Though somewhat dated by the emergence of correspondence chess via a playing server, you might find the battle tactics below useful. My playing career is winding down - I have no secrets to keep any more. One thing that I have learned through the years is this - you will find it very tough going to win games in serious, high-level competition. You simply must try to get an edge - read this to mean take more chances - in your games, if you want to improve your results. Naturally, your opponents are not just sitting back, waiting for you to crush them. They will be using engines and every other trick in the book to try and defeat your strategies, and your general game plan. Once in awhile, though, it might be a good idea to try some advanced tactical tricks...

Tactic 1 - Rope a dope. I've found that email cc is quite different in one respect. You will cross swords with some opponents who like to move very quickly. Yes, this also happens in snail mail cc, but you still have the transit time, which is an annoyance to those who like to move quickly in cc. That's probably one of the attractions to email cc for them. You will have to be prepared for this in order to do well in email cc. I've developed a technique, which I call "rope a dope". First practiced by Ali with great results in boxing, in email correspondence chess it works out to be something like this: keep the same movement pace as your opponent, but spend more time researching, and studying, the actual position! This little-known (and never disclosed!) trick works only when you have very few pending games, and also when you are extremely comfortable with the general requirements of the position. The basic method is to blitz the reply within one day, but only after taking at least three to four hours in analysis time before you decide what you will play and then make your move. The object is to lull your opponent into faulty thinking, that is, he thinks you are spending the same minimal amount of time on the position as he is, when in fact you are using all sorts of time to study, mostly on his time! Again, this is a risky method of play but may work with some opponents who blitz their moves. Many of my wins in email cc have come about, directly or indirectly, by application of this tactic, and opponents who like to blitz their moves are prime candidates for this special attention. Those opponents who have many games pending (check this using forecast in ICCF's EloQuery), but still insist on moving quickly are just asking for serious trouble. This tactic doesn't always work but, used wisely, has much potential for success. Once your opponent's position is beyond hope, it doesn't matter how much he slows down the pace of the game (I call it "going postal"). A lost game is a lost game, no matter how long it is dragged out. I'm not suggesting that no one ever blunders a won position into a lost or drawn position, but in high-level email cc, I would guess that rarely happens.

There is one special circumstance when I would recommend this tactic in almost every instance. That is when you, as a CC specialist, are playing a titled over the board player (FIDE Master, IM, or GM) in a correspondence chess tournament. Particularly if it is his first cc tournament! The reasons for this are obvious. Firstly, the talented over the board player is used to opponents simply falling apart on him and self-destructing, in his over the board games. Secondly, he will be motivated to move quickly, perhaps, because others in the tournament will be taking their time playing cautiously against him, i.e., the titled over the board player won't have much activity in his games, particularly at the start. Lastly, many FIDE titled players do not respect cc players, because they are not FIDE titled players... The CC specialist knows that correspondence chess is quite different from its over the board counterpart. You can use rope a dope to score points (and half points) against FIDE titled players - I have done it many times... Again, I will not claim that it works all of the time, but, in this special circumstance, it works more often than not. You are perhaps more motivated in this endeavor than he is. Above all, respect no one because of a high rating or title! Remember, he is coming to your backyard to play, and not the other way around... That is your edge.

Tactic 2 - Pre-game research. Before the tournament starts, seek out the annotated games of your opponent, especially those annotated by your opponent himself. Study the games, the strategies, the tactics. Are any of the openings employed by your opponent ones which you feel comfortable playing against? If so, these are ideal candidates for further attention. Does your opponent do well against the opening that you would like to play against him? If so, pay particular attention to these games. Why is that? Chances are good that your opponent will not vary from lines which have worked for him in the past. In fact, choosing an opening against which your opponent has had poor prior results will more likely bring the opposite result – he will vary, and that at the first opportunity. This is because traditional wisdom is that you should learn from your mistakes, and not repeat them. Try and find holes, tactical and otherwise, in the previously published analysis of your opponent. If you find an opportunity to improve on a game he previously won, seize the moment and seriously consider it. Study subsequent games, by other players, in the opening in consideration. You may discover, as the game below illustrates, that most of the most challenging work has been already done by someone else – then, it is a simple matter of checking to make sure the proposed move/line is really good. Or, better yet, you may come up with an original idea of your own. Of course, your opponent may smell a rat and change strategies by playing another line - you have to be prepared for that. But, chances are also good that your opponent will want to play again what worked for him in the past. In higher level cc, it is becoming more and more difficult to win games - use every resource available to you to tip the scales in your favor. 

