Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: How to play drawish positions?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Ottawa Ontario National Master Former Gov.
    Posts
    10,761
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default How to play drawish positions?

    How to play drawish positions? This might make for an interesting topic of a chess book (let alone this thread). What are some/the ways one can strive to win in such cases (rife as they are), or (maybe less interestingly) how does one strive to nail down the draw, i.e. steering for a forced draw, or dead draw(ish) position?

    At least 3 books I have allude to this topic. Secrets of Endgame Strategy by Lars Bo Hansen deals with what he calls Strategic Endgames, i.e. where the proper result is not yet known (as opposed to Technical Endgames, where the proper result is known). However, this book does not seem to touch much on positions that are rather drawish, i.e. the most likely result with proper play is a draw (not only that, but I'm referring to cases where neither side starts out with much of any kind of an edge, however intangible). Still, drawish endgames that are not dead drawn would be classed by the author as Strategic Endings, one would think, if he were to be asked.

    In Understanding the Grunfeld by Jonathan Rowson, the following line (see PGN viewer, next) is given as best play vs. a certain continuation by White in the so-called Carlsberg Variation of the Grunfeld. It results in a rather drawish position, which the given elite players promptly agreed to a draw in. However, not every time this line has been trotted out has a draw resulted (moreover, luckily for Grunfeld players, since this book other ways have been found to hope for playing for a win with Black without going into this line). What's also interesting is Rowson's remarks:

    "You may well find that last line baffling and it is also disappointing that such a dazzling flurry fizzles out to a draw. Though analysis does suggest that this was best play after 11 Qd1 it is dissatisfying to feel that a move like 8 Qa4+ can 'kill' the game in this way. I have never liked having 'dead draws' anywhere in my black repertoire mainly because I don't accept that Black should necessarily content himself with a draw. I just don't think we know enough about chess to reach that conclusion yet. Of course 'living draws' are another matter and if you can find an equal position with just a little bit of tension there is still a chance of out-witting your opponent. If you are up against a weaker opponent who bangs out the theory to reach this position I can only suggest you play on from the final position. You still have about thirteen units as well as your active king and there are many pawns to be won." I would add that, why play on as Black just against a weaker opponent in such a situation, if you're not fully content to draw?:


    [Event ""]
    [Site "Gausdal"]
    [Date "1991"]
    [Round ""]
    [White "Shirov, A"]
    [Black "Ostenstad"]
    [Result "1/2-1/2"]

    1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bg5 Ne4 6.cxd5 Nxg5 7.Nxg5 e6 8.Qa4+ c6 9.dxc6 Nxc6 10.Nf3 Bd7 11.Qd1 Qb6 12.Qd2 Nxd4 13.0-0-0 Rd8 {13...0-0-0 14.Nxd4 Bc6 15.e3 e5 16.Nxc6 Rxd2 17.Ne7+ Kd7 18.Rxd2+ Kxe7 19.Nd5+} 14.Nxd4 Bc6 15.e3 e5 16.Qe1 exd4 17.exd4+ Kf8 18.d5 Bxd5 {18...Bd7 gives some dark-square compensation for the pawn} 19.Rxd5 Rxd5 20.Qe7+ {20.Nxd5+ Qxb2+ 21.Kd1 Qb1+ 22.Ke2 Qb5+ wins for Black} Kxe7 21.Nxd5+ Kd6 22.Nxb6 axb6 1/2-1/2


    In play 1...Nc6! by Wisnewski, a Canadian game is offered at one point (reached properly by an Alekhine's Defence move-order, rather than by the author's), which reaches a drawish position after Black's 15th move. At that point, before giving the rest of the game without notes, the author remarks "Of course this position is dead level. But the rest shows an aspect of the game you should always remember: a strong player, you draw with him; a weak player, you beat him with your superior technique." Aside from once again noting that, why try to beat just a weaker player, in such a situation or otherwise, I'll note (as we'll see in the PGN viewer below) that Black made the first significant error (and in short order), but then the rest went well for him as per the author's script:


    [Event ""]
    [Site "Richmond, CAN"]
    [Date "1999"]
    [Round ""]
    [White "Jiganchine, Roman"]
    [Black "Wright, Stephen"]
    [Result "0-1"]

