Chessworld.net presents Instructive game: Redefining "Opening" as a way of getting Trumps

[thespacialone]

Qf6 looked pretty silly. But cool game.

[Cerebralator]

What's a "Winning trump card"? This is a good game.

[hiphopfan77]

It's not king scrusher it's kings crusher haha

[lazimofo90]

Can someone define the term "trump cards " more specifically?

IE here I understood that the trump card was the central pawn mass that Bronstein used to gain space and dominate the space on the board.

What can be another example of trump cards?

[andrewh817]

I'm only 1100 rated ATM, but I do get the sense that most players in my range and perhaps higher don't want to step out of their comfort zones (the mainlines) and if you force them out they haven't the tactical skill to improvise.

[mikedoyle1982]

does the term "trump card" in chess come from top trumps, the playing cards. (ie, u could have a football top trump card game wer each player has different advantages and weaknesses, such as a better attack than most other cards, or a worse defense) this could relate to the "trump cards" in chess. for example if a player has gambited a pawn, like in the evans gambit, the white player has the trump card of more dynamic pieces with chances of an attack, top trump - trump cards, seems to fit

[ShotDownInFlames2]

Great game, thanks. Bronstein was on the losing end to Spassky in the "From Russia With Love" game. That's the only time I've heard of him.

[oryxfreeride]

amazing game, it really is beautiful.

[GarrBear314]

very unique and interesting game, great vid as usual KC :)

[guitarfella581]

gosh that was beautiful ive never heard of bronsetin great great player

[whoslayedgoliath]

I have seen the Bronstein game before; the commentator dubbed it the "Bronstein piece sac," giving up a piece for connected central passed pawns. I believe this idea has been played in other games as well.

[kuntakintay18]

this was one of my favorite games, great pawn usage

[AlanWattParrot]

" ..... "

speechless!

excellent commentary



[Minkar]

This stuff is cool I guess, but do more houdini games!!!

[lazimofo90]

should be called the bronstein gambit that move.the piece sack.

[alinc2]

Hey KC, I do like the idea of creating trump cards in the opening, perhaps because I often have difficulty in telling good from bad lines in the mainstream of the currently played opening I have in memory, but in this game Bronsteins opponent could have done better at some points (i.e. c5 instead of Nbd7 or, even better I think, Bb4+, or Qf5 instead of Qf4). But the important point is creating a position from the opening with trump cards or imbalances that make you feel good and provide a plan.

[kingscrusher]

@alinc2 Yes that is the spirit I hope I was conveying in the video - to use openings as a tool to try and get "Trumps" (favourable imbalances) - and this can help opening selection - rather than saying to yourself "I will play this opening X because it is popular", or "Y because GM played it", etc. The focus on "Trumps" I think is better as a selection criteria.

[TheDrawnik]

This one-sided trump card concept is utter nonsense as it implies that you get a winning advantage.

Chess is about trade-offs or imbalances or however you want to call it. Here Bronstein gave up material and gained central control. As MrZingnigga noted this idea of giving up a piece of pawn and superior central control also occurs in the Halloween Gambit as well as in the sounder Cochrane Gambit where White gets, like in this game, two pawns for the piece.

[kingscrusher]

@TheDrawnik You can try and get winning trumps- e.g. a 3-2 pawn majority like in a recent Capabalanca video. I hope I never implied in this video that a one-sided trump card is possible and a forced win!. No the idea I hope I was conveying was to see the opening to get favourable imbalances ("trumps") - or at least try to get them. Here although this game is arguably really unsound, still there is the effort for favourable trumps which is a feature of many Bronstein wins - creative opening

[kingscrusher]

@kingscrusher play leading to unbalanced situations, and hopefully favourable trump cards (favourable imbalances) which can be steered to increase advantage later on in middlegame and even endgames.

[TheDrawnik]

@kingscrusher: Sorry if I sounded too harsh, this is a wonderful game and you commented it greatly. I just don't like the word trump card as unlike imbalances it doesn't mention what could go wrong, in this instance that Bronstein could have been just down material.

I absolutely agree with the main idea that you conveyed, being creative in the opening and playing unusual moves like d3 and then latter the knight sac is more important than playing the latest opening theory innovation.

[TheDrawnik]

Furthermore being creative implies that you are more active in your preparation and this is more likely to educate your analyzation skills than passively soaking up opening theory.

If you like these kind of give up "a piece to gain a monste centre" postions you might wanna do a video about the Cochrane Gambit, sometimes even played on the highest level, or the totally outrageous Halloween Gambit which admittedly shouldn't be played in normal games ... but in blitz it can be deadly.

[Nimzowitz]

very nice. i just tried this in blitz, and i totally murdered my opponent

[leeponzu]

Find a better term than 'trump card'. Out isn't cards and there isn't a trump. How about "winning set of combinations"?

[kingscrusher]

@leeponzu Combinations has a notion of tactical play. I think conceptually I really myself prefer "Trumps" as a shorthand for "Favourable imbalances" where imbalances are the elements of the position, which Steinitz started annotating - e.g. pawn structure, space, time, etc. From elements, you can generate tactical possibilities and combinations - e.g. weakened king safety.

[whitenightf3]

@leeponzu Trump Moves sounds better we are not playing cards it's chess.

[leeponzu]

@leeponzu

i looked up the origin of the word 'trump'. The use here comes from the word 'triumph'. That makes King Scrusher's idea boil down to "The purpose of the opening is to lead to a triumph." duh.

