plik

FIDE Surveys – Vlastimil Jansa

Vlastimil Jansa:

Inscrutable knight

The aim of this article is not a further
documentation of what has been described
many times in chess literature and what
forms the foundations of the strategy.
Indeed, the activity of the knight
theoretically manifests itself best in the
centre, in the blocked position or in co-
operation with a queen, that is all gospel
truth. We would also definitely agree that
the knight is the most peculiar piece on the
board. No lines and no diagonals (in
contrast to the other pieces), but a strictly
limited „jump“ over several squares. Not
incidentally exactly the knight moves rank
among the most wonderful secrets of the
chessboard, their surprisingness is an
inseparable component of our remarkable
game and a sort of its „flavour“.
The uniqueness of knight jumps is often a
source of the most original ideas as well as
manifold tactical oversights and gross
miscalculations. Even at the highest level!
1. Blunders and oversights
Many of you might recall the 6

game of

the World Championship Match Carlsen :
Anand from Sochi, 2014.

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+rtr0
9+k+-+p+-0
9-zpl+p+nzp0
9zp-zp-zP-+R0
9-+P+-+R+0
9+-zP-vL-+-0
9P+L+-zPP+0
9+-mK-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

Carlsen, the future winner of the game and
the match, continued 26.Kd2?? and
completely overlooked a „typical“ knight

sortie 26…Ne5!, and if 27.Rg8, then
27...Nc4 28. Kd3 Nb2 gives Black a
material advantage. Still, Anand also
missed this possibility. He played
26…a4?? and after 27.Ke2 went on to lose
the game. A remarkable mutual „chess
blindness“ in such a top-level match!
The complex game Khismatullin D. :
Smirin I. from the recent tournament in
Poikovsky 2015 came to the position of the
next diagram:

XIIIIIIIIY
9rwqrvll+k+0
9zp-+-+p+p0
9-sn-zp-+p+0
9+-+Pzp-+-0
9Nsn-+P+-+0
9+PsN-vLP+-0
9-+-wQL+PzP0
9tR-+-+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy

White has not realized the tactical fragility
of the position, when he continued
21.Nb2? There followed a spectacular
knight punishment: 21…Rc3! 22.Qc3
N6d5! and after the forced 23.ed5 Nd5
24.Qd2 Ne3 Black was close to winning.
Knight jump might be insidious even in the
„simplest“ endgames, as the further
examples from the modern grandmaster
practice testify.

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-sn-+0
9+-+-sN-+-0
9-+-+-zP-+0
9+-+-+-zPk0
9-+-+-mK-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

FIDE Surveys – Vlastimil Jansa

In the previous course of the game
Grischuk A. : Polgar J., Biel 2007, White
remarkably gradually outplayed his
opponent, but a momentary carelessness
cost him half a point. The only correct
continuation was 61.f5!, with an easy win.
Instead, Grischuk plays seemingly logical
61.Kf3?, overlookes a stalemate
combination 61…Ng4! „Originally I
thought that I would „somehow“ lose the
game anyway“, says later Judit Polgar.
„But when I saw how long the opponent
was thinking, I realized that there was an
unavoidable draw on the board!“ Indeed, it
is impossible to overcome the blockade of
the pawns and White had to accept a bitter
draw after 62.Nd3 Nh2 63.Ke4 Ng4
64.Ne5 Nf6 65.Kf3 (65.Kf5 Kg3=) Ng4
66.Nc4 Nh2 67.Ke4 Nf1 68.Ne3 Ng3
69.Ke5 Kh2! 70.Kd6 Nh5 71.f5 Ng7 72.f6
Ne8 ½.

