Tangled in Nots "101 Attacking Ideas in Chess" by GM Joe Gallagher, 2000 Gambit Publications, Figurine Algebraic Notation, Paperback, 128pp., $17.95 Reviewed by Glenn Budzinski Perhaps the best way to describe "101 Attacking Ideas in Chess" by English Grandmaster and highly-regarded opening theoretician Joe Gallagher is to begin with what it is not. As Gallagher writes in the Introduction, "this book is not intended to be an exhaustive treatise on attacking chess. That is impossible in a book this size." While there are a mixture of themes covered in the 101 attacking ideas outlined in the book, the reader should not be surprised to find that much of the material focuses on attacks against the opponent's king. Again quoting the author: "I believe that most people would associate the word 'attack' in chess with combinations and direct attacks on the king this is not a large book and with limited space I had to make my choices." This is also a book that is not well-organized. According to Gallagher, "This is not because I was feeling particularly lazy but because I prefer it that way. To have, for example, four successive Ideas dealing with the exchange sacrifice followed by three on the pawn- storm could be quite overbearing and would present a more serious text-book type image than I wish to project. Therefore the material is spread relatively randomly throughout the book. This allows those who just want a quiet read to have just that, while those wishing to study specific themes can find them easily enough using the index." What this book does provide, as the title implies, is 101 various types of attacking ideas. There are a staggering 101 chapters, each but a page or two in length and corresponding to a certain theme. The first 21 chapters, or "Ideas", cover what Gallagher refers to as "standard attacking ideas, combinations and ploys that all strong players have in their tactical armoury." A few examples of these themes include well-known mating combinations like Legall's mate, Anastasia's mate, smothered and back-rank mating patterns, as well as other basic tactical ideas such as the double-Bishop sacrifice and Rook sacrifices. The remaining chapters, however, run the gamut from a discussion of the benefits of playing the move a4, to a few ideas of Ukrainian Grandmaster Vasily Ivanchuk, one of the best players in the world during the last decade. This book presented a challenge to review, given the author's detailed explanation of format, goals and exclusions thereto, offered in the Introduction. Although I'm not sure that Gallagher was contemplating the potential objections of the critics when he wrote the Introduction, it does serve to diffuse certain anticipated criticisms. Thus, before we reach the first chapter, we already know that (1) after the initial 21 chapters, there is no organized sequence to the remainder of the book; (2) there is an intentional bias for the author's own games and ideas; and (3) "The fact that a theme is highlighted by an Idea does not necessarily mean that it is not discussed elsewhere in the book. Conversely, just because you can think of a theme that does not have an Idea, it doesn't mean there is no mention of it within the notes." My take on this: Nothing has been omitted. It's there somewhere, but up to the reader to find it. And, of course, there's the corollary to (3): In the event that a particular theme has been missed, remember that "this book is not intended to be an exhaustive treatise on attacking chess" since the "real objective in writing this rather personal view of attacking chess [is] to share one's enthusiasm for chess and attacking chess in particular." Although Gallagher disclaims the notion that his work is meant to be a treatise on attacking chess, he doesn't deny that it may prove beneficial as a study aid. A publication that purports to serve as a study guide should contain at least some widely recognized, standard themes in its area of expertise. So, what are some recognized standard attacking themes? To confirm my choices, I consulted a few books known specifically for providing examples of common attacking themes: the newer "How to Beat Your Dad at Chess" by Murray Chandler; Fred Reinfeld's "1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations", and Rudolf Spielmann's classic "The Art of Sacrifice in Chess". Among the fifty mating attacks identified by Chandler are the Greek gift sacrifice of the bishop for the opponent's h-pawn with a subsequent mate provided by the Queen and Knight; Philidor's Legacy, or a smothered mate by a lone knight; the double-Bishop sacrifice made famous by Emanuel Lasker; Legall's mate, where the Queen is sacrificed in the opening and mate is delivered by both Knights and a Bishop; Anastasia's mate, which involves mate with a Knight on Black's e7 square, for example, and a Rook on the open h-file; the Arabian, Rook + Knight mate and Boden's mate with the two Bishops. Fred Reinfeld was a chess book writing machine for several decades. One of his better titles certainly was "1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations" published in 1955 (it is still in print!). He