This article based on book "How to Reassess Your Chess" by Ilman. How would you decide in a game between two moves that both look good? How do you find which one would be more beneficial to your position even though they look the same? My standard so far has been that after finishing a game and analyzing it with a program, I try to see where I could have chosen a better move (even in games I have won) by looking at the program's choice.
Correct evaluations can be very hard, or very easy, depending on each particular position. Some rely on pure calculation/tactics, and others call for a very advanced ability to see beyond the usual rules of positional chess. However, most of the time basic but solid evaluations can be constructed by making use the system of chess imbalances.
The idea is that the vast majority of players don’t have anything to grasp onto while looking at a position. Most just start to calculate (the old, “I go there and he goes there …”), but they don’t have any idea what the position itself is calling for. Let’s face it, if you don’t know what the position’s needs are, how are you going to know which moves to calculate, or even if calculation is necessary?
Here’s the list of imbalances: Superior minor piece, Pawn structure, Space, Material, Control of a key file, Control of a hole/weak square, Lead in development, Initiative, King safety, and Statics vs. Dynamics.
By studying imbalance, can make you evaluate position,importance, positives and negatives, and how to use a combination of all the imbalances to come up with a logical plan, or a logical series of moves, or simply one logical move. Often, no calculation is required to understand the soul of a position.
Let’s look at examples:
This seems like a complex position, and there are all sorts of moves that appear to be reasonable. Result of evaluation by listing all the imbalances for both sides:
* White has an advantage in queenside space.
* Black has a potentially weak pawn on c7.
* If Black pushes the c7-pawn to c6 or c5, bxc6 will leave Black with a weak pawn on b6 and a hole on b5.
* Black’s d5-pawn is weak since it can’t be defended by another pawn.
* Black’s only source of counterplay is on the kingside – his d6-Bishop, e6-Rook, e4-Knight, and Queen are all eyeing that area.
* Black’s b7-Bishop, which is defending d5, is playing a purely defensive role.
* Black’s dark-squared Bishop is giving firm support to the c7-pawn while also playing a key role in any kingside attack that he might drum up.
* White’s b2-Bishop is inactive.
1.Ba3! forces the exchange of white’s worst piece for black’s critically important Bishop on d6. No calculation was needed here. Instead, a solid (but basic) understanding of the general position made the correct move obvious. Here’s the rest of the game:
1…Rc8 2.Bxd6 cxd6
Of course, 2…Rxd6 was possible, but then c7 would be a permanent source of concern. After 2…cxd6 that’s no longer the case. In addition, the e5-square is also covered (ending all Nf3-e5-c6 ideas). Of course, 2…cxd6 comes with its own baggage: the d5-pawn is weak and will need babysitting for the rest of the game.
3.Rc1 Ndf6 4.h3
Topalov (New In Chess 4, 2007) now said: “As you can see, all this is not about concrete lines, but about clear positional weaknesses. I knew that it didn’t matter how long it would take me, but in the end all the Rooks would be exchanged, further highlighting his structural problems.”
Topalov, one of the greatest attacking players in the world, is making it clear that his course in this game isn’t dependent on his personal tastes (i.e., attack), but rather on the dictates of the board (a quiet buildup in accordance with the imbalances).
4…Re7 5.Qb3 h6 6.Rxc8 Qxc8 7.Rc1 Rc7 8.Rxc7 Qxc7 9.Qc2
Topalov had this to say in regard to the position that would result after the exchange of Queens: “I can chase away the Knight on e4, transfer my Bishop to b3 and sooner or later I will exert pressure with two pieces on d5 and push my kingside pawns.”
Okay, there’s no getting around it—this is clearly a plan! But did he use any strange “system” (or deep calculation) to create it? No, this too is based on the imbalances: he will chase away black’s advanced Knight by f2-f3 (Knights need advanced squares to be effective—thus he intends to turn a good enemy piece into a passive one), he’ll aim his pieces against the weakness on d5, and then he’ll gain space on the kingside by advancing his pawns there (which would give him yet another positive imbalance to work with).
9…Qe7 10.Qc1
White’s Queen already controls the c-file, but now it also defends e3. This shows white’s intention to chase black’s one active piece away with an eventual f2-f3 (when the e3-pawn will be happy to have some support).
10…g6 11.Nh2 Kg7 12.h4
This gains kingside space, deprives the e4-Knight of the g5-square, and threatens to win by f3.
12…Ne8 13.f3 N4f6 14.Nf1 h5 15.Nf4 Nd7 16.Qe1 Nf8 17.Qg3 Kh6 18.Nxh5!?
18.Kf2 followed by Nf1-d2-b1-c3 would have continued the grind and maintained the pressure. However, Topalov decides to up the ante in his opponent’s time pressure. Can Black find all the right defensive moves with his clock rapidly ticking down to nothing?
The rest of the game, which has nothing to do with our theme (tactics suddenly take over), is given with minimum comments:
18…gxh5 (18…Kxh5?? 19.Qf4 wins outright) 19.Qg8 f5 (The only move) 20.Ng3 Ng7 21.Bxf5 Ng6 22.Bxg6 Kxg6 23.Nxh5! Qxe3+ 24.Kh2 Qe7?? (Black cracks in time trouble and plays the losing move. Correct was 24…Qxd4 when a draw would be the most likely outcome) 25.Nf4+ Kf6 26.g4 Qf7 27.Qd8+ Qe7 28.Qg8 Qf7 29.Qd8+ Qe7 30.Qxe7+ (30.Qxb6 was even stronger) 30...Kxe7 31.Kg3 Ne6 32.Nxe6 Kxe6 33.f4 Bc8 34.f5+ Kf7 35.h5 Bd7 36.h6 Kg8 37.Kf4 Be8 38.Kg5 Kf7 39.h7 Kg7 40.h8=Q+ Kxh8 41.Kf6 Bxb5 42.Ke7 Bd3 43.f6 Bg6 44.f7 Bxf7 45.Kxf7, 1-0.
Source:
http://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-evaluate-a-position
