It doesn’t even rate as a footnote as the bombs fall and families cower in bomb shelters, but there is something inexpressibly sad about seeing two of the world’s great chess-loving nations at war.
Ukrainians chess stars were an integral part of the great Soviet chess dynasty, and to this day Russia and Ukraine are home to some of the world’s strongest players and some of the game’s most passionate fans. Ukrainian grandmasters have posted videos of bombs exploding outside their apartments, while a number of top Russian players, including such stars as GMs Peter Svidler, Andrey Esipenko, and reigning national champion have come out against the war, and the pain, discomfort and conflicted emotions are poignantly visible on the face of Russian GM Ian Nepomniachtchi in a YouTube video last week when asked what he thought about recent events.
Russian chess has already faced a steep price for the war: FIDE officials over the weekend confirmed the 2022 Olympiad will not be held in Moscow as planned, and no official events will be scheduled in either Russia or Belarus. Players may not compete under the Russian or Belarusian national flag. Lucrative funding and sponsorship deals with Russian companies such as oil giant Gazprom have been terminated and all deals with sanctioned Russian and Belarusian companies will be banned.
Russian players who have spoken up in support of the war and of President Vladimir Putin, including Sergey Karjakin and Sergey Shipov, also are facing an ethics probe and potential punishment from the international chess body.
“FIDE stands united against wars [and] condemns any use of military means to resolve political conflicts,” the Paris-based group’s governing council said in a statement Sunday. “FIDE will take any necessary action to ensure the security of chess players and other members of the chess community.”
The fraternal bonds that long linked Russia and Ukraine were nowhere more evident than at the chessboard. Perhaps the greatest Ukrainian-born player of them all, David Bronstein, played on four gold medal-winning Soviet Olympiad teams in the 1950s, wrote some of the greatest chess books of the 20th century, and was an ambassador for his country and the game over a 50-ply-year career before his death in 1996.
Bronstein took on friend and fellow Ukrainian great GM Isaac Boleslvasky in a 1950 playoff match for the right to challenge reigning Soviet world champ Mikhail Botvinnik.
In his great chess autobiography “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice,” Bronstein breaks down the epic struggle in Game 7, won with a positional idea that few players even today would likely consider. Out of a Nimzo-Indian line favored by GM Efim Bogolyubov (another Ukrainian great from the first half of the 20th century), Boleslavsky as Black seems to be doing just fine through 20. Nc5 Qe7 (Bxe2? 21. Rfe1 Bc4 22. Nd7) — the fianchettoed bishop in neutralized, Black holds the b-file, and White’s only impressive piece is the knight on c5.
Thus the shock of Bronstein’s next move: 21. Nxa6!!, giving up a beautiful knight for a distinctly lesser bishop. The positional justification is to make the eventual c3-c4 for White the key lever in the position. The threat of the advance, “indirectly supported by the bishop on g2, will be a factor in the next 19 moves,” Bronstein wrote. “When White finally makes the move, his advantage will be overwhelming.”
The ensuing play justifies White’s intuition after 21…Rxa6 (Qxa3 22. Rxa3 Rxa6 23. Rb1 Rb6 24. Rb5 Rfb8 25. Rc5 Kf7 26. e3 Ke7 27. c4) 22. Qc5! Rb8 23. Rfb1 Qxc5 24. dxfc5 Kf8 25. Rb5 Raa8 26. Kf2 Ke7 27. Ke3 Rb8 28. Rab1, and Black is left to temporize as White methodically prepares his breakthrough.
Black’s only “error” in the game may be here, when 28…g5! might have given him some badly needed counterplay. Right at time control, White’s idea comes to fruition on 39. g5 Kd7 40. c4 (finally, and just as devastating was Bronstein foresaw) dxc4 (c6 41. cxd5 exd5 42. e4! opens the position for the bishop to dominate) 41. Bf3 Ra7 42. Kc3 c6 43. Rh2, and Black’s penned-in knight and lack of maneuvering room are just enough for White in the endgame.
White’s impeccably timed 53. Bxf7! Rxf7 54. Rah8 liquidates to a winning endgame in which the outside passed a-pawn will spell Black’s doom. With 59. Rd3 Kf7 60. Rd6!, the Black king is kept in box on the kingside and the rest is a matter of (world-class) technique: 60…Kg7 61. Rd7+ Kg8 62. Ka4 Kf8 63. Rb7 f4 (or 63…Ra8 64. Rb6 Rc8 65. a6 Ke7 66. a7 Ra8 67. Rb7+ Ke6 68. Ka5 f4 69. Kb6 f3 70. Rc7! f2 71. Rxc6+ Kf5 72. Rf6+ Kxg5 72. Rxf2 and wins) 64. Rb4 Kf7 65. Rxf4+ Ke6 66. Rf6+ Kd5 67. Kb4 and Boleslavsky resigned.
Bronstein would fall just short of the title, tying his match with Botvinnik 12-12 after tragically losing a tough ending in Game 23 with a one-point lead. Under the rules of the day, the champ retained the crown in the event of a drawn match.
—-
Vassily Ivanchuk, whose glory years at the chessboard came as his native Ukraine was just achieving its independence in the 1990s, may be the one player to rival Bronstein in talent, imagination and the affection he generated from passionate Ukrainian chess fans.
Even his top rivals acknowledged Ivanchuk’s pure genius for the game, where a visit to “Planet Chukky” was reminder of what beauties still wait to be discovered in the game.
Ivanchuk’s nerves may have kept him from a world title, but in his prime he defeated every one of his top rivals, often in brilliant style. Today’s diagram comes from a 1996 game against GM Veselin Topalov in which the Bulgarian superstar fails to appreciate the venom in an apparently stable position.
Black seeks to bother the annoying White rook on a7 and reaps the whirlwind: 23…Nc6? (apparently grabbing a free tempo, but even now, 23…Be6 may have been mandatory to “save” Black’s game) 24. g6!! (letting the rook go for free to target the vulnerable f7-square) Nxa7 (Topalov sportingly goes along for the ride; 24…f6 was the toughest defense, though not 24…hxg6? 25. Rxf7! Be6 [Kxf7 26. Bg5+] 26. Bg5 Be7 27. Nxe7+ Nxe7 28. Rxg7+!! Kxg7 29. Qc3+ Kg8 30. Bh6 Nf5 31. exf5 Qe7 32. fxe6 and wins) 25. gxf7+ Kh8 (Kxf7? 26. Bg5+ again) 26. Bg5!, not settling for 26. fxe8=Q?! Qxe8 27. Ne3, with a much smaller edge.
Ivanchuk’s unmatched attacking imagination (perhaps the greatest in the game since Bronstein, in fact) is justified repeatedly in the finale: 26…Qd7 27. fxe8=N Rxe8 (Qxe8 28. Nf6! gxf6 29. Bxf6+ Bg7 [Kg8 30. e5!] 30. Bxg7+ Kxg7 31. Qd4+ Kg8 32. e5, and the bishop enters with decisive impact) 28. Qf2 Kg8 29. e5! h6 (dxe5 30. Nc7! Qxc7 31. Bd5+ Kh8 32. Qxf8+) 30. Nb6 Qc7 31. Bd5+ Kh7 (or 31…Kh8 32. Qxg8+ Rxf8 33. Rxf8+ Kh7 34. Be4+ g6 35. Bf6!) 32. Be4+ Kg8 33. Nd5 Qd7 34. Ne7+!, forcing resignation even though three Black pieces can take the knight. After 34. Bxe7 (Rxe7 35. Qxf8 mate) 35. Qf7+ Kh8 36. Qg6, Black can only delay but not prevent the mate to come.
Bronstein-Boleslavsky, Candidates Playoff Match, Moscow, August 1950
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Nf3 d6 5. Qb3 a5 6. g3 Nc6 7. Bg2 Ne4 8. O-O Bxc3 9. bxc3 O-O 10. Ne1 f5 11. f3 Nf6 12. a4 Qe7 13. c5 d5 14. Bg5 h6 15. Bxf6 Qxf6 16. Nd3 b6 17. cxb6 Rb8 18. Qa3 Rxb6 19. f4 Ba6 20. Nc5 Qe7 21. Nxa6 Rxa6 22. Qc5 Rb8 23. Rfb1 Qxc5 24. dxc5 Kf8 25. Rb5 Raa8 26. Kf2 Ke7 27. Ke3 Rg8 28. Rab1 Rgb8 29. Kd3 Kd7 30. e3 Ke7 31. Kd2 Rc8 32. Bf3 g6 33. Be2 h5 34. h3 Rg8 35. Rb7 Rgc8 36. g4 hxg4 37. hxg4 Nd8 38. R7b2 Nf7 39. g5 Kd7 40. c4 dxc4 41. Bf3 Ra7 42. Kc3 c6 43. Rh2 Ke7 44. Be2 Kf8 45. Bxc4 Re8 46. Rb6 Rc7 47. Ra6 Kg7 48. Rxa5 e5 49. Rh3 Rd7 50. Bb3 exf4 51. exf4 Re4 52. Ra8 Rxf4 53. Bxf7 Rxf7 54. Rah8 Rf3+ 55. Rxf3 Kxh8 56. a5 Ra7 57. Kb4 Kg7 58. Ra3 Ra6 59. Rd3 Kf7 60. Rd6 Kg7 61. Rd7+ Kg8 62. Ka4 Kf8 63. Rb7 f4 64. Rb4 Kf7 65. Rxf4+ Ke6 66. Rf6+ Kd5 67. Kb4 Black resigns
• David R. Sands can be reached at 202/636-3178 or by email at dsands@washingtontimes.com.
• David R. Sands can be reached at dsands@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.