The elimination of Levon Aronian, one of
the main favourites, was a big surprise of
the 2

round of the World Cup in Baku,

2015. The main cause was the loss in the
1

rapid game of the tie-break. Aronian got

into a difficult knight endgame and his
opponent A.Areshchenko increased his
advantage, reaching a completely winning
position:

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+N+p0
9-mk-+-+-+0
9zp-+-+-zP-0
9-+-+n+-+0
9+K+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

Black to move could quickly and easily
win, playing 57…Kb3! White is in
zugzwang after 58.Ka1 a2, as 59.g4 fails to

59...h4! 60.Nh4 Nd4… Instead,
Areshchenko complicated his task with an
unnecessary knight shift: 57…Nc3?!
58.Kc2 Ne4 59.Kb1 Kb3 60.Nd4, after
which the dramatic game continued for
further 40 moves, featuring White's
stubborn resistance and a big duel of both
knight. Black still prevailed in the end.
Knight jumps in Baku will probably
remain a nightmare for Levon Aronian for
some time ...
  „Knight tragedy“ took place at another
World Cup in Khanty–Mansyisk in 2009.
The match V. Laznicka – V. Bologan came
to a four-game play-off. Laznicka was
leading 1,5: 0,5, but Bologan was very
close to levelling the score in game 3.

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-zp-+-zp0
9zPP+-snP+k0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-+-zP0
9+-+-+-+K0
xiiiiiiiiy

Black (Bologan) should have won after the
correct 52…Kg5, which timely brings the
king into play. For instance, 53.b6 Nd7
(Yes, the knight has enough time to
blockade the White pawns.) 54.b7 Nb8
55.Kg2 Kxf5 56.Kf3 Ke5 57.Ke3 Kd5 and
Black wins. Instead, Bologan hurried to
attack the White pawns with his knight:
52…Nc4??, which allowed Laznicka (who
was down to seconds!) to excellently
exclude Black's king from the play by
means of 53.b6 Na5 54.h4! The game
continued with 54…d5 55.Kg2 d4 56.Kf2
d3 57.Ke1! Nb7 58.Kd2 Nc5??
Black was unsettled by the sudden change
of the situation and failed to find the
salvation, which again consisted in the

FIDE Surveys – Vlastimil Jansa

inclusion of the king: 58…Nd6 59.Kd3
Kxh4! 60.f6 Kg5. The knight will manage
his role after both 61.f7 Nf7 62.b7 Ne5
with a draw and 61.b7? Nb7 62.f7 Nc5 and
Black even wins. After 58…Nc5?? the
game went downhill for Black: 59.Ke3
Kg4 60.f6 d2 61.Ke2! Nd7 62.f7 Kf5
63.b7 Ke6 64.f8Q 1:0.
Even the best from the best frequently
overlook knight sorties. In blitz games
such a risk naturally increases. Next
diagram features the game Kramnik V. :
Dubov D. from the World Blitz
Championship in Berlin 2015.

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-zpR+p0
9-+-+-+pmk0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-+-sn0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+r+-+-zP0
9+-+-+-tRK0
xiiiiiiiiy

In the game White underestimated Black's
knight for a moment and a severe
punishment followed: 1.Re7?? Nf3 0:1!

2. Cooperative knight and its surprising
and unrestrained movement

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+K+R+-+0
9+-+-+-+N0
9-+-+-+k+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-tr-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-zP-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

Study by A. Gurvich 1953.
White to move wins.

How to save the f2-pawn? White cannot
win after its loss. The troublesome path to
the victory leads through the brilliant
action of the knight and its flawless
cooperation with the rook and the king:
1.Nf8 Kf7 2.Ne6! Rd2! (The best defence.
After 2…Ra4 3.Kd7 Ra7 4.Nc7 Ra2 5.Re7
White wins.) 3.Rd8! Rc2 4.Kd7 Rd2
5.Kc6 Rc2 6.Kd5 Rd2 7.Kc4 Rc2 8.Kb3!
(Only so, it is necessary to lure the rook to
the e-file… 8.Kd3? Ra2.) 8…Re2 9.Rf8
Ke7 10.Nf4! The final accord of a
splendidly played composition. 1:0.