If you are serious about your correspondence chess, you simply must purchase the MegaCorr Database CD from Chess Mail, Ltd. (Tim Harding). The web address for Chess Mail is http://www.chessmail.com/ . Get the latest MegaCorr there, and your research ability will be taken to a higher level indeed, as this is the best correspondence chess database available in the world, period. Tons of heavily annotated games.  I would highly recommend that you always have the latest version in your research inventory - your research, and results, will improve greatly by using it on a regular basis.

Arppi, Heikki (2344) (ICCF IM) (FIN) - Knudsen, John C. (2418) (USA) [C18]
David Lodge Memorial, ICCF Email, 15.07.2000
[notes by John C. Knudsen]

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.Qg4 Qc7 8.Qxg7 Rg8 9.Qxh7 cxd4 10.Ne2 Nbc6 11.f4 Bd7 12.Qd3 dxc3 13.Qxc3 Nf5 14.Rb1 0–0–0 15.Rg1 d4 16.Qd3 f6 17.g4 Nh4 18.exf6 e5

Winawer players are at home in complicated positions – and, this game is no exception.

(Diagram)
FEN - 2kr2r1/ppqb4/2n2P2/4p3/3p1PPn/P2Q4/2P1N2P/1RB1KBR1 w - - 0 19
TEXT - wKe1,Qd3,Ne2,Bc1,f1,Rb1,g1,Pa3,c2,f4,f6,g4,h2/bKc8,Qc7,Nc6,h4,Bd7,Rd8,g8,Pa7,b7,d4,e5

19.Bh3

Reflecting from my opponent’s chair, the logical point to vary would have been here. The other major choices for White are 19. f7 and 19. h3, with 19. f7 probably being a bit better. This position is well worth further study; as there are many recent examples from practical play:

