Loving the Game

Okay, so I opened this course by emphasizing the importance of being true to yourself in
your chess experience. To be honest, I think this is one of the most critical and neglected
aspects of the learning process. Too many teachers, coaches, and parents jam us into
cookie cutter molds that we just don't fit into, and so we constantly have this haunting
feeling that something is wrong in our lives. I spent a number of years in my late teens and
early twenties going down this path, and it was terribly frustrating, as if I had lost my
internal compass. When things got hairy my instincts were working against me. This is an
awful state for any artist or competitor.

If you are going to play chess you should learn to love chess. And the best way for that to
happen is for the game to be in harmony with your being. Because chess is not just a
game. If approached with an open heart, it can become a fascinating channel of self-
expression and self-discovery.

Of course getting to this relationship with chess is not so easy, and at times it might seem
paradoxical. While we have to be true to ourselves, we also have to grow, to evolve as we
take in new information. So while we are learning chess in a manner that is in tune with
our internal vibrations, we also have to take ourselves on and avoid self-indulgence. Like
most real issues in life, this navigation is one of greyness, of the middle way-it's not black
and white. On one side is doing whatever you want and on another side is being an
automaton and ignoring your natural talents. In the middle is allowing your intuition to help
guide your learning process while you build your foundation of knowledge
 Game N°1: Erez Klein vs Josh Waitzkin

As a 6, 7, 8 and 9 year old boy there were two coexisting elements of my chess education.
There was my study with my teacher Bruce Pandolifini where we worked on the endgame
and middlegame principles, and studied the great games of old masters. And there was
the street side of my game, where I played with my buddies in New York City's
Washington Square Park, let loose, had a blast, put myself on the line, focused through
the distractions, learned from my mistakes.

So I was learning from the ground up, gaining a

solid foundation-AND I was having fun and
expressing myself through chess. This balance-
of taking on your weaknesses, building from a
solid foundation AND being true to your
strengths, having fun, expressing yourself
through your play is perhaps our greatest
challenge. You've already seen some endgame
wins-now I'll show you a park style game I played
as a kid-opening up the position early, taking big
risks, and going right after the guy…One thing
you'll notice is the intimidation factor. My
opponent Erez Klein was a rival of mine who had
a bit of a fearful chess persona, even though he was a very strong player. In this kind of
matchup, I tended to be very aggressive.

This game was played when I was 13 years old.

He played D4, knight F6, C4. I played C5, headed for a very aggressive opening I loved
called the Benko gambit. He played D5 which is the typical response. If he takes on C5, he
is giving up his central pawn and he can’t hold
on to it. I can win it back with moves like knight
A6 or E6. Eventually, I’ll win that pawn back
and I'll have better central control. He played
D5 and here I played the gambit, B5. Right
from the start I’m determining the style of the
game.

The Benko gambit is a very aggressive opening

that I started playing when I was 13 and I never
lost touch with.

If you look at my annotated games, you will see

one with the same opening against the same
rival years later where I won with a dangerous
queen sacrifice.

In this game Erez tried to turn down the Benko.

He played C takes B5, A6.

This is the idea of the opening. I am giving up a pawn.

If he plays B takes A6, there is no way to win

back the material right away; but I’m going to
play G6 put my bishop on this long diagonal. I
am going to capture on this with my bishop here
and I’m going to gain wonderful counter play.

This is the kind of opening I would love to throw

opponents when I was feeling aggressive.

Sacrifice a pawn for some positional dynamic

and build up an attack, risky, but just in my
style.

So Erez played knight C3 here turning down the

Benko gambit.

A typical way it’s accepted is to play the move B takes A6.

Now I can’t win back material right away but the

way I tend to play here is G6, knight C3, and
then play bishop takes A6.

To give you a sense of a typical Benko position,

he could play moves like knight F3, bishop G7,
G3. I would play D6, bishop G2, knight BD7.
And now you can see. I have a wonderful
bishop on the long diagonal, my other bishop is
very strong and my plan is to play castles, queen
A5 or queen B6, rook F to B8. I have rooks
shooting down the queen side, his bishop is
sometimes pinned down on C1, he is up a pawn
but I have got wonderful pressure on his game.
And also the end games are very good out of the Benko. My pawn structure is so good
and my bishop on G7 is so strong and he has some long-term weaknesses.
So often you can even trade down towards an end game in the Benko, when you are down
a bit of material and it will still be good for you.

So it’s a wonderful opening, very rich play.

