MARK RUBERY CHESS
The double bishop sacrifice featured prominently in an encounter between two great antagonists of the early 20th century: Aaron Nimzovich (1886-1935) who pioneered the Hyper-modern approach to the game (fianchetto bishops and attack the centre from the flanks) and the classical if dogmatic Siegbert Tarrasch (1862-1934) who espoused rapid development and a strong centre. In the following clash it was the more inflexible Tarrasch who at the age of 52 showed how dynamic his play could be.
Nimzovitch,aaron - Tarrasch,siegbert [D30]
St Petersburg prel St Petersburg, 1914
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 c5 3.c4 e6 4.e3 Nf6 5.Bd3 Nc6 6.0–0 Bd6 7.b3 0–0 8.Bb2 b6 9.Nbd2 Bb7 10.Rc1 Qe7 11.cxd5 exd5 12.Nh4?! (Provoking a weakness but the loss of time incurred soon proves costly)…g6 3.Nhf3 Rad8 14.dxc5 bxc5 15.Bb5 Ne4 16.Bxc6 (This is too obliging. 16 a3!?)…bxc6 17.Qc2 Nxd2 18.Nxd2 d4! (Opening the diagonal and preparing the following combination) 19.exd4
‘Chess is a form of intellectual productiveness, therein lies its peculiar charm. Intellectual productiveness is one of the greatest joys - if not the greatest one - of human existence. It is not everyone who can write a play, or build a bridge, or even make a good joke. But in chess everyone can, everyone must be intellectually productive, and so can share in this select delight. I have always a slight feeling of pity for the man who has no knowledge of chess, just as I would pity the man who has remained ignorant of love. Chess, like love, like music, has the power to make men happy.’ – Siegbert Tarrasch
True, but it’s well to remember that losing at chess, like rejection, like Barry Manilow, has the power to make men unhappy. – Mike Franett