The co-operation of the knight with a
queen makes for an ideal combination, as it
contains the whole motional potential –
lines, diagonals and also the unique
movement of the knight. In the following
example:

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+Q+-+-+0
9+-mK-+-+-0
9-+-+N+-+0
9+-+-+-zp-0
9k+-+-+q+0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

R. Réti, 1925.
The White duo manages to put Black into a
hopeless situation through the fine
manoeuvres. Only so White can overcome
the draw pitfalls on the way to the victory:
1.Nc3 Ka1! 2.Qa4 (2.Qg2 first stalemate)
2...Kb2 3.Qa2 Kc1 4.Qb1 (4.Qg2 second
stalemate) 4...Kd2 5.Qb2 Ke1 6.Qc1
(6.Qg2 third stalemate) 6...Kf2 7.Nd1!
(The deplacement of the knight is
essential.) 7...Kf3 (Or 7…Ke2 8.Qb2!
Kd3 9.Qb3 …) 8.Qc3 Ke2 (8…Kf4 9.Qf6
Ke4 10.Dd4! – but not 10.Dc6 Kd3 11.Qg2
fourth stalemate – 10…Kf3 11.Dd5 +-)

FIDE Surveys – Vlastimil Jansa

9.Qb2! Kd3 (9…Kf3 10.Qb7 +-) 10.Qb3
Kd2 (e2) 11.Qa2! Kd3 12.Nb2! (The
decisive knight shift to c4.) 12…Ke3(e2)
13. Nc4 Kf3 14.Ne5 1:0.

In the 22

game of the World

Championship Match A.Alekhine –
M.Euwe White demonstrated a fascinating
„knight dance“. This famous game has
been a subject of numerous analyses of the
leading players. Alekhine himself analyzed
it in detail in his book „Alekhine's 300
Selected Games”, as well as Kasparov in
his work „My Great Predecessors” much
later. Knight jumps at the full board really
make a huge impression and cannot be
missing in my article. Even more so, that
even after many years they evoke not only
a justified enthusiasm, but also an ambition
to discover the long-hidden truth…

XIIIIIIIIY
9-tr-+-+k+0
9+-+-+p+p0
9-+-+-+p+0
9+-+N+-+-0
9-+-vl-+-+0
9+P+Q+-+P0
9-wq-+-zPP+0
9+-+-+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy

Alekhine (playing with White) initiated the
relevant part of the game in the position on
the diagram. The game continued with
41.Ne7! Kf8 (The only sensible retreat, as
41…Kg7? loses to 42.Nf5 gf5 43.Qg3 ;
after 41…Kh8 there follows 42.Nc6 Bf2
43. Rf2 Qc1 44.Kh2 Qc6 45.Rf7 and the
spare pawn should decide.) 42.Nc6 Bf2
43.Kh2?! (Kasparov later showed that the
prosaic option 43.Rf2 Qc1 44.Qf1 Qc6
45.Rf7 Kg8 46.Rf3 “with a fifty per cent
chance to win“ (Kasparov) was correct
after all. Alekhine was reluctant to enter
that endgame and he did well… Otherwise

the chess world would be deprived of the
following enchanting rage of the White's
knight.) 43…Re8? („If 43…Rb7, then
44.Qf3 Bb6 45. Nd8 and White wins at
least an exchange“, says Aljekhine. „No,
White overlooked an intermediate check
45…Qe5!“, counters Kasparov. Indeed,
Black saves the day after both 46.g3 Re7
47.Nf7 Qe2 and 46.Kh1 Bd8 47.Qb7 Bc7
48.Kg1 Dd4. I would like to add that in the
current computer age there also appears
one more defence: 43…Rb6 44.Qf3 Bg3!
45.Kh1 Qb3, even though not everything is
clear after 46.Qf6!) The idea behind the
move 43.Kh2 will fully manifest itself,
now. 44.Qf3 Re2 (Forced. In case of
43.Kh1 Black could play 43...Re1.)
45.Nd4! Rd2 46.Ne6 (The tireless knight
continues its journey through the centre of
the board.) 46…Ke7 (An automatic retreat.
Still, 46…Ke8 was more accurate in my
view. It would have allowed Black to meet
47.Nf4 with another defence than
47…Qd4, namely 47…Qc2 …) 47. Nf4!
(Threatening 48.Nd3! Now 47…Qc2 does
not work. Instead of 48.Ra1 (Alekhine,
Kasparov), White can execute a further
knight manoeuvre 48.Nd5 Kf8 49.Nf6!,
with a crushing threat of 50.Ne4.)
47…Qd4

