Traps, Tricks & Mistakes: Small Inaccuracies

There is a similarity between a game of chess and a dialogue. In a dialogue, both speakers present their arguments by making statements and asking questions. When one part wants to persuade the other, objective arguments are necessary. In a game of chess, objectivity is necessary as well.

Russian GM David Bronstein stated: “To lose one’s objective attitude to a position, nearly always means ruining your game.”

However, we frequently lose our objectivity because of various reasons. For example, because of our limited understanding of the logic of chess. Or because we wrongly focus on only one move without giving the chance to “lateral thinking”. As a result, we come to wrong conclusions.

Chess players know opening concepts like “central control” and “piece development” as they are basic ideas explained in every chess manual for beginners. But sometimes we don’t apply them appropriately. The following game is an example where the not objective conclusions of one player bring him to a devastating disaster.

Although Alapin didn’t blunder, he played a sequence of small inaccuracies that led to a precarious situation. On the contrary, Nimzowitsch objectively assessed every position and concluded that his better development secured him the advantage.

It’s worth mentioning White’s moves 12.O-O-O and 14.Bf6. Very few beginners would have played 12.O-O-O. Instead, they would have hurried to save the knight. What to say about 14.Bf6? It’s a really master move that leaves Black without hope.

If you enjoy chess but are unable to attend a local club, then join our virtual Chess.com club. On our site, we regularly play online tournaments and team matches. More than 1090 members enjoy that chance and new players join every week. There are new tournaments for the coming months that need players! Join now! Limited slots!