e3 Be6 11 Nd4 Rc8 12 Kb1 h6 13 Nxe6 fxe6 14
Qh3 Kf7 15 Bf4, but he could have paid for this in the event of
15…Nb4 16 a3 Rxc3!

9…Bd7 10 Kb1 h6!

‘A seemingly simple, but
basically brilliant move.’ (B.
Vainstein). ‘Thus either the
bishop must be exchanged or
the white queen stay where it
is.” (Lasker)

11 cxd5 exd5 12 Nd4 0-0! 13

Bxf6

If 13 Bxh6 $6 gxh6 14 Qxh6

there is the adequate reply
14…Ne4.

13…Bxf6 14 Qh5

Not even contemplating the restrained 14 Qg3.

14…Nxd4 15 exd4 Be6!

Lasker already knows how to reply to the advance of the f-pawn.

16 f4

16 Ne4? Bxd4!; 16 Bc4 Rfd8! and …Rac8.

16…Rac8 17 f5

file:///C|/cafe/Reviews/books.htm (3 of 8) [07/14/2003 8:47:01 AM]

Book Reviews

17…Rxc3!!

A fine, deeply calculated

combination, which any
grandmaster could be proud of
even today. It is beyond the
powers of even a strong
computer – here additional
forces are needed… Whereas
after the prosaic 17...Bd7 18
Qf3 the chances would have
become double-edged.

18 fxe6

Pillsbury avoids 18 bxc3, not wishing to go into a depressing

endgame with problematic drawing chances after 18…Qxc3 19
Qf3! (19 fxe6? Qb4+ and …Rc8) 19…Qxf3! (less clear is
19...Qb4+ 20 Qb3 Bxf5+ 21 Bd3 Qxb3+ 22 axb3 Bg4 23 Rd2 Bxd4
24 Bc2 Bf6 25 Rxd5 Rc8 26 Bf5) 20 gxf3 Bxf5+ 21 Bd3 Bh3. Or
perhaps he had noticed the unexpected quiet move 18...Bd7!!, when
after 19 Qf3 Rc8 Black has a decisive attack: 20 Rc1 Bxd4 21 cxd4
Bxf5+ and …Qb4+; 20 Kb2 Bxf5 21 Be2 Be4 22 Qh3 Rc6; 20 Rd3
Bb5 21 Re3 Bxd4 22 Bxb5 (22 cxd4 Qb4+ 23 Rb3 Qe1+)
22…Qxb5+ 23 Ka1 Bxe3 (23...Bf6!? 24 Rb1 Qc5 25 Rxb7 d4) 24
Qxe3 Qc4 25 Kb2 Rc6.

18…Ra3!!

The point of the combination. This paradoxical rook sacrifice forces

the white king to begin a fight for its own existence.
19 exf7+?

The seemingly tempting 19 e7?

Also fails to disrupt the
coordination of the black pieces
– 19…Re8! (after 19...Rc8?? 20
Qf5! the queen returns to the
defence) 20 bxa3 Qb6+ 21 Kc2
(21 Ka1 Bxd4+ and …Rxe7)
21…Rc8+ 22 Kd2 Bxd4 and
White has no defence: 23 e8Q+
Rxe8 24 Bd3 Qa5+ 25 Kc1
Rc8+ or 23 Ke2 Qe6+ 24 Kf3 Qe3+ 25 Kg4 g6 26 Qxd5 h5+ with
mate.

It also seems hopeless to play 19 bxa3! Qb6+ 20 Kc2 (20 Ka1?

Bxd4+ 21 Rxd4 Qxd4+ 22 Kb1 fxe6 23 Be2 Qe4+ 24 Ka1 Rf2 with
a winning attack: 25 Re1 Qd4+ 26 Kb1 Qd2) 20…Rc8+ 21 Kd2
Qxd4+ 22 Ke1 (22 Bd3? Rc2+!! 23 Kxc2 Qb2 mate) 22…Qc3+ but
the e6-pawn serves as a shield for the king and by the sequence 23
Ke2 Qc2+ 24 Rd2 Qe4+ 25 Kd1! (but not instead 25 Kf2? when the
continuation is 25…Bd4+ 26 Kg3 Rc3+) 25…Qb1+ 26 Ke2 or 23

file:///C|/cafe/Reviews/books.htm (4 of 8) [07/14/2003 8:47:01 AM]

Book Reviews

Rd2 Qe3+ (23...fxe6 24 Qe2 Bg5 25 Qxe6+ Kh8 26 Qe2 Qa1+) 24

Kd1 Bb2 25 Qxf7+ Kh8 26 Bc4! Rxc4 27 Qf8+ Kh7 28 Qf5+
White gains a draw.

