Weak Pieces

"Mastering Rook vs. Minor Pieces" by GM Andrei Maximenko,
IM Jaroslav Srokovsky and Wit Braslawski, 1999 International
Chess Enterprises, Softcover, Figurine Algebraic Notation, 205pp.,
$19.95 

In order to win at chess, one side must create a favorable
imbalance. Sometimes that imbalance is easy to identify and
implement. For example, you are a piece ahead. Your advantage is
clear and the method of using it to win is usually clear too. When
the imbalance or advantage is smaller or less clear, more subtle
means may be required. An extra pawn may win, but careful
defense may be able to re-establish the equilibrium and save a half-
point. Then there exist certain unbalanced positions that require
special handling, even special knowledge. A piece versus three
pawns or rook versus minor piece plus pawn may require such
special handling. Certainly one of the most difficult types of
positions to understand is where one side has a rook, the other two
minor pieces.

A recent effort by Messrs. Maximenko, Srkovsky and Braslawski
(names probably unfamiliar to most Western European and North
American players) attempts to shed some instructive light on this
last enigmatic imbalance. The authors state in the Introduction that
it is their hope that this monograph "will help the chess player
move a few paces forward in understanding the fabric of chess, in
particular, [the book] succeeds in showing typical methods of play,
standard piece formations ... teaches how to put the pieces on their
best squares, coordinating their activity, choose the correct plan
and prevent the realization of the plans of the opponent." Well, that
is quite a tall order...

The first clue that everything may not be quite like what is claimed
is the book's incomprehensible (dis)organization. There appears to
be no rhyme or reason to the presentation of the material. Perhaps
this should not be such a surprise in a 205-page book that has its
Table of Contents (a word used loosely in this case) on page... 171!
Would you like to look up these positions by player? No problem.
The "Player Index" is conveniently located on page 5. And page
17. And 23. And 25, 27, 32, 41, 49, 57 and 66.

The "convenience" of that index is exceeded only by usefulness of
the "Place Index". The what index, you ask. The Place Index. You
will be happy to know that you may look up positions based on
where the game was played. What good could this kind of index
possibly be? If anyone figures that out, they will be facing
additional confusion, as, for example, you will find one entry for
Amsterdam and another for The Netherlands. And, we shouldn't
have to tell you that the game references are different. And of
course the Place Index is also spread over some half dozen pages.
Finally, there purports to be a table designed to help one find
certain kinds of positions. Found on page 2, it is badly conceived
and difficult to understand.

As far as the substance of the book is concerned, it would have
been nice to present this material with some semblance of order
and clarity. This simple idea seems never to have occurred to the
authors. It is fairly easy to think of a possible two-part, six-chapter
structure that might have worked: Part I: Middlegame Positions (1)
Rook versus Two Bishops; (2) Rook versus Two Knights; (3)
Rook versus Knight and Bishop. Part II would have the same three
topics, only as applied to the endgame. These six chapters would
be introduced by a discussion of strategical themes common to
each kind of position, underscoring the kinds of theoretical
positions each side should be striving for. There is nothing even
remotely resembling any coherent organization in the book.

Unfortunately, what we do have is a hodgepodge of game positions
- all fragments; no game is given from the beginning - with little
explanation or instructive guidance, and an enormous amount (over
700!) of diagrams. Discussion of the theory of handling these
positions is almost completely lacking. While there are light notes
to most of the positions, they tend to discuss the strategy and
tactics of the particular position, with no help in guiding the
student to grasp the concepts of how to approach these positions
from a theoretical or general point of view.

Is this an impossibly difficult task? Hardly. A quick look at Fine's
masterpiece Basic Chess Endings, published sixty years ago,
shows how it should be done. The section entitled "Rook vs. Two
Minor Pieces" takes up ten pages in Chapter VII. In it, we find
extraordinarily helpful maxims such as: "Where the Pawns are
scattered, or offer convenient targets, the pieces are superior; where
the Pawns are solid a rook will usually be able to hold its own" or
"The Rook will win if there is a distant passed Pawn which is not
adequately blockaded." These are illustrated by comprehensive
examples from which the conscientious student is able to derive
significant benefit. 

The light notes, lack of instructive explanation and disorganized
presentation combine to produce a book that will be of little or no
use to most players. The idea of a book explaining the complexities
of positions where a rook battles two minor pieces was a good one.
It still is.