Still, the idea of thinking about what the opening is for is still a good one, plus nobody can deliver a chess lecture like K.

i still want to know what a 'Scrusher' is, though.

[Solonil]

Another great instructive video! Thanks so much!

[MrZingnigga]

Very Halloween Gambit.

[trixapete]

is being a piece up a trump card?

as is the case for black here

[Topanga2]

The downside of too obvious a trump creation (as in unsound gambits) is that permits your opponent to focus his attention/resources of your now narrowed opportunity to convert the transient advantage of the trump to a winning hand. So, one returns to strategies that offer multiple, flexible or subtle trump creations - i.e., positional play.

[yosoybrandon]

Which book are you talking about of his? I see two on Amazon.

[Topanga2]

I take the difference between trump cards and a winning hand (to stretch the card playing analogy) to be the potential for converting a transient advantage into a winning position. Here Bronstein exchanges a knight for two central pawns that have the potential of converting to a wining advantage if he can prevent them from being blockcaded. So, is a trump the transient potential for winning advantage which may have value provided one understands how to play out one's hand?

[Chaxar]

Funny how many "Chess Masters" there are on this post who disregard your ideas KC since they are obviously always playing superior GM opponents. Chess innovation works for all levels of chess IMO since chess is an infinitely dynamic game.

[kingscrusher]

@BinkyHuckleback The point is when playing any opening - it is a good idea to be aware and be able to use the trump cards the opening gives. Not just play moves for the sake of it, or following "main lines" without understanding trump cards. I consider for example the Benoni nearly refuted - but its not a gambit - its just that it seems structurally unsound. However, i might play it sometimes and use it to play on the dark squares and semi open e file pressure, an queenside pawn majority.

[mavaddat]

KC, I think your philosophy leans heavily on surprise factor. Fine for Blitz, but doesn't work in tested OTB play.

Bronstein's opening play here was risky and refutable. With time to prepare, good opponents would realize their material advantage.

Bronstein was extremely booked up. That's what GAVE HIM the authority and qualification to create such radical novelties. To create radical novelties without knowing the position is like "innovating" with art without knowing the current art theory.

[Chaxar]

@mavaddat Your theory that a person can prepare for Bronstein openers has no basis on reality. If an opponent knew you were playing Bronstein and spent months prepairing for it, what is going to happen if you play Nimszovich or even make a new dynamic line? Don't disreguard someones opinion just by saying "With time to prepare"

[mavaddat]

@Chaxar On the contrary, Bronstein would be crushed if he tried this exact opening today.

I never said that it's possible to prepare for ALL of his possible openings. However, if your knowledge of a line and its sub-variations is sufficiently rich, then you can be confident that any early deviation is wrong and you will always be better out of the opening. That is hugely important to one's confidence and fun over the board.

[kingscrusher]

@mavaddat At club level, you can still play benonis and kings indians etc - dioesn't matter what 2700's play. You can also play the Kings Gambt etc- an if you know the trump cards you are looking for it helps to try and win games at least at club chess level in my opinion.

[EClein2]

@kingscrusher This idea is really starting to grow on me now, like here sacrificing a piece for 2 pawns generates the trump card of a solid pawn wedge and the advantage of space (and it comes with tempo). It wins because Bronstein's opponent doesn't consider giving back the material until bound by a line where he is forced to. So here's my question - if you knew which openings performed better against certain others does that mean you could essentially trump your opponent's trump cards early on?

[Chaxar]

@mavaddat I feel that the point of Bronstein opening has been missed. Of course a person with more chess knowledge would be able to recognize when a wrong move is made and would have a better game. However, I feel that KC's point is not in the exact movements of a "Opener" but rather it is the results of the opener that is important. If actual "Trump Cards" can be won from an opener, then the opener is good. Also, deviation from an opener or its sub-lines its not wrong, but possibly dynamic. :)

[realCevra]

10...c5 is already a mistake. so the game might demonstrate how bronstein should play against rojan, but not how one should play this opening regardless of the opponent, which is what opening theory is about.

imho rojan was helpless against this new line bc he underestimated the position against the overall superior player bronstein and therefore made even more mistakes later on. my old opening book says "a sacrifice only bronstein can afford to play".

[Ep1cure]

Fantastic. I think I appreciate Bronstein alot more now after looking at this game and hearing of his concept. Tal, when sacrificing a piece used to have some of his sacrifices 'refuted' by heavy analysis, post-game, but looking for the best move is not always a good objective if it takes forever to find it and the time control is moving along. He used the time control to his advantage, and his sacrifices were strong enough in an over the board encounter.

[mcpartridgeboy]

not many people would trust themselves to play like that, i think this game is for very experienced players

[dilbertfungoing]

Wow!! Very interesting. It makes me think that maybe we don't know everything about chess yet, and there still can be different ways to think about the game. :-D

[Comradez]

This is a fascinating game! Games like this, where someone manages to pull off the unthinkable (going a bishop down for two pawns that early) and yet manage to win, just make one marvel at the resources in chess.

[cuevasdecamuy]

I think one person who used a similar idea, But he focused more on the pshycological trump cards, was Josh Waitzkin...He didnt necessarly went into main lines but he develop trump cards by playing openings which fitted his oponent psycology.

[pistraurder]

more bronstein please