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-mkp+p0
9-+-+-+p+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+-wq-sN-+0
9+P+-+Q+P0
9-+-tr-vlPmK0
9+-+-+R+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

48.Kh1!! („A superingenious silent move“
– Kasparov. Another knight jump 49.Ne2!
is threatening and on 48…Bh4 Alekhine
gives the following line: 49.Qb7 Qd7

FIDE Surveys – Vlastimil Jansa

50.Qb4 Ke8 51.Ne6! Be7 52.Qb8 Bd8
53.Nd8 Qd8 54.Qe5 Qe7 55.Qh8 Kd7
56.Qh7 Rf2 57.Rd1 Kc7 58.Qh8 and White
should win. And Garry Kasparov adds:
After 49…Ke8 the splendid knight will
again have its say: 50.Ne6! fe6 51.Qf7 Kd8
52.Qf8 Kc7 53.Rf7 Kb6 54.Qb8 Kc5
55.Rc7 Kd5 56.Rd7 Ke4 57.Qb7 Kf5
58.Rd4 Rd4 59.Qh7+-.) 48…Ra2? (In my
opinion, only this rook move is the
decisive mistake. Alekhine and Kasparov
agree with each other: „48…h5 49.Ne2
Rd1 50.Qb7 would have led to similar
consequences as the game continuation.“
But it is not so! Exactly 48…h5! was – as
we will see – the best defence. This fact
was recently discovered at the training
camp of the Czech national team.
Moreover, Black's last move should have
lost for a much more prosaic reason:
49.Nd5 Kf8 50.Nc3! Rc2 51.Ne4! – thus,
because of the further manoeuvre of the
inscrutable knight!) 49.Ne2 Ra1 50.Qb7!
Kf6 („More tenacious was 50…Kf8“,
agree the both greats of the world's chess
in their annotations. Yet, this time they are
not right … After 50…Kf8 51.Nd4 Rf1
52.Kh2 Bg1 53.Kg3 Bf2 White's king
avoids the f-file by means of 54.Kg4! and
Black cannot avert a huge material
disadvantage: 54…h5 (If 54…Bd4, then
55.Qb4.) 55. Kg5 Be3 56. Kh4 Rf4 57.Kg3
h4 58.Kh2 Rd4 59.Qb8 Kg(e)7 60.Qe5 +-.
On the other hand, Black would definitely
have decent chances for a draw after the
above-mentioned and only correct 48…h5!
49.Ne2 Rd1 50.Qb7 Kf8! 51. Nd4 Rf1
52.Kh2 Bg1 53.Kg3 Bf2 54.Kf3 Bd4
55.Ke4 Bg1 or 55.Ke2 Rf5.) 51.Nd4 Rf1
52.Kh2 Bg1 53.Kg3 Bf2 54.Kf3 Bd4
55.Ke4 Rd1 (After the bishop retreat
56.Qa6 decides.) 56.Qd5?! („An
unsubstantial oversight in this
extraordinary difficult game“, Alekhine
comments afterwards. Indeed, 56.Qc6
followed by 57.Qc2 would win on the spot,
but even now is the eventual pawn

endgame easily winning for White: 56…
Re1 57.Kd4 Td1 58.Kc5 Rd5 59.Kd5 Ke7
60.Kc6.) 56…Ke7 57.g4 h5 58.gh5 f5
59.Kf3 Rd3 60.Ke2 Re3 61.Kd2 Re4
62.hg6 and Black resigned. Alekhine's
magnificent knight manoeuvres in this
game make a great impression. Not
incidentally, shortly after its end dr. Euwe
reconciles himself with the defeat in the
whole match shortly afterwards: „The
tension of the fight has become simply
unbearable for me!“.

3. Domination of the knight in the centre
of the board
A lot has been written about the relation
between the knight and the bishop, the
advantages and disadvantages of the
movements of both pieces have been
documented in the literature countless
times. The strength of the knight increases
when it is positioned in the centre.

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+k+-+-vl0
9zP-+-+-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+N+-zPKzp0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

Richard Réti's study from 1922 is its proof
in the most economic, but not less
impressive form: 1.Nd4 Kc5 (The only
sensible retreat. After 1…Kd5 2.a6
decides, also after 1…Kb7 2.Kh2 Bf4
3.Kh3 Ka6 4.Nb3 Kb5 5.Kg4 Bb8 5.f4
Kb4 6. f5 Kb3 7.f6 Kb4 8.a6 Kb5 9.f7 one
of the White's pawns reaches the
destination on the 8

rank.) 2.Kh1!! and

this beautiful „zugzwang“ finishes
everything. It is perhaps the shortes study
ever!

FIDE Surveys – Vlastimil Jansa

The centralised knight in Richard Réti's
hands became the decisive force also in the
fight against the rook:

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+p+N+-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-zP-+-0
9-mK-+-+-+0
9+P+-mk-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+r+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

Reti R., a study from 1928.
1.e6 Re1 (Black has a wide choice, but the
other options are no better: 1…Ra1 2.e7
Ra8 3.Nf6: 1…Kd2 2.Ne5 Ra1 3.e7 Ra8
4.Nc4 and 5.Nd6; 1…Kd4 2.Ne5 Ra1 3.e7
Ra8 4.Nf7 Te8 5.Nd6: 1…Kf2 2.Ne5 Ra1
3.e7 Ra8 4.Ng4 and 5.Nf6 or 1…Kf4 2.e7
Re1 3.Nf6.) 2.Ne5! +-

In exceptional cases the action of the
knight can overcome even the strength of
the most powerful piece on the board! The
study by M. Liburkin from 1939 is a
beautiful example of such a “miracle”:

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+N+-+-+0
9zp-+-+-+-0
9q+p+-zp-+0
9mkp+-+-+-0
9-+-zP-+-+0
9zPP+-+K+-0
9-+-+-zP-+0
9+-vL-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

1.Bd2 b4 2.Bb4 Kb5 3.Nd6 Kb6 4.Ba5!
Ka5 5.Nc4 Kb5 6.Kf4 f5 (6…c5 7.d5)
7.Kg5! f4 8.f3 c5 9.d5 and Black's queen
is lost!

Grandmaster David Navara impressively
describes in detail the course of many of
his games in his remarkable book “My
Chess World” (in Czech, Prague 2015). At
the end of the book he annotates the
encounter Navara D. : Caruana F., Rhodes
2013.

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-mk-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-zP-sNP+-0
9-zP-+L+-+0
9+-+-vl-+-0
9-tr-+-+-+0
9+-+K+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

In an unusual but pleasant poetic way.
Here is the very end, where exactly the
centralized knight plays the decisive role:
52.Bc2! Navara aptly writes: „At the
moment White is ready to give a fork with
his knight, centralized steed is quite steady
and might soon end up the fight.“ 52…Bg5
(52…Ra2 53.f6 Kf6 54.Ng4¸52…Rb4
53.Nc6.) 53.c6 Ra2 (53…Kd6 54.Nc4;
53…Kd8 54.Nf7.) 54.b5 and White easily
won after 54…Be3 55.f6 Kd8 56.f7 Bc5
57.b6 Ra1 58.Ke2 Ra2 59.Kd3 Rb2
60.Nc4 Rb5 61.Bd1! 1:0.

FIDE Surveys – Vlastimil Jansa

The study by A.Guliev (1928) shows a
slightly different but also important role of
the knight in the centre:

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9sN-+-+-+-0
9-+-+P+-+0
9+-+-+K+-0
9-+-+-+-mk0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-vlr+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

1.e7 Re2 2.Nc6 Kh5! 3.Ne5!! Re5 4.Kf6
with a draw.