19…Rxf7 20 bxa3 Qb6+

21 Bb5!

The best chance. Both 21 Ka1

Bxd4+ and 21 Kc2 Rc7+ 22
Kd2 Qxd4+ 23 Ke1 Qc3+! 24
Rd2 Re7+ 25 Be2 Bg5 were
hopeless.

21…Qxb5+ 22 Ka1 Rc7?

What a pity… After spending

masses of energy and creative
effort, Lasker misses a simple win – 22...Qc4!, for example: 23 Rd2
Qc3+ or 23 Qg4 Re7! (threatening …Re4 or …Re2) 24 Rhe1
Bxd4+ 25 Qxd4 Rxe1 etc.

23 Rd2 Rc4 24 Rhd1?

An error in reply: 24 Qe2?! Qb6! 25 Rhd1 Rxd4 26 Rxd4 Bxd4+ 27

Rxd4 Qxd4+ 28 Kb1 Qe4+ was also poor, but a pretty draw would
have resulted from 24 Re1! Qa5! (24...Rxd4? 25 Re8+ Kh7 26
Qf5+ g6 27 Qxf6 Qxe8 28 Qxd4 wins for White) 25 Re8+ Kh7 26
Qf5+ g6 27 Re7+!! (27 Qxf6?? Rc1+ 28 Kb2 Qc3 mate) 27…Bxe7
28 Qf7+ Kh8 29 Qe8+ Kg7 30 Qxe7+ with perpetual.
24…Rc3?

Another serious mistake, which

was also not pointed out by the
commentators. 24...Qc6! would
have won, for example: 25 Kb1
Bg5 26 Qe2 Bxd2 27 Qxd2 Qd6
etc.

25 Qf5

Possible was 25 Re1!? Qc4

(25...Kf8 $2 26 Rf2! And Rxf6+, while after 25...Rc8?! White has a
clear advantage) 26 Re8+ Kh7 27 Qf5+ g6 28 Re7+!, forcing a
draw: 28…Bg7 29 Rxg7+ Kxg7 30 Qd7+ Kg8 (but not 30...Kf6?
31 Rf2+ Kg5 32 Qe7+ etc.) or 28...Bxe7 29 Qf7+ Kh8 30 Qe8+.

25…Qc4

25...Rxa3?! 26 Qc8+ Kf7 27 Rb2 was unclear.

26 Kb2?

file:///C|/cafe/Reviews/books.htm (5 of 8) [07/14/2003 8:47:01 AM]

Book Reviews

Lasker’s time-trouble haste had upset Pillsbury’s equanimity: he

sensed that his opponent had lost the thread of the game and… he
grew nervous. And yet 26 Kb1! (26 Qf1?! Qa4; 26 Qb1 Rxa3 27
Qb2 Rc3 28 Kb1 b5 is level) 26…Rxa3 27 Rc1! (previously they
considered only the insipid 27 Qc2 Rc3 28 Qb2 b5! 29 Rc2! Bxd4
30 Rxc3 Bxc3) would have set Black unpleasant problems:
27…Qb5+ (27...Rc3? 28 Rxc3 Qxc3 29 Qxd5+ Kh8 30 Rd1) 28
Ka1 Qa5 29 Rc8+ Kf7 30 Rb2, when it is now White who has an
attack. A couple of accurate moves – and chess history could have
taken a different course…
26…Rxa3!!

This is some kind of mysticism:

the second rook is also
sacrificed on the very same
square! I think that Pillsbury
must have been unable to
believe his eyes…

27 Qe6+ Kh7?

27...Kh8 would have won

cleanly – 28 Qe8+ (28 Kb1 Bxd4) 28…Kh7 29 Kb1 (29 Kxa3?
Qc3+ 30 Ka4 a6) 29…Bxd4 30 Qe2 Qb4+ 31 Rb2 Bxb2 32 Qxb2
Qe4+ 33 Ka1 Ra4 etc.
28 Kxa3??

