|
FIRE ON BOARD II: 1997-2004
Author: Alexei Shirov
Everyman Chess (2005)
192 pages
$24.95
Reviewed by John Watson
It was years ago, in my very first review, that I praised Alexei Shirov's FIRE ON BOARD to the highest degree. It is still one of my favorite books. Guess what? The second volume is quite as good as the first.
At the time of this writing, Shirov has just received his worst drubbing ever in a professional tournament (although this was a Rapids Event, hardly as serious as a Linares or Corus/Wijk aan Zee). This could be for a variety of reasons, but is in any case stunning for a player who has been over 2700 for so many years. It's likely that some will be counting him out in future events. I'd gladly give odds against that. Possibly excepting Kasparov, I believe that Shirov is the greatest tactical genius of our time, at least if one speaks in the traditional sense of consistently playing ingenious moves and finding fantastic combinations in game after game. Even the ideas that he doesn't play, or the ones he sees for his opponents, are imaginative in a way that stands out above the crowd. That isn't to say that all the ideas are objectively sound, nor that every one of them is followed up with the pitiless accuracy of a Kasparov or Anand. Sometimes Shirov lets his opponent off the hook, or risks too much and has to create from an inferior position, thus opening himself up to the charge of “swindler.” Let's face it: we don't see a lot of swindling from profound thinkers such as Adams, or Kramnik, nor from great attackers like Anand. Nevertheless, Shirov's ability to attack and defend in complex positions inevitably reminds one of the great Tal. However overused that comparison may be (they are both Latvians, which makes it more compelling), I think that it's an appropriate one.
In FIRE ON BOARD II, we see a more objective and self-critical Shirov, made perhaps too judgmental by today's powerful analytical engines. He analyses 53 games, some using his original notes that have appeared elsewhere. He also annotates a good many games from scratch solely for the book, and others are re-annotated based upon published analysis. Such reuse is true of all serious biographies of top-flight active players today, in part because they annotate so many of their best games for publication. Not surprisingly, Fritz appears throughout in Shirov's reanalysis and reassessment. At the same time he rebels against the computer engine's role and its reputation for omniscience. I wince at even the thought of reproducing the following position from Topalov-Shirov, Linares 1998 for the 2000th time but it's necessary to complement his statement about chess creativity:
Okay, only residents of my neighboring ice floe don't know that Shirov played the amazing 47...Bh3!!. He says:
“The idea of giving up the bishop in order to gain the necessary tempo seems very logical and easy to find when it has already been played, but no computer program proved competent enough to suggest it. I would like to think that no human in chess history would be able to find it under the same conditions, but who knows...? Maybe the Swedish grandmaster, Ulf Andersson, would be able to rise to the challenge....”
He goes on to explain that Andersson had played a similar move against Shirov seven years before (well, similar in a limited sense of having a related idea), which may have planted a seed, although he doesn't claim to know. He says: “In chess, as in any other field, you need to reach beyond your knowledge (the greater the knowledge, the further you can go!). And that's when creativity begins.” By the way, Topalov-Shirov is a good example of the latter's first-rate endgame play, a feature typical of great calculators' games. In FIRE ON BOARD (1) Shirov devoted a 23-page chapter to his most interesting endgames.
Continuing with the theme of computer analysis, let's look at Shirov-Reinderman, Wijk aan Zee 1999. This is certainly not the most brilliant game in the book but illustrates typical features of Shirov's style as well as the way that computers can strip the romantic aspect from exciting contests. In the middle I have included some comments of Shirov's, which as you will see are mostly ironic ones. The game reached this position:
20.e5
This dynamic attacking move was given an "!" by annotators at the time, rightfully swept up in the game's course. But Shirov questions it and feels obliged to go into a rather lengthy computer-assisted analysis that ultimately shows that 20.f5! f6 21.Ra1! was best, leading to an apparently winning endgame. Moves like 21.Ra1 are not in Shirov's or most people's style.
20...d5?
Again, we find that although most of Black's natural moves can be refuted by nice tactics, he had the strange move 20...Qd7! (obvious to the computer, I guess) since 21.Ne4 (the move that prompted 20...d5) 21...dxe5 22.Nf6+ only draws, and 21.Bxh7+ Kxh7 22.Ne4 f6 23.exf6 Kg8! ultimately draws following a forced line that ends in perpetual check on move 34! Thus Shirov assigns “?!” to 20.e5. Give me back the days of over-enthusiasm!
21.Nf3! Qd7
Correct this time.
22.Bxh7+!
An obvious move, right? But to the more careful observer it's not at all evident that the attack will succeed. In view of the following complications, many other masters might bank upon their positional advantage instead.
22...Kxh7 23.Qh4+ Kg8 24.Ng5 Re8! Not 24...Rd8? 25.Qh7+ Kf8 26.Qh8+ Ke7 27.Qxg7 Rf8 28.f5. 25.Rf3!
Jonathan Tisdall, who was present at the game, gave this move a ''!!" and said: “Most people would have concentrated on 25.Qh7+ Kf8 26.Qh8+ Ke7 27.Qxg7 but 27...Kd8 does not leave white with a clear continuation of the attack. Shirov prefers to keep the black king at home.”
25...Ne7
Forced. Worse is 25...Rxb3 26.Rh3! Kf8 27.Nh7+ Kg8 28.Nf6+.