4. Knight manoeuvres, transfer of the
knight from the one side of the board to
the other

Knight's limited ability, caused by the
character of its movement and occasionally
manifesting itself by knight's troublesome
“transport” accross the board, is its
undeniable weakness. The necessary shift
always requires big attention and often also
surprising but accurate decisions! The
following position is a textbook case for
this:

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-mk-+N0
9-+-+-+-zp0
9+p+-+-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9K+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

Gurgenidze D., study 1970.

White to move has to annihilate the Black
b5-pawn as quickly as possible. However,
the automatic 1.Kb3? (looking for 1…Kf7?
2.Kb4 Kg7 3.Kxb5 Kh7 4.Kc4 =) would
have been an irreparable mistake due to the
clever reply 1…Ke6! 2.Nf8 (2.Kb4 Kf5
3.Kb5 h5 -+) Kf5 3.Nd7 h5 4. Nc5 h4
5.Nd3 h3 6.Nf2 h2 7.Kb4 Kf4 and Black
wins. So what is the matter? Any square
for the knight, even a seemingly
unimportant one! Correct is only the
thoughtful move 1.Ka3!! with the point
consisting in 1…Ke6 2.Nf8 Kf5 3.Nd7 h5
4.Nc5 h4 5.Nb3!. The knight needs exactly
this square for the drawing finale: 5…h3
6.Nd2! h2 (or 6…Kf4 7.Nf1=) 7.Nf1=.

Anatoly Karpov demonstrated a classical
example of a very effective knight transfer
in his game against Boris Spassky in the
Candidates match in 1974.

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+-tr-+k+0
9+-+-wqp+-0
9-+p+-+p+0
9zp-+-zp-+p0
9PsnQ+P+-vl0
9+-sN-vL-+P0
9-zPPtR-+P+0
9+-+-+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy

The passive knight on c3 and its active
Black's counterpart inspired White to start
the excellent manoeuvre with 24.Nb1!.
Not only White transfers the knight
through d2 to f3, he also drives away the
Black's knight to the rim through the
subsequent advance c2-c3. Excellent
strategy! The difficulty lies in the idea
itself – the knight returns to its initial
position! This manoeuvre has nevertheless
brought the decisive impetus into the
further course of the game: 24…Qb7
25.Kh2 Kg7 26.c3 Na6 27.Re2! Rf8

FIDE Surveys – Vlastimil Jansa

28.Nd2 Bd8 29.Nf3 f6 30.Rd2 Be7
31.Qe6 Rad8 32.Rd8 Bd8 33.Rd1 Nb8
34.Bc5 Rh8 35. Rd8! 1:0  (35…Rd8
36.Be7+-).

In the following example from the game
Navara D. : Caruana F., Reggio Emilia
2010/2011, White managed to conceal the
significance of the knight manoeuvre
accross the board from the opponent's sight
until the moment, when Black was
essentially helpless …

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-tr-mk0
9+-+-wq-zp-0
9-vlrzpp+-zp0
9zpp+-zp-+P0
9-+-+P+Q+0
9zP-zPR+PzP-0
9-zPN+-+K+0
9+-+R+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

In the position of diagram White followed
up with an interesting king move 36.Kh3!
And here is David Navara's comment: „I
seem to prepare 37.Qh4 or 37.f4, but in
fact I had a different intention which the
opponent failed to detect …“  And further
he explains: „ …namely the knight
manoeuvre c2-e1-g2-h4-g6! If Black had
found this plan, he would have probably
chosen the correct continuation 36…Rf6
37.Ne1 Kh7 38.Ng2 g5! with counterplay.“
Instead there followed 36…Rf7?! 37. Ne1!
a4? (Black could not prevent the knight
invasion to g6, but he should not have
deprived himself of the possibility to play
b5-b4.) 38.Ng2 Bc7 39.f4! Rc4 40.Nh4
Kh7 41.fe5 de5 42.Rd7! Qe8 43. Qg6
(White has already achieved a winning
position. Here 43.Ng6! was the quickest
way to finish the game, for instance
43…Kg8 44.Rf7 Qf7 45.Qe2!, with a

subsequent penetration via the f-file:
45…Qe8 46.Od3!+- Navara.)
43…Kg8 44.R1d3 Rc6 45.Rf7 Qf7
46.Qf7 Kf7 47.Rd7 Kf6 48. Ng6 Bd6
(Otherwise 49.Nf8 follows.) 49.Kg4 Rb6