Worn out by Black’s ferocious

onslaught, Pillsbury walks into
a mate. Also bad was 28 Kb1?
Bxd4! 29 Qf5+ g6 30 Qd7+
Bg7. But for some reason no
one has pointed out the saving
28 Qf5+! Kh8 29 Kb1!, for
example: 29…Rxa2! (29...Bxd4
30 Qf8+ and Qxa3) 30 Rxa2
Qb3+ 31 Kc1 Bg5+ (31...Qxa2
32 Qc8+ Kh7 33 Qc2+) 32 Rad2 Qc3+ 33 Qc2 Qa1+ 34 Qb1 Qc3+
with perpetual check.

28…Qc3+ 29 Ka4 b5+! (the final point) 30 Kxb5 Qc4+ 31 Ka5

Bd8+

In view of 32 Qb6 Bxb6 mate White resigned. Later Lasker called

this game the best of his career.

It is clear from the overall tone and general approach in the book
that Kasparov has an abiding respected, at time bordering on
reverence, for his predecessors, including those that almost made it
to the top of Olympus. Another nice touch is the selection of quotes
from world champions at the end of each chapter. So, for example,
at the end of the Alekhine chapter, there are quotes by Lasker,
Capablanca, Euwe, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Spassky, Fischer, Karpov

file:///C|/cafe/Reviews/books.htm (6 of 8) [07/14/2003 8:47:01 AM]

Book Reviews

and a this brief one from Tal: “In Alekhine we are captivated by his
exceptional combinative talent and his whole-hearted love for
chess.”

However, all is not peaches and cream. The book is marred by lack of both a
bibliography and general index, two essential elements for a book of this nature
and scope. The absence of a bibliography is a serious omission. Quotes and
analysis by others are freely used, but rarely if ever are sources given. To his credit,
when asked about these omissions in the interview, Kasparov readily admitted that
they should have been included and said that he would do his best to see to it that
they would appear in any subsequent editions.

There are also some questions about the accuracy of some assertions. For example,
in a number of places, reference is made to an alleged provision in the agreement
between Capablanca and Alekhine that their title match would be declared drawn if
the players reached a point where they both had five wins (the rules did provide
that the first to achieve six wins would be the winner). However, the London Rules
of 1922, the rules under which this match was played, contain no such provision. In
addition, we are not aware of any other credible source that might confirm the
accuracy of the 5-5 provision.

Again, when this was pointed out, Kasparov conceded that indeed it might not be
correct, but noted, without being able to give a specific source, that this was the
understanding both he and Plisetsky had. Last but not least, the text is in need of a
competent editor. Awkward phrases and strange word orders abound, leaving the
reader wondering what went wrong in the editing process (assuming there even
was an editing process after the translated manuscript had been prepared). And the
reader is pummeled with the overuse of the ellipsis (the three dots appearing in the
middle or end of a sentence) to the extent that it becomes irritating. The ball was
clearly dropped when it came to editing the English version of the manuscript, a
very unfortunate state of affairs in view of the high profile of the book and its
authors.

Anticipation for this book has been high throughout the chess world. Most players
will welcome the deeply annotated games as well as Garry’s view of the world
champions as something we have dubbed an ‘integrated continuum’ – inexorably
linked to one another on a number of levels. The book may not meet the
expectations of historians who insist on applying severe academic standards. The
shortcomings have been noted and, as we found in the interview, acknowledged.
This book, and the subsequent volumes in the series will be well received by the
chess community, and justifiably so. Garry Kasparov on My Great Predecessors
represents a unique look at the best by the best. Garry has gone where no champion
has gone before. And he has gone there with an open mind and inquiring intellect.
We like that a lot. Thanks, Garry…

file:///C|/cafe/Reviews/books.htm (7 of 8) [07/14/2003 8:47:01 AM]

Book Reviews

[ChessCafe Home Page] [Book Review] [Bulletin Board] [Columnists]

[Endgame Study] [Skittles Room] [Archives]
[Links] [Online Bookstore] [About ChessCafe.com] [Contact Us]

Copyright 2003 CyberCafes, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

"The Chess Cafe®" is a registered trademark of Russell Enterprises, Inc.

file:///C|/cafe/Reviews/books.htm (8 of 8) [07/14/2003 8:47:01 AM]