    1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5 Nxd5 4.Bc4 Nb6 5.Bb3 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.0-0 e6 8.d4 Be7 9.Bf4 0-0 10.d5 exd5 11.Nxd5 Nxd5 12.Qxd5 Qxd5 13.Bxd5 Rfd8 14.Bb3 Bd6 15.Bxd6 Rxd6 16.Rad1 Rad8 17.c3 Bd3 18.Rfe1 Na5 {A serious error} 19.Ne5 {Better was 19.Re7 with a large edge} Nxb3 20.Rxd3 Rxd3 21.Nxd3 Kf8 22.Ne5 Nc5 {Black is slightly better here. White's next move loses a pawn, to start with} 23.Nf3 Na4 24.Rb1 Nxb2 25.Kf1 Rd1+ 26.Rxd1 Nxd1 27.c4 Nc3 28.a3 Nb1 29.a4 a5 30.Ke2 Nc3+ 31.Kd3 Nxa4 32.Kd4 Ke7 33.c5 f6 34.Kc4 Nb2+ 35.Kb5 a4 36.Kb4 Nd3+ 37.Kxa4 Nxc5+ 0-1


    At this point I can list a few general themes I can think of offhand, for players hoping to eek/grind out a win from such drawish situations; perhaps posters may add to these:

    1) First, take into account clock situation, tournament situation, rating difference of the opponent, in trying to guess if he's also playing hard to win (or if he likely will know how to draw a technical ending that just might arise);
    2) Setting tactical traps both big and small for the opponent;
    3) 'Planning', or setting strategic traps/problems for the opponent that he should counter or disallow;
    4) Maneuvering, to again set strategic traps/problems, if no clear plan to do so presents itself (if nothing else, keep the game 'alive' this way).

    What's less clear to me is how to neatly and clearly define 'outplay/outwit' opponent, or 'beat with superior technique', unless the 4 above points already cover most or all of that.
    Last edited by Kevin Pacey; 02-22-2019 at 11:30 AM. Reason: Spelling
    There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
    Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kanata, Ottawa, Ontario
    Posts
    1,227

    Default

    Thanks Kevin for an interesting thread. I've often marveled at how players like Nikolay and Hikaru take allegedly drawn positions, and hours later, twist out wins.

  3. #3

    Default

    Offer a draw

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Ottawa Ontario National Master Former Gov.
    Posts
    10,761
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aris Marghetis View Post
    Thanks Kevin for an interesting thread. I've often marveled at how players like Nikolay and Hikaru take allegedly drawn positions, and hours later, twist out wins.
    You're welcome. One thing I forgot to mention explicitly is hoping for (especially from a non-elite player) what Halldor often refers to as a 'donation', or unforced tactical blunder, from one's opponent. It can happen at practically any time, it would seem.
    There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
    Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio.

  5. #5

    Default

    That's why you offer a draw to prevent undeserved wins.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Ottawa Ontario National Master Former Gov.
    Posts
    10,761
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Here's an example (see PGN viewer, below) of the fairly drawish Exchange Variation of the Classical King's Indian Defence, which is thought by many or most books nowadays to give Black real trouble winning against, especially at Grandmaster level (as one strong Cuban GM told me personally back in the 1990's, even). If Black wishes to avoid it by playing something other than 6...e5, he may be risking an inferior position (though this has not quite been fully established yet) - he's certainly missing the fun that can happen if, as usual, White doesn't trade on e5 immediately. This possibility has been one thing that's a little off-putting for me, as far as wanting to play the KID as Black nowadays (even though below GM level it really shouldn't be a factor). My biggest database offers some encouragement all the same, with a few Black wins in 2500+ vs. 2500+ games, beginning in relatively recent times; the players in the game that follows were both rated 2600+:


    [Event ""]
    [Site "Tbilisi"]
    [Date "2009"]
    [Round ""]
    [White "Mchedishvili, Mikheil"]
    [Black "Jobava, Baadur"]
    [Result "0-1"]