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+R+-zp-0
9-tr-vlpmkNzp0
9+p+-zp-+P0
9p+-+P+K+0
9zP-zP-+-zP-0
9-zP-+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

50.Nh8! (This impressive jump right into
the corner creates mating threats and
consequently also brings the decisive
material advantage.) 50… Be7 51.Rd3
Bc5 (Or 51…g5 52.hg6 Kg7 53.Rd7+-)
52.Rf3 Ke7 53.Rf7 Ke8 54.Rg7 … 1:0.

4. The knight in the corner of the board.
An unusual, but sometimes important
role!

A.Miles : S. Makarichev, Oslo 1984

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-zp-+pmk-0
9-zp-+-+pzp0
9+P+-zp-+-0
9-+P+Q+Pvl0
9+-+-zP-sNP0
9-+-+-zPK+0
9wq-+-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy

Diagram position depicts an unusual role
of the knight, which operates extraordinary
efficiently at the very corner of the board.
The potential of the knight understandably
manifests itself best in the centre, but there

FIDE Surveys – Vlastimil Jansa

are some exceptions! But those cases are
rare and unusual, which makes it very hard
to discover such knight moves. Not only
the attacking knight sorties belong there, at
times a „modest“ retreat of the knight or
even its move into the corner might be the
best idea!
To activate his queen, White needed to deal
with two obstacles: the possible exchange
of the knight and the eventual weakness of
the f2-pawn. He resolved both issues
brilliantly: 1.Nh1!! Qb2 2.Qc6 Qb1 3.Qc7
Qe4 4.Kh2 h5 5.Qc6! and White easily
won.

The position of the next diagram ( Jansa V.
: Bilek I., Polanica Zdroj 1968) is full of
pieces and danger.

XIIIIIIIIY
9-+r+-+k+0
9zp-+lzppvlp0
9-+-zp-+p+0
9+q+P+-+P0
9-zpr+-+P+0
9+N+-vLP+-0
9PzPPwQ-+-+0
9+K+R+-+R0
xiiiiiiiiy

I got an idea to cover the vulnerable c2-
square with the knight from a1! White
excludes his knight from play, but opens
up attacking possibilities to all the
remaining White pieces. As it soon
transpired, it was a good idea. It usually
pays off to care about a reliable defence ...
1.Na1! (Much better than 1.Rc1 a5)
1…e6?! (True, the Hungarian grandmaster
„helped me a bit“ with this move, but
White's attack seems to be quicker even
after the more resilient 1…Be5 2.Qf2
followed by Qh4). After 2. hg6 hg6 3.Qh2
ed5 4.Qh7 Kf8 5.Bh6 White attack
became unstoppable.

Sometimes the knight retreat has to be
connected with an extraordinary strategic
conception involving the other pieces as
well. In the game Wang Y. : Navara D.,
Baku 2008:

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+r+-+-+0
9+p+lmkp+p0
9p+n+p+-+0
9+-zP-+p+-0
9L+-+-+-+0
9+-zP-zPN+-0
9P+-+-zPPzP0
9+R+-+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy

Black chose a “logical” move 17…Rc7?!,
yet White maintained an initiative in the
endgame after 18.Rfd1 Ne5 (18…Nb8
19.Rd4) 19.Ne5 Ba4 20.Rd4. It was
definitely not easy to discover 17…Ra7!
18.Rfd1 Nb8!, after which Black pieces
would co-ordinate well. Still, it would have
been the correct solution of the situation.