But notice when I am describing the ideas of this opening, I’m not telling you to memorize
these variations. I am not saying if he does this, do this. I am showing the ideas where
you want to place your pieces generally. The type of principles you want to use, the types
of pressure you want to put on the opponent.
This is the way to confront openings, not with
memorizing variations. But with learning the
principles, the structures of the game, so you
can learn to understand the strategic dynamics
of various positions and put them into motion,
combine them with one another. Don’t
memorize, think in principles.

After knight C3, A takes B5, Erez played E4

turning down the Benko gambit and playing for a
different type of central control.

I played B4, knight B5.

And here I played D6.

Do you see what he had in mind for me after knight takes E4? This was a trap.

White to play, what would you do here?

OK, queen E2 is a very good move.

Now the knight on E4 has to go somewhere. But if

it goes back to F6, here White to move, what
should you do?

Exactly, checkmate, you see the pawn on E7 is

pinned to the king. It can’t move. The king has no
where to run, smothered mate.

So his trap was if I play knight takes E4, he plays

queen E2, the knight can’t go anywhere because if
he goes to F6, knight D6 is mate.

If he goes to D6, of course, knight takes D6 is still

mate.

If I defend with F5, he can just attack it again with F3. I’m going to lose a piece.

I have to allow him to take that knight with his pawn because if I move it, knight D6 is
brutal.

Notice, of course, the knight on D6 guards that

F7 square. It doesn’t matter that the pawn
moves.
So I can’t take on E4.

Here, I played D6, perfectly fine, consolidating.

He played bishop F4.

So from the very start, I sacrificed a pawn.

Played the Benko gambit, he declined it.

Now once again, I push the envelope. I played

an incredibly dynamic, risky move, G5.

It would be difficult for me to tell you the principles behind this move—it’s aggressive.

It’s opening things up, gaining a tempo, taking a big risk.

I was establishing control of the tone of the battle, making my opponent psychologically
uncomfortable.
Here he played bishop takes G5, the only good move. He would expect me to play knight
take E4, but I didn’t, I played bishop G7. Surprising!

I’m playing without any feeling of materialism

here. I’ve give up a pawn now, just to gain a
little bit of a tempo in my development. I
understand that he has got this long-

term, shady thing happening with his knight

on B5. You see the knight on B5 is a good
outpost, but it’s also risky. I can maybe win
that piece later on.

So I have given up material, also given up

king safety down the road to gain some time.

Now I want to take on E4.

He played bishop D3. Now, you understand how I’m playing here. I’m playing tactically,
pushing him around, establishing the tone of the battle.

I played a crazy move, C4 kicking the bishop once again. If his bishop goes back, I have
gained a very powerful queen side expansion, and his knight on B5 is looking very
vulnerable because his bishop’s no longer defending it.

I can play queen B6 or queen A5 attacking the

knight. If he plays bishop takes C4 then I would
play knight takes E4.

You see I’ve removed the defender of the E4

pawn.

After knight takes E4, I am threatening his

bishop and I am also eyeing the B2 pawn. He
would have to go back all the way to bishop C1
defending that pawn.

And now I can continue with my development.

I’ve got a good central knight. I’ve got a bishop
on a long diagonal, his bishop is pinned down to the defense of the B2 pawn. His knight is
a little bit exposed on B5, he is up a pawn. But I have sacrificed that pawn for a long-term
dynamic. This was a typical Josh decision, take big risks, make the position crazy and
outplay my opponent in the madness. I love this kind of game.
The funny thing about this move, C4 is that I am giving him a choice.

Do you want to win a pawn or do want to win the exchange? By exchange I mean, of
course, knight for rook or bishop for rook.

Here playing C4, if he takes on C4, I would take on E4 and he would be up a pawn.

His other option, which is what he decided to do, was rook C1.

He is trusting me, after bishop takes C4, it is not at all clear that my position is good.

He is believing me, ok, rook C1.

It’s funny, I didn’t realize it but I was told years later that a bunch of my rivals had all
conferred and for years had the strategy against me of declining my sacrifices.

When I would offer a pawn sacrifice, or a

piece sacrifice for an attack, they would just
turn it down, not take the piece, defending
against the attack.

While this might have seemed clever, they

were actually playing into my hands allowing
me to dictate the tone of the battle while they
were running scared. I was winning the
mental game with my confident aggressive
play. And the reason I was able to feel
confident was because I was playing “Josh
chess”, chess that was true to myself.