    1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.dxe5 dxe5 8.Qxd8 Rxd8 9.Bg5 Na6 {This move has a dubious reputation, but my database's engine thinks Black can do okay if he varies from established opening theory a little down the road} 10.Nd5 Rd6 11.Nd2 {Here trading twice on f6 is thought to be at the least a slightly better alternative for White, by theory and by my database alike} c6 12.Nxf6+ Bxf6 13.Be3 Bd8 14.0-0-0 Be7 15.Nb3 Rxd1+ 16.Rxd1 c5 17.h3 b6 18.Bg4 f5 19.Bf3 {Now White goes from equal to slight disadvantage. Perhaps he thought opening the game up a little with 19.exf5 would increase Black's winning chances, but this was preferable} f4 20.Bd2 Be6 21.Be2 Nb4 22.a3 Nc6 23.Bc3 f3 24.Bxf3 Bxc4 25.Kc2 Rf8 26.Rd7 Bb5 27.Kb1 Bh4 28.Nd2 Bxf2 29.Bg4 {Better is 29.Bd1} Bd4 {Here 29...Nd4 would have increased Black's advantage} 30.Nf3 {30.Be6+ was preferable.} Rf6 {Black now has a big edge} 31.Bd2 {Better was 31.Bxd4. Now Black is winning} h5 32.Bg5 hxg4 33.Bxf6 gxf3 34.gxf3 Be2 35.Rg7+ Kf8 36.Rxg6 Bxf3 37.Rg7 Bxe4+ 38.Kc1 Bd3 39.Rc7 Na5 40.Kd1 e4 0-1
    There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
    Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Ottawa Ontario National Master Former Gov.
    Posts
    10,761
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    A closely related topic is: the [possible] problem of what to do about forced/dead drawing lines in the opening (usually more of an issue for one's Black repertoire). Recalling Rowson's comment earlier in this thread, I would note that for a given game I'm not always against going into a forced/dead draw, it's just that beforehand I would like to have in mind the possible option of avoiding that.

    Here's an example from opening theory that highlights a number of solutions to this general problem. I like to be able to play the Pirc as Black, even if I need to win at all costs. In the Austrian Attack variation (1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3) Black can play 5...c5, as I chose to do some times not too many years ago. However, like a Black Hole in the centre of the galaxy, there's a forced draw that White has available to him, in a main line that is to some degree awkward for Black to avoid. What to do? Well, fortunately Black has a natural alternative at move 5 (5...0-0), and that's a good choice for Senior players or others who want to cut down on the memorizing of sharp lines; I'd play it, certainly, if I felt uncomfortable using 5...c5 in a given situation (or I could always choose a different Black opening, without necessarily giving up on the Pirc). Already, a Pirc player's lot seems preferable to a Dragon player's these days, as the latter is in more danger of being faced with virtually unavoidable drawing lines (if White uses them - not a given, but unpleasant if it's virtually unstoppable for this opening, the way Dragon theory is developing).

    Suppose though that in the Austrian Attack, 5...c5 really suits your style, and/or you dislike 5...0-0 for some reason. Then the choices get narrower if you suspect White might be bent on drawing, and you mind that in a particular game. After 6.Bb5+ Bd7 (somewhat necessary to avoid disadvantage) 7.e5 Ng4 (no choice) 8.e6, Black can play the current main line (8...fxe6) when a draw can soon result if White wishes (see game below), or else follows 8...Bxb5 9.exf7+, when Black can choose to risk a slightly worse game, in theory, with the relatively safe king move 9...Kd7 (long thought to favour White at least slightly, but he needs to know the theory), or he can play the riskier looking 9...Kf8, when my opening database program CA16 thinks Black comes out okay, but he must walk a nerve-wracking tightrope for a lot of moves. So, here we see two other solutions to avoiding draw outcomes: risking slight disadvantage (most natural vs. a weaker opponent) or having an emergency solution (perhaps hoping not to ever need to use it).

    Anyway, here's the draw I wrote of above - it put new life into 5...c5, oddly enough, as top players especially like to normally play for the win with White:


    [Event "Brussels"]
    [Site ""]
    [Date "1988"]
    [Round ""]
    [White "Sax, G"]
    [Black "Seirawan, Y"]
    [Result "1/2-1/2"]

    1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 c5 6.Bb5 Bd7 7.e5 Ng4 8.e6 fxe6 9.Ng5 Bxb5 10.Nxe6 {The huge main lines start with 10.Nxb5.} Bxd4 {The draw that now happens was Yasser's discovery.} 11.Nxd8 {A massive line starts here with 11.Nxb5 Qa5+.} Bf2 12.Kd2 Be3 {The first of many games with this draw by perpetual check.} 1/2-1/2
    There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
    Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •