Prevention as a prelude to trying to exploit targets is important

Hi all

I found the following Tigran Petrosian game particularly fascinating and what it kind of represented in terms of prevention aka "Prophylaxis" as a basis for targeting later weak pawns.

"Prophylaxis" etymology

In case the word "Prophylaxis" is not in your dictionary - here is a useful etymology : "prophylaktikos" is a GREEK word. The word "precautionary," is from prophylassein " - to keep guard before, ward off, be on one's guard," from pro "before". This Greek stuff is not only useful for really confusing mathematical formulas but also for Chess terminology too :) I am going to simplify things here and also use the word "Prevention" but the key thing is to see this word "Prevention" or "Prophylaxis" as part of a meta-philosophical template for making follow-up moves in chess easier to play.

What has Prophylaxis got to do with anything?

Do you not lock your car doors after leaving the car? Do you not lock your house doors after leaving the house? These are forms of prevention or prophylaxis. On the chessboard, the great writer Aron Nimzovich who wrote the highly influential "My system" put a sense of positional security center stage for the chessboard operations. He made use of the term "Prophylaxis" and also other terms and phrases such as "Blockade" or more enthusiastically "Die Blockade!".

Aron Nimzovich also coined the phrase "Restrain, Blockade Destroy" and "Passed pawns are criminals to be kept under lock and key!". Sometimes the ground-work is to do with making targets in the position slower-moving. Sometimes the groundwork is to do with just strengthening one's own position in general. Taking prophylaxis measures can be applied to any accidents that might happen to our position or any accidents that might occur if targets in the opponent's position are allowed too much freedom. Or any accidents with the opponent's passed pawns - let them be under "Lock and key". We need prophylaxis and we need tonnes of this stuff, and it needs to be applied in tonnes of different angles! NO, I have not made this stuff up - read "My system" by Nimzovich - highly influential to Tigran Petrosian! Enough said!

b4 is a very interesting preventative style move, yet it doesn't appear to be the top engine move:

Human Follow-up moves

It is a kind of human move which is more about the follow-up plan than the move itself. Often the strength of a move is actually related to how we follow up on it. In this regard, there are philosophies that show us how to "follow up" on moves in a kind of abstract manner. For example

• "Put yourself beyond defeat BEFORE going onto the attack"
• "Restrain, Blockade and THEN destroy"
• "Shut down the opponent's counterplay on Queenside, and THEN go for the K-side attack!"
• Make your own up if they are logical and help the subsequent steps somehow easier because you set the groundwork in the prior steps :)

We can see these high-level forms of advice to actually "concretize" into specific moves and specific follow-ups. If we are not using such philosophies, we play an accurate move, but do not really know how to follow it up. In fact, the philosophies above kind of make things more simple and easier in terms of how to follow up later.

They do not make things more difficult later, e.g. the meta-template "Let's win a pawn here, give the opponent a tonne of counterplay, and also leave ourselves very short of time to have to calculate all the variations" is generally not as good - because the subsequent steps after winning material might become harder and harder! We want the positions to be EASY TO PLAY! - we are not computers!

The terrible influence of chess engines on player style

Quite a lot of the time though in reality we do try and play an accurate tactical game, grab pawns, or multiple pawns, make our positions more difficult to play and then get "Swindled". We take solace in and tell people "I was winning - I was a pawn up etc." - In reality, such "Swindles" are just the symptoms of the positions becoming harder and hard to play. Blunders are not usually in a vacuum. We want the positions to be easier and easier to play - and our "Meta-philosophical template" should reflect that :) Forget what computers want to do - when they win a pawn, they can calculate 6 million+ positions a second to back up the follow-up. We can't generally as humans do this. Tactical chaos is a bit of a risk if you have to calculate a tonne of stuff.

Related Tip

Related Tip: You shouldn't generally try and build a house on sand. In chess terms, you shouldn't really attack the opponent's King prematurely because the potential for backfire can be huge e.g. if your King is still in the center.

First moves without any clue of follow-ups

On the extreme opposite, you may have found the first brilliant move of a tactical puzzle like a Queen sac, but actually have no idea to "follow it up". And the move itself loses its importance if it is not followed up correctly. When we play sub-optimal plain vanilla positional moves, the move might not be stunning - but at least we have some "plan" behind it quite often, especially if we have a positional template philosophy such as "Restrain, Blockade, then finally destroy!".

The upside you could say of dull boring "Wet lettuce" positional moves is not just to feed rabbits, but also to help your subsequent play be easier without having to calculate tonnes of variations!

The "KISS" principle - an acronym for Keep It Simple, Stupid :)

The "KISS" principle indicates in the realms of engineering, science, and logic generally it is great to keep things simple. By reducing the opponent's counterplay, you are in a way using also the KISS principle. Your later moves and actions don't perhaps need the same level of analytical care because, for example, your king is safe, your pieces are developed, and your position is generally strong.

So the higher level advice quite often makes later steps simpler and simpler. This is the way generally human chess is effective. It is not trying to imitate a computer and trying to find the most accurate move in any given position. We are not computers. As such, any "philosophical templates" such as the above are really helpful for making things easier to play, and to have follow-up ideas prompted by the philosophical "template-plans".

Which Masters to Study - Old or new?

It is quite ineffective sometimes in a way for ordinary players to study the more technical newer Super-Grandmasters and not the "old masters" such as Morphy, Capablanca, Fischer, Petrosian, etc. It is for the same kind of reasons. The old masters' moves were often easier to appreciate. You can often see more the plans and follow-ups in their moves.

There was not much concrete technical opening theory at the time of their games, and one can often emulate them more effectively without having the technical precision or the vast opening knowledge of some of the newer generation - by newer I mean Kasparov onwards who are in particular more "concrete" in nature with their plans and moves and opening theory. If we can establish not just moves but general intent and plans for the followups of moves - and that clarity can be emulated more easily, then we should perhaps seek the clarity of the "old masters" more just from a "follow-up" perspective.

Back to the game

In the game, the preventative move echoes the higher-level philosophy "Restrain, Blockade then Destroy" which many Aron Nimzovich fans will be acutely aware of. Petrosian was greatly influenced by Tigran Petrosian, and so the same kind of logical "step-by-step" positional plans can be found in many games of both Nimzovich and Petrosian.

Rb1 - another preventative move designed against c5 :

Concrete threat alert- Bxd7 and Rxb6:

Preventing b5 but is the b6 pawn the final target to "destroy" ?!

h4 - another "preventative move" trying to discourage g5. Petrosian is playing like British GM Michael Adams in this game who is nicknamed the spider - because he slowly paralyzes his prey! I don't particularly like that metaphor myself, but more the "Counterplay removal" philosophy which makes positions easier to play later :)

Animal metaphors for players

BTW: If animal metaphors are to be used for key positional players, I prefer those to be based on furry cute mammal-type animals. Petrosian had metaphors of "Python" and "Crocodile" which is a little better in my view than Michael Adam's "Spider" metaphor, but there is some way to go here I feel - we really need to represent positional style with cute furry mammals somehow!

It may be because cute furry animals are more pouncing in nature like cats and tigers and generally don't suffocate their prey like Pythons. So Petrosian unfortunately is stuck mainly with the "Python" metaphor. A shame really. Sometimes we can't easily have the cute furry metaphor we really wanted! Playing a "cat and mouse" game can be a dangerous affair as well.

Back to the game .....

Kg2 is a more subtle preventative measure putting the King 'on the other side of the road' to Black's dark-squared bishop just in case any nasty accidents might occur later on the dark squares. It becomes less likely if the Bishop doesn't have major targets sitting on its same color.

A new target is made - the c6 pawn:

Preventative maneuvering with the knights holds the c5 square more solidly:

Concrete threat alert! Nxd5 threatened:

Nxd5 threat alert renewed!

Stunningly accurate tactics follow:

Final position (threat is Qxf7+ now - so Rxb8 is rather crushing!)

Petrosian Puzzles

Takeaway points

• I have a great new course at discount for Tigran Petrosian at: https://ww.udemy.com/course/chess-strategy-and-tactics-tigran-petrosians-amazing-games/?couponCode=94863CCF7E290AD04FDA - if you miss this, then use: https://kingscrusher.tv/petrosian
• Philosophical meta-templates often help structure our plans and actually make secondary and tertiary plans easier as we reduce ideally the opponent's counterplay
• "Restrain blockade, then destroy" is an example in case you were wondering is a kind of "Philosophical meta-template" - it can directly map to concrete moves like in this model positional game
• In this game, the c6 pawn had been "restrained", then blockaded, and then finally destroyed
• The "Destroy" part, in particular, requires sometimes amazing tactical resourcefulness to make sure no downsides emerge which can't be handled
• Positional players such as Aron Nimzovich, Capablanca, and Petrosian are also very strong tactically. Their play might look quiet, but if you check the details, there are concrete threats that had to be reacted to

---

Hope you enjoyed this blog :). Any likes and follows are really appreciated. Also, I also have some interesting chess courses at https://kingscrusher.tv/chesscourses to check out.

Cheers, K