offers examples of such common tactical ideas as x-ray attacks, deflection, clearance, queen sacrifices, the overworked piece, discovered attacks, the weakened king position and removing the protection. Spielmann, known for his daring attacking play in his own games, categorized sacrifices in his seminal work "The Art of Sacrifice in Chess." He provided us with the definition and examples of such concepts as the sacrifice to obstruct the opponent's development; sacrifices that speed one's own development; vacating sacrifices; king hunt sacrifices and exchange sacrifices. Kudos to Gallagher for covering most, if not all, of the foregoing ideas. That fact alone may give the book some value as an instruction tool. Turning our attention to specific games, Gallagher includes at least three well-known contests that stand out as being illustrative of attacking themes. Two are relatively recent and one is from the 1920s. He gives for example the well-known back rank mate seen in E. Adams-C. Torre from 1920 New Orleans. (See Diagram) White: Kg1, Qd4, Re1, Re2, Nf3; pawns - a2, b2, d5, f2, g2, h2 Black: Kg8, Qd7, Rc8, Re8, Bf6; pawns - a5, b7, d6, f7, g7, h7 White is on the move and came up with the surprising 18 Qg4 and after 18 Qb5, found the stunning 19 Qc4, eventually going on to win. Maybe the most spectacular example of all-time of a King leading the attack, occurred in the 1991 Tilburg game, Short-Timman. (See Diagram) White: Kg1, Qf6, Rd4, Rd7, Nf3; pawns - a4, c2, c4, e5, f2, g2, h4 Black: Kg8, Qc6, Re8, Rf8, Bb7; pawns - a5, b6, c7, e6, f7, g6, h5 White has the advantage, but how to press the attack? Short found 31 Kh2 which led to one of the most profound concepts ever seen: a King walk amidst a nearly full board of pieces 31 Rc8 32 Kg3 Rce8 33 Kf4 Bc8 34 Kg5 and Black resigned because of 34 Kh7 35 Qxg6+ Kh8 36 Qh6+ Kg8 37 Kf6 with unstoppable mate. One might question the next example's applicability to a book about attacking ideas (Gallagher includes it under the chapter "Develop Your Sense of Danger"), but it is undoubtedly one of the worst oversights in history by a great player. (See Diagram) White: Ke1, Qc2, Ra1, Rh1, Bf1, Bf4, Nc3; pawns - a3, b2, c4, e4, f2, g2, h2 Black: Ke8, Qd8, Ra8, Rh8, Bf8, Bc6, Nf6; pawns - a7, b6, d7 e6, f7, g7, h7 In the game Christiansen-Karpov, 1993 Wijk aan Zee, Anatoly Karpov now tried 10 Nh5 and after the obvious 11Be3, played 11 Bd6??, missing that 12 Qd1 wins one of the two unprotected pieces. However, the trouble with this book is not what's included, but what's missing. Although there is some coverage of Kasparov, one of history's great attacking players, others are short-changed or even omitted entirely. For instance, only three Bobby Fischer games are cited (two of which are from his 1992 match against Spassky), two Tal games and one by Frank Marshall. Worse yet, some of the best known attacking players of all-time are not even mentioned Paul Morphy, Alexander Alekhine and Adolf Anderssen. Although the author does warn us in the Introduction that "You will have to put up with quite a few Gallagher games but this is a price you have to pay if you insist on reading one of my books," wouldn't the reader be better served by a few less than 47 Gallagher games and substitution of a couple Alekhine and Morphy games? Assuming the author really means it when he writes that this book "seems like the ideal format if one just wishes to share one's enthusiasm for chess and attacking chess in particular" why does he then exclude some of the most exciting and brilliant attacking players in the history of the game? The material selected is also top-heavy with positions that feature spectacular solutions, to the detriment of more mundane subjects. Thus, there are numerous examples of queen and rook sacrifices, which occur infrequently in actual play, but only a few examples of the relatively common theme of the x-ray attack. The omissions of this book are more memorable than the author's inclusions. He may have discussed most attacking themes in the 101 chapters, but locating all examples of a common idea is still frustratingly difficult given the disorganized format in spite of the existence of a topical index. And how can one write a book purporting to espouse the enjoyment of attacking chess and not include some of the best examples of attacks? No Morphy. No Anderssen. What happened to Zukertort's spectacular win against Blackburne from 1883, when he repeatedly put his Queen en pris, usually considered to be one of the most brilliant games of all- time? And what about Alexander Alekhine, perhaps THE greatest attacking player ever, who goes completely ignored? What this book isn't about seems more important than what it is about. We know it's not a serious treatise, but nor is it a collection of best games. It focuses neither on historical greats nor on present day attacking players, although the latter are emphasized more than the former. So, what kind of book IS "101 Attacking Ideas in Chess"? A confusing presentation that serves as showcase for the author's games with a few dozen other examples thrown in for good measure. Nothing more. Nothing special.