[19.f7 A) 19...Rxg4 20.Rxg4 Bxg4 A1) 21.Qg3 Nf3+ 22.Kf2 Qd7 23.Ng1 (23.h3 Bh5 24.Bg2 ½–½ Michalczak,T-Lenhardt,M/It (open) \ Schwabisch Gmund (Germany) 1995 (24)) 23...Nxg1 24.Kxg1 Be6 25.Bg2 Qxf7 26.fxe5 Qf5 27.Qf2 Qxe5 28.Bf4 Qc5 29.c3 Rg8 30.cxd4 Qxd4 31.Qxd4 Nxd4 32.Kf2 Nb3 33.h4 b6 34.Rh1 Rxg2+ 35.Kxg2 Bd5+ 36.Kh2 Bxh1 37.Kxh1 Kd7 38.Kg2 ½–½ Sanko,S-Cimicki,D/corr ch-Poland 1993 (38); A2) 21.Bh3 21...Qd7 22.Bxg4 Qxg4 23.Qg3 A2a) 23...Qh5 24.Rb3 (24.Qg7 Nf3+ 25.Kf2 e4 26.f8Q Qxh2+ 27.Kf1 Qh3+ 28.Kf2 Qh4+ 29.Qg3 Rxf8 30.Qxh4 Nxh4 31.Rb5 Nf5 32.Rb3 Rd8 33.c3 e3+ 34.Bxe3 dxe3+ 0–1 Del Pilar R-Seferjan Narek/Concord U.S. Open 1995 (34)) 24...e4 A2a1) 25.Qg8 A2a11) 25...Qd5 26.Qg7 Nf3+ 27.Rxf3 exf3 28.f8Q Qe4 29.Qxd8+ A2a111) 29...Nxd8 30.Qe5 Qxc2 31.Nxd4 Qxc1+ 32.Kf2 Qb2+ (32...Qd2+ 33.Kxf3 Qxh2 34.Qf5+ Kb8 35.Qd7 ½–½ Gutsche,D-Anda,H/ICCF Email 2000 (35)) 33.Kxf3 Qxa3+ 34.Kg4 Qa2 35.h4 Qg2+ 36.Kh5 Qd2 37.Kg6 Qg2+ 38.Kf6 Qg8 39.Qc5+ Kd7 40.Qxa7 Qf7+ 41.Kg5 Ne6+ 42.Nxe6 Qe7+ 1–0 Kilgour,D-Dorner,J/Pelikan Memorial A 1998 (42); A2a112) 29...Kxd8 30.Qg8+ Kd7 31.Qc4 fxe2 32.Qxe2 Qd5 33.Bb2 Ne7 34.Kf2 Nf5 35.Qf3 Qc5 36.Qxb7+ Kd8 37.Ke1 Qxc2 38.Qb8+ Kd7 39.Qxa7+ Kc8 40.Qa8+ Kc7 41.Qa5+ Kc8 42.Qa6+ Kd8 43.Qe2 Qb1+ 44.Kf2 Qh1 45.Qh5 Qe4 46.Qf3 Qc2+ 47.Qe2 Qb1 48.Qd2 Qe4 49.a4 Kd7 50.h3 d3 51.Be5 Qd5 52.Bc3 Qc5+ 53.Kg2 Qd5+ 54.Kf2 Qc5+ 55.Kg2 ½–½ Kristensen,S-von Rein,G/cr WT/M/720 1996 (55); A2a12) 25...Qa5+ 26.Bd2 Qd5 27.Qg7 Nf3+ 28.Rxf3 exf3 29.f8Q Qe4 30.Qxd8+ Kxd8 31.Qg8+ Kd7 32.Qc4 fxe2 33.Qxe2 ½–½ Odehnal,J-Spal,M/corr ch-CZE 1995 (33); A2a2) 25.Qg7 25...Qc5 (25...d3 26.cxd3 Nf3+ 27.Kf2 Qxh2+ 28.Qg2 Qxg2+ 29.Kxg2 exd3 ½–½ Stepashkin,E-Belov,A/Russia cadets ch 1996 (29)) 26.f8Q Rxf8 27.Qxb7+ Kd8 28.Rb5 Nf3+ 29.Kf2 Qd6 30.c4 Qe6 31.Rd5+ Ke8 32.f5 e3+ 33.Kg3 Rxf5 34.Rxf5 Qg6+ 35.Kf4 Ne1 36.Qc8+ Ke7 37.Qf8+ Ke6 38.Nxd4+ Nxd4 39.Re5+ Kd7 40.Re7+ 1–0 Kristensen,S-Lunding,P/cr 1993 (40); A2b) 23...Qf3 24.Qxh4 e4 25.Ng1 Qh1 26.Kf1 Rf8 27.Qg4+ Kc7 28.Qg8 Qxh2 29.Qxf8 Qxc2 30.Qg7 Qxb1 31.f8Q+ Kb6 0–1 Anukhin,A-Khasanov,M/Kirov ch-RUS sf 1993 (31); B) 19...Rh8 20.f5 e4 21.Qxe4 Ne5 22.Nxd4 Ba4 23.Kf2 Rxd4 24.Qxd4 Qxc2+ 25.Bd2 1–0 Bryson,D-Ma,P/cr 1992 (25); 19.g5 e4 20.Qxe4 Bf5 21.Qh1 Rge8 22.Bd2 d3 23.cxd3 Rxd3 24.Rg3 Rxd2 25.Kxd2 Rd8+ 26.Ke1 Bxb1 27.Qg1 Qa5+ 28.Kf2 Qc5+ 29.Ke1 Nd4 30.Nxd4 Rxd4 0–1 Galow,W-Lenhardt,M/GER-ch