26.Qh7+
26.Rh3?? Ng6 and Black defends nicely.
26...Kf8 27.Qh8+ Ng8
Tisdall: “It is not obvious what white has achieved by allowing Black to bring his knight into the defense. White follows through with a new series of line-opening sacrifices.”
28.f5!
Now let's hear from Shirov: “Fritz claims that 28.Bf2!, strangling the king, would be more effective, but unfortunately I learned to attack with old books.”
28...exf5 29.e6!
Shirov: “29.Nh7+?! Ke7 30.Bg5+ Ke6 31.Qxg7 d4! would create some unnecessary mess, if only from a human point of view. White is winning after 31.g4! according to the silicon monster.”
29...fxe6
Shirov: “At least there is some solidarity in the line 29...Rxe6 30.Nh7+ Ke7 31.Bg5+ f6 32.Qxg8, which I saw during the game.”
30.Rg3! g6 31.Nh7+ Kf7 32.Bh6
Shirov: “I saw this move when playing 22.Bxh7+. And you, my German friend?” [jw: a reference to Fritz, the German analytical engine; even today my own engines can't say yes to that one]
32...Ke7
No better is 32...Nxh6 33.Qf6+. Ribli offers the pretty line 32...Bf8 33.Bxf8 Rxf8 34.Rxg6! Qa7+ 35.Kh1 Kxg6 36.Nxf8+ Kg5 37.Qxg8+ Kf6 38.Nh7+ Ke5 39.Qg3+ f4 40.Re2+ Kd6 41.Qxf4+ Kc6 42.Rc2+.
33.Bg5+ Kf7 34.Bf6
Shirov: “Too concerned about aesthetics and a little short of time, I didn't notice 34.Nf6, after which Fritz gives an unusual evaluation of +25.52 in White's favor.”
34...Rf8
“34...Bf8 35.Ng5 mate is how I would prefer to end the game, of course.”
35.Rc7!
Shirov: “Not +25.52 any more, but still clearly winning for White. Not a bad end to an attack starting with 20.e5, is it?”
35...Nxf6 36.Qxf6+ Ke8 37.Qxg6+ Kd8 38.Rxd7+ Bxd7 39.Nxf8 Bxf8 40.Qf6+ Be7 41.Rg8+ Kc7 42.Qc3+ Kb7 43.Rxb8+ Kxb8 44.h4!, 1–0.
Tisdall called this "A textbook attacking game, with a wealth of instructive, thematic ideas."
Wandering around in the same time period, I found the brief example from Shirov-Ljubojevic, Amber-blindfold, Monte Carlo 1999. Shirov himself calls this “a relatively easy game” that he included because it was “nice to remember.”
White has sacrificed a pawn and has more than enough compensation because of the d5 square. The question is how to best exploit that advantage.
16.f5!
Shirov calls this “a positional approach,” citing the short time control as a factor in making the decision. Indeed, it turns out that 16.Nb6? Qe6 17.Nxa8 Rxa8 gives Black compensation.
16...Bd8 17.Rhg1 Nxe3 18.Qxe3 f6 19.h4!
The last force needed for the attack.
19...Qf7 20.h5! Kh8
Or 20...Qxh4 21.Rg3! with a dangerous attack. But this proves just as dangerous.
21.Rg6! Rg8
Obviously not 21...hxg6? 22.hxg6.
22.Rdg1 h6?
A natural move in order to stop h6, but Shirov points out that he had to try 22...b5! 23.h6 hxg6 24.Rxg6! gxh6 25.Rxh6+ Kg7 26.Qh3 Kf8 27.Rh7! and White wins the queen but still has to find a way to win. Now White plays a relatively simple but still pretty combination:
23.Nxf6! Bxf6 24.Rxh6+ gxh6 25.Qxh6+ Qh7 26.Qxf6+ Rg7 27.h6
Not a bad combination of when you consider that it's a blindfold game, and at rapid time controls at that!
27...Rag8 28.Rg6 b5 29.hxg7+ Rxg7 30.Rh6, 1–0.
In general the quality of blindfold chess has risen dramatically over the last decade or so, such that top-level blindfold games, even Rapid ones, are published regularly as “normal” examples of play. This is a fine example.
Shirov spends only nine pages describing his life since the first book, but they are dense ones, both physically and in terms of events. He addresses with bitterness (justified in my opinion) the failure to hold the World Championship that he qualified for by defeating Kramnik. He lays forward his case briefly, then describes the simultaneous blows from a divorce and the financial disaster connected with the match that didn't take place. Remarkably, as the ignored winner of the Kramnik match he never even received the promised compensation for the match having been cancelled, much less for winning it, while Kramnik the loser was rewarded financially on the spot and later by means of his match with Kasparov. Ultimately Shirov overcomes his problems, revives his career, and mixes fatherhood with chess. He continues on with this autobiographical narrative up through early 2005, concluding on a note of optimism. At the end he promises a future Fire on Board 3. I already look forward to that with great anticipation, since these first two books are absolute masterpieces of the games collection/autobiography genre. This is easily the first book that I would get if I had to choose amongst those of 2005.
Click to buy (or get more information about) FIRE ON BOARD, PART TWO: 1997-2004
Click to buy (or get more information about) Shirov’s first volume FIRE ON BOARD, SHIROV'S BEST GAMES
| 