Impossibility of Chess

The Two Great, Main Chess Skills

I guess it goes without saying: as with computers, as with humans. The two most basic chess skills are evaluation and calculation.

But when it comes to computers, they pretty much mechanically run these for most positions. But as humans, we have to perhaps have a third meta skill: that is the question of when to evaluate and when to look further.

Perhaps a unique human folly is to (mis)evaluate when calculating further seems unnecessary and when calculating two more moves would change or at least challenge one's evaluation.

And I'm not just talking about tactically rich positions. NM Dan Heisman calls stopping calculation early in a tactically rich position a Quiescence Error: "Ending calculation of a line prematurely before the position has become "quiescent," or stable without tactical complications". A different kind of quiescence error can arise in a relatively more quiet position.

Natural Moves Don't Need Calculating... Right? Right?

I want to talk about a version of this error that I made in a recent 15 10 game. The position I want to focus occurs after the following moves 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. d3 b5 7. Bb3 O-O 8. a4 b4 9. a5 d6 10. Nbd2. Anchored position follows:

A Question for the Light Bishop

I've navigated the opening fairly well despite being unfamiliar with 6.d3 in the Ruy Lopez. Here I was faced with the question of how to develop my light-squared bishop. Here was roughly my thought process. I rejected 7..Bb7 on the basis that without ..d5, that bishop would just be biting granite on e4 and it would be hard for me to get d5. I thought my position was a bit cramped, so exchanges would favor me. I also intuitively rejected ..Be6 because I wasn't sure after Bxe6 ..fxe6, the double pawns were okay for me. With the time ticking down, I thought I had a safe choice in ...Bg4. Since White had already castled kingside, I thought I didn't need to fear h3-g4. And the pin on Nf3 would allow me to gain a tempo with ..Nd4 and at least exchange some pieces and perhaps even get ...c5 in, which would allow my Q to attack the pawn on h5.

Cue the Star Wars meme: Right...? Right? So imagine my surprise after the following moves. Anchored position follows:

Suffocating for Air

When I had played ...Bg4, I simply had rejected White could play h3-g4 on the basis that White had castled kingside. Such heuristics often serve well but sadly not always. Here, after ...Bg6, I realized I may be worse because I was probably getting squeezed out due to a lack of space and inability to exchange pieces. This is why chess is an incredibly, impossibly (hence the title), difficult game. There are almost no exceptionless rules.

Had I looked into the position after10. Nbd2 Bg4 11. h3 Bh5 12. g4 Bg6, I may have rejected 10...Bg4. As it turns out the book move is ...Be6 but that's a story for another day.

But the issue is that I would never look into that position, having decided that h3-g4 was impossible due to White's O-O. I would have had to know this position before hand due to studying the opening. I don't think I'll ever be a strong enough chess player that can reject a move like ..Bg4 without prior knowledge of the position.

Kudos to my opponent for playing 12.g4 after a minute's thought.

The game followed 13. Nc4 Nd4?? played after almost 3 minutes of thought. Anchored position follows:

Simply compounding the earlier error. I guess I realized something wasn't right at this point but I wasn't sure how much worse I was - after all I had played only natural moves and White couldn't get away with h3-g4. (Right? Right?) The engine says +2 for White. I was thinking that an exchange on d4 would ultimately ease my cramp and also allow me to get in ...d5, since there'd no longer be a pawn e5 to babysit.

However, the exchange on d4 allows White to get in f4 and simply increase their space advantage.

From thereon, my position simply got worse and I ultimately collapsed with the following blunder. Anchored position follows:

Hoping for complications based on the mate threat on h2 but I simply missed that Ra8 was hanging with check.

A Segue To A Line In the Zukertort Opening

This whole SNAFU regarding ...Bg4 in the previous game reminds me of a line in the modern/Zukertort that arises after the following moves 1. Nf3 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. d4 d6 4. Bc4 Nf6. Anchored position follows:

Here White has to to decide how to protect the e4 pawn. I think most of us would toss out Nc3 without much thought here. I have done it at least one according to my Lichess games and probably even more. However, that, while not being a terrible move, turns out to be inaccurate.

The correct move is Qe2. There are several points to this that one sees after exploring the lines. First the Q is a bit better on e2 because it supports e4-e5 (and sometimes even e6). Second, in these lines c3 (hence better to preserve the c3 square for the pawn) is a better move as it blunts Bg7. And third Nbd2 (as opposed to Nc3) in these lines again serves as a good way to counteract Bg4. And fourth, in conjunction with e4-e5, after O-O, Rd1 (possible due to Qd1-e2) is sometimes a useful move in these lines because it eyes Black's Q on d8.

Of course, I would have known none of these points had I not studied the opening. In similar but sufficiently unfamiliar positions, I'm likely to play Nc3 or moves like Nc3 (or ...Bg4 in the previous game) without much analysis.

That my friends, is the impossibility of chess.