qgA26 corr939 1993 (30); 19.f5 e4 20.Qxe4 Rge8 21.Qf4 Ne5 22.Rg3 (22.f7 Qxc2 23.Rg3 Ng2+ 24.Bxg2 Nd3+ 25.Kf1 Qd1# 0–1 Voller Jiri-Taus Martin/It open juniors 1994 (25)) 22...Qxc2 23.Rb2 (23.Rbb3 Ba4 24.Rb2 Qc5 25.Bd2 d3 26.f7 Nef3+ 27.Qxf3 Nxf3+ 28.Rxf3 Re4 29.Rb4 Rxb4 30.Bxb4 Qxb4+ 31.axb4 d2+ 32.Kf2 d1Q 33.g5 Qd5 34.g6 Bc6 35.Rf4 Rh8 36.h4 Qe5 37.f6 Qd6 38.g7 1–0 Lara,J-Vinas,J/corr 1994 (38)) 23...Nd3+ 24.Rxd3 Qxd3 25.Kf2 Bc6 26.Qg3 Nf3 27.Bg2 Re3 28.Ng1 Nd2 29.Rxd2 Rxg3 30.Rxd3 Rxg2+ 31.Kf1 Rc2 32.Rd1 Bg2+ 0–1 Michalczak,T-Blauert,J/Geisenkirchen Master 1994 (32); 19.h3 e4 (19...Be8 20.Bg2 Nxg2+ 21.Rxg2 Bg6 22.f5 Bf7 23.Ng3 Na5 24.Ne4 Bc4 25.Qf3 Bd5 26.Rb5 Nc4 27.Rxd5 Rxd5 28.g5 Rb5 29.Rg1 Nb2 30.c3 1–0 Nightingale,D-Obertin,F/IRL-LUX friendly match 1997 (30); 19...exf4 20.Bxf4 Ne5 21.Qb3 Bc6 22.Rg3 Qd6 23.g5 d3 24.Bxe5 Qxe5 25.Rxd3 Rxd3 26.cxd3 Rxg5 27.Qc3 Nf3+ 28.Kd1 Rf5 29.Qxe5 Nxe5 30.Kd2 Nf3+ 31.Ke3 Rxf6 32.Nd4 Nxd4 33.Kxd4 Rf2 34.Ke3 Rf3+ 35.Kd4 Rf2 36.Ke3 ½–½ Achilli,M-Negri,J/cr SEMI 1997 (36); 19...Be6 20.Bg2 Nxg2+ 21.Rxg2 Rge8 22.Qb5 Bd5 23.Rh2 exf4 24.Bxf4 Ne5 25.Kf1 Re6 26.f7 Bc4 27.Qb4 Rf6 28.Kg1 Nf3+ 29.Kg2 Qc6 30.Qxb7+ Qxb7 31.Rxb7 Kxb7 32.Kxf3 Rxf7 33.Kg3 d3 34.Nc1 Rxf4 35.cxd3 Rf1 36.Rb2+ Ka6 0–1 Blank,Wolfgang-Knudsen,John C./EM/M/A068 ICCF Email 1999 (36)) 20.Qxe4 d3 21.cxd3 Rge8 22.Qh7 Qa5+ (22...Nd4 23.f7 Qc5 24.fxe8Q Ndf3+ 25.Kd1 Rxe8 26.Rb4 a5 27.Rc4 Qxc4 28.Qxd7+ Kxd7 29.dxc4 Kc6 30.Bg2 Kc5 31.Bxf3 Nxf3 32.Rg3 1–0 Chapman,M-Ali,M/Open Geelong AUS 1998 (32)) 23.Kf2 Qc5+ 24.Kg3 Rxe2 25.Bxe2 Qxg1+ 26.Kxh4 Qf2+ 27.Kg5 Qxe2 28.Rb5 Nd4 29.Rc5+ Kb8 30.f5 Nf3+ 31.Kh6 Qh2 32.Rc4 Ka8 33.Kg7 Qd6 34.f7 Qf8+ 35.Kf6 Qd6+ 36.Kg7 Qf8+ 37.Kf6 Be8 38.Re4 Bxf7 39.Qxf7 Rd6+ 40.Re6 Qh8+ 41.Qg7 Qd8+ 42.Kg6 Rxd3 43.Bh6 Qc8 44.f6 a6 45.Qf8 Rd8 46.Qxd8 Qxd8 47.f7 Qd3+ 48.Kg7 Qd7 49.Re8+ Ka7 50.Be3+ b6 51.Kg8 Qd5 52.Re7+ Ka8 53.Kh8 1–0 Michalczak,T-Mobus,M/Muenster 1994 (53); 19.Kf2 Be6 20.Bh3 e4 21.Qxe4 Bc4 22.g5+ Kb8 23.f7 Bxf7 24.f5 Qxh2+ 25.Bg2 Nxg2 26.Rxg2 Bd5 27.Bf4+ Ka8 28.Qxd5 Qh4+ 29.Bg3 Qxg3+ 30.Kxg3 Rxd5 31.Kf4 Ne7 32.Ng3 Rf8 33.Ke4 Nxf5 34.Nxf5 Rdxf5 35.g6 Rc5 36.g7 Rg8 37.Rf1 Rcc8 38.Rf7 a6 39.Re7 Ka7 40.Rf2 Kb6 41.Rf6+ Ka5 42.Rxb7 Rxc2 43.Rf8 Rc8 44.Rbf7 Re8+ 45.Kd3 Rxg7 46.Rf5+ Ka4 47.Rxe8 Rg3+ 48.Kxd4 Rxa3 49.Re6 a5 50.Ree5 1–0 Luetgens,E-Thiemonds,U/2.BLW9697 Plettenberg-Porz II 1996 (50)]