So here he declines the sacrifice but later on, I’ll push the tone of the battle.

So instead of taking on C4, he played the move,

rook C1, an interesting decision, trying to win
the exchange but I had planned for that.

I took on D3.

He played knight C7 check forking my rook and

king, but no problem

I played king F8.

Now if he takes on A8 right away, I can play the move knight takes E4 and here you can
probably feel why Black’s game is so strong. I’m threatening his bishop on G5.

Let’s say he makes the move bishop back to

D2, what would you do now?

If he goes back to D2, for one thing, I can take

his pawn on B2 attacking his rook on C1.

If his rook moves, I can think about taking his

knight, putting a bishop on C3, or I can go
back to D4 threatening the F2 square.

I have this incredible central control. I have a

pawn on D3 I can always move my bishop out
to A6.

His knight on A8 is very strange. I’ve got a great attack. This position is pretty bad for
White.

So instead of allowing that, he played bishop takes F6. He doesn’t want allow knight takes
E4. I don’t really blame him.

But he has given up his bishop which makes my bishop even stronger.

I play bishop takes F6 and now this dark square guy can run unopposed for the rest of the
game.

He plays knight takes A8.

And now you’re Black, what should you do?

Perfect, bishop takes B2.

Now I am attacking the rook on C1.

I’m also eyeing bishop C3 check which makes

him move the king so he can’t castle.

Here, my opponent played the risky move, rook

C7 jumping down. He is putting the rook on the
seventh rank, it’s defended by his knight on A8.

This is an interesting decision, maybe not the

best.

This is a totally wild position, just what I wanted to create.

At the moment, he is up material; he has a rook for a bishop. But that’s OK.

I played knight A6 attacking his rook.

Now he played the rook A7, which was a bad

move.

You think about the downward spiral.

He played rook C7, I played knight A6. He didn’t

want to admit that rook C7 was maybe not the
best decision.

He played rook A7 getting his rook trapped too

deep into my board.

What he should have done: take a deep breath. Find the best move. Get his clarity of
mind back. Play rook C4.

And here I like my position very much. Maybe I would play knight C5 followed by bishop
A6.

Maybe I would play bishop C3 check. This is a great position.

After rook A7, he is trying to hold it all together. But he can’t quite do it.

What should we do now?

Well I began with bishop C3 check.

The point is his rook on A7 could be attacked. He has put it too deep in my game. This
happens quite often when you’re the aggressor in a chess game. The opponent gets
spooked by your confidence and aggression and doesn’t defend with a clear head.

After bishop C3 check, the king goes to F1.

Now, he doesn’t have the option of knight F3

and castling to safety.

I play bishop C3, a tiny little addition to the

position just to maximize my advantage.

He plays king F1.

And now what do you play?

Well done! Our idea all along, bishop to D4

going after that rook.

He’s got to get something for it. He doesn’t want to give it up for nothing. Rook takes A6,
bishop takes A6.

Now, I’m attacking his knight on A8.

He played knight F3.

What should you do now?

OK, you see that your bishop is attacked. You also see he is trying desperately to gain
some counter play. Maybe he wants to play knight G5.

Do you remember the relationship between the bishop and knight where I said if there are
two squares between them, the bishop dominates the knight?

Bishop F6, it’s a very good move that stops all of White’s counter play.

The knight can’t move, it is completely dominated. It can’t go to H4, it can’t go to G5, E5
and D4 are covered.

Next move, I can take his knight on A8 and win the game.

In this position actually, my opponent resigned. He was bereft. There was nothing he
could do. I had this great pawn on D3, I had two bishops, I am winning this piece, I’ll be up
a piece next move, his king is stuck in the middle of the board, it’s all over.

So from beginning to end, I dominated the tone of this game. I offered a sacrifice, he
refused it, I offered another sacrifice, he took it. Than I offer another one, allowing him to
take an exchange, but in turn, he had a knight deep in my board, too deep, he got stuck in
there. Then I brought another piece in, I allowed him to bring his rook down to C7 and to
A7, so he had his rook and his knight both deep, deep, deep in my position. That might
seemed good to you from the outside, but in fact, they got stuck in there. One of the
problems of being too aggressive on an external, superficial level (in other words, putting
your pieces too deep into the opponents’ position, until you have a legitimate attack) is that
you could get stuck in there and lose your fighters. That’s what happened. This game was
all about playing with the free spirit, determining the tone of the battle, and loving the
game.