19...Rge8 20.Qg3 d3 21.f7 Re7 22.cxd3 Nd4 23.Kf1 

(Diagram)
FEN - 2kr4/ppqbrP2/8/4p3/3n1PPn/P2P2QB/4N2P/1RB2KR1 b - - 0 23
TEXT - wKf1,Qg3,Ne2,Bc1,h3,Rb1,g1,Pa3,d3,f4,f7,g4,h2/bKc8,Qc7,Nd4,h4,Bd7,Rd8,e7,Pa7,b7,e5

23...Nxe2!

[and not 23...exf4?? - as Arppi bashed properly: 24.Qxh4 Rxe2 25.Rg2 f3 26.Rf2 Rf8 27.Be3 Nc2 28.Bxa7 Rxf7 29.Qh8+ Re8 30.Qb2 Re2 31.Rc1 Rfe7 32.Kg1 Rxf2 33.Bxf2 Re2 34.Bf1 Ba4 35.Bxe2 fxe2 36.Qh8+ 1–0 Arppi,H-Kotka,R/Ekblom Memorial 1996/Megacorr/[H.Arppi] (36)]

24.Qxh4

(Diagram)
FEN - 2kr4/ppqbrP2/8/4p3/5PPQ/P2P3B/4n2P/1RB2KR1 b - - 0 24
TEXT - wKf1,Qh4,Bc1,h3,Rb1,g1,Pa3,d3,f4,f7,g4,h2/bKc8,Qc7,Ne2,Bd7,Rd8,e7,Pa7,b7,e5

24...Bb5! 

This surprisingly strong and forceful move was, apparently, first played by ICCF IM (now GM) Richard Hall - it is extremely hard, if not impossible, to meet. 

25.g5+N

[25.f8Q Rxf8 26.Rxb5 Qxc1+ 27.Kxe2 Qc2+ 28.Ke1 Rc7 29.Rf1 exf4 30.g5+ Kb8 31.Re5 Qc3+ 0–1 Barnsley,A-Hall,R/cr ch GBR 1997 (31)]

Upon its completion, I showed this game to my (late) friend John Jordan, who provided these interesting comments about this critical position: [ICCF IM John Jordan - Of course, White is in trouble but is there a clear-cut Black win? 26.Rxb5 Qxc1+ (26...Nxg1 27.Bb2 Nxh3 28.Qxh3 exf4 29.g6) 27.Qe1 Qxe1+ 28.Kxe1 Nxg1 29.Rd5 Rf8 30.g6 A) 30...Nxh3 31.Rxe5 (31.fxe5 Nf4 32.g7 Rexf7 33.gxf8Q+ Rxf8) 31...Rfxf7 32.gxf7 Rxf7 33.f5 Nf4 34.Kd2 Rd7 35.Re3 Rh7 36.Re8+ Kc7 37.Ke3 Nd5+ 38.Kd4 Nf6 39.Re2; B) 30...exf4+ 31.Kf1 Nxh3 32.Rh5 Ng1 33.Kxg1] 

25...Kb8 26.Bf5 Rxf7 27.Be4

There is a tactical solution in this position. 

27...Nxf4 28.Bxf4

(Diagram)
FEN - 1k1r4/ppq2r2/8/1b2p1P1/4BB1Q/P2P4/7P/1R3KR1 b - - 0 28
TEXT - wKf1,Qh4,Be4,f4,Rb1,g1,Pa3,d3,g5,h2/bKb8,Qc7,Bb5,Rd8,f7,Pa7,b7,e5

28...Bxd3+! A nice in-between-move, which settles things.

29.Bxd3 Rxf4+ 30.Qxf4 exf4 31.Ba6 Qc2! 32.Rxb7+ Ka8 33.Re7 Rd1+ 34.Re1 Rxe1+ 35.Kxe1 Qb1+ 36.Kf2 Qb6+ 37.Kg2 f3+ I would like to dedicate this game to David Lodge, a fellow Winawer Warrior. 0–1

John C. Knudsen is a Senior International Master (SIM) of correspondence chess.
He is also the founder of CORRESPONDENCECHESS.COM (1996) and the Editor of this syndicated article feed.

Copyright 2000-2005 by John C. Knudsen, all rights reserved. Visit CC.COM at
http://www.correspondencechess.com

Content by Chess Samizdat

http://www.correspondencechess.com/samizdat/