Analyzing the Chess Mind

By

Boris Gulko &

Dr. Joel R. Sneed

Quality Chess
www.qualitychess.co.uk
 Contents
List of Photographs 4
Key to Symbols used 4
Foreword by GM Lev Alburt 5
Introduction 7

1 Perception 13
2 Thinking and Uncertainty 35
3 Mindreading in Chess 55
4 Aggression 65
5 Problems in Self-Confidence 79
6 Reciprocal Understanding 97
7 Psychology of Decisive Games 109
8 Destroying Your Opponent’s Thinking Process 123
9 Losing Winning Positions 147
10 Playing Against the Hedgehog 161
11 A Question of Time 173
12 Improving Your Chess Psychology 183

Appendices:
Chess and Cognition by Daniel Saldano and Joel R. Sneed 195
Glossary of Technical Terms by Daniel Saldano and Joel R. Sneed 217

Game Index 223

Foreword
I first met Boris Gulko in 1965 at the championship of the Student Sport Clubs of the USSR. In
the following decades, Boris and I played together in many tournaments in both the USSR and
USA. Three times I won the title of US Chess Champion but Boris set a unique record – he won
the title of USSR Chess Champion and twice the title of US Chess Champion! He is the only
player to have done so.

Gradually each of us came to the understanding that to achieve success in chess, it’s not enough
to master the secrets of strategy and tactics, to study openings and endings, and to improve the
technique of calculating variations. It is also necessary to study the mysteries of psychology, to
gain knowledge of not only the peculiarities of the opponent’s style – to learn their strengths and
weaknesses – but also to understand their human advantages and disadvantages. It is perhaps
even more important to do the same work on oneself, with one’s own style and character. I’ve
done this work as a chess practitioner, fighting in competitions at the highest level. I received the
best opportunities to comprehend the subtleties of practical chess psychology, however, when I
started to work as a trainer and chess teacher in 1991. I have outlined my findings in these areas
in my books. Boris has achieved comprehension of psychology in a more direct way. He received
a Master’s degree in psychology from Moscow State University and then worked for three years
there as a research scientist. He has also published several scientific articles on psychology in
Russian.

Boris uses his scientific knowledge, and experience as a chess grandmaster, as a coach (a good
coach is always a good psychologist) and as a researcher in all of his books. This book on chess
psychology, however, is a direct study of the subject. Among the many examples of the application
of practical chess psychology presented in this book, his analysis of his victory over Garry Kasparov
was particularly illuminating. His two other victories over the great Garry Kasparov can be found
in his Lessons with a Grandmaster series, also written with his student and co-author Joel Sneed.

This book by GM Boris Gulko and Professor Joel Sneed considerably promotes the understanding
of complex aspects of practical chess psychology, and will be interesting and useful to both chess
players and trainers, as well as to researchers of psychology.

Lev Alburt
New York 2021
Chapter 9
Losing Winning Positions

“Give me a difficult positional game, I’ll play it...

But totally winning positions I cannot stand.”
Jan Hein Donner
148 Gulko & Sneed – Analyzing the Chess Mind

One of the most unpleasant experiences a 9...a6!

chess player goes through is losing a winning An aggressive approach. Black prepares to
position. Unfortunately, it is also a very attack White’s queenside castling position.
common experience. The most common
reasons for this unpleasant experience are 10.exf5 gxf5 11.0–0–0 b5 12.¤g3 ¤f6
obvious, such as fatigue and time shortage. 13.¥g5
There are also psychological reasons for losing
a winning game. The player who is losing is

like a wounded animal – they are desperate  
and fight hard to survive. The player in the    
winning position generally relaxes and thinks
that the struggle is over, and therefore can    
become passive and complacent, so their play  
will lack energy.
Our first example of this phenomenon
   
comes from a game I played against Averbakh    
in the first round of the Soviet Championship
in 1970.
  
 
Yuri Averbakh – Boris Gulko 
Soviet Championship 1970 13...£e8
Black sacrifices a pawn, hoping for
1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 g6 3.¤c3 ¥g7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 compensation.
0–0 6.¥e3 e5 7.d5 ¤h5 8.£d2 f5
 Black could have kept the material balance
by playing 13...b4?! 14.¤ce2 a5, but White
  would take the initiative after 15.¤h5.
   14.h4?!
    It was better to accept the sacrifice by playing
  14.cxb5! but in this case Black would have
open files against White’s king. This would
   have been preferable to the game when Black’s
    pawns become very useful.
   14...b4 15.¤ce2 a5 16.h5 ¤a6
  

9.¤ge2?!
Not the most dangerous way. Theory prefers
9.exf5! or 9.0–0–0.
 Chapter 9 – Losing Winning Positions 149

 20...£f7!?
 Once again Black had a safe option, this time
    with 20...f4, based on the idea 21.¥xf4? £f7
and two pieces are hanging. But instead, with
    the text move, Black was continuing his idea.
 
    21.¤dxf5
Playing 21.h6! first might have made Black
    regret the bold choices at moves 19 and 20.
  21...¤xh5!! 22.¤e7†
  White has to follow the path that Black
 prepared for him.
17.¢b1
White has already lost his opening initiative. If he tries to avoid it with 22.¤xh5? there
follows 22...¥xf5† 23.¢c1 ¤xb3† 24.axb3 a2
In the case of 17.h6?! ¥h8 Black would obtain 25.¢b2 e4† winning.
the very cozy g6-square for his queen.
22...£xe7 23.¥xe7 ¤xg3
The continuation 17.¥h6?! f4 18.¥xg7 ¢xg7 
is simply bad for White.
 
17...a4 18.¦e1 a3! 19.b3 ¤c5!?    
The introduction to an amusing queen
sacrifice.
    
   
Black could have had a good game simply by    
stepping away from the e-file pin with 19...£f7!
but Black was looking for an adventure.   
  
20.¤d4
 
 
 24.¥d3!
    This position is more complicated than
humans can calculate. But Averbakh chooses
     one of the two best moves.
 
    It looked too scary to go in for:
24.¥xf8! ¥f5† 25.¢c1 ¤xb3† 26.axb3 a2
   From afar, this position seems terrifying for
   White, but in fact he can survive, and even
challenge Black to be accurate to keep the
  balance.

150 Gulko & Sneed – Analyzing the Chess Mind

27.¢b2 35.£xc7† ¢g8 36.£c8† White is winning)

 34.£d8† ¢f7 35.£xc7† Black’s position
   would be bad despite the material equilibrium.
29.¦xb1 e4† 30.¢c2 axb1=£† 31.¢xb1
    ¤xh1
     
      
       
       
      
     
   
27...¢xf8!
The more logical choice, keeping the rook    
supporting the a2-pawn.  
27...¦xf8 allows White a choice between 
28.¦e4! and 28.£xb4!. Both are complicated, The position is sharp but with level chances,
but likely to favor White. with perpetuals likely. For example:
28.£g5! 32.fxe4 ¤f2! 33.£f5† ¢g8
Challenging Black to make a tough choice. White cannot take the knight due to a
Instead, taking on b4 would give Black a rook check on a1 followed by another on a2,
broader choice of moves that give at least picking up the queen.
equality.
 24...¤xd3 25.¥xf8 ¢xf8
    An unusual perpetual would occur after:
25...¥f5 26.¥xg7 ¤xe1† 27.¢c1 ¤d3†
    28.¢d1 ¤b2† 29.¢e1 ¤d3†
     
     
       
       
     
      
  
28...¥b1!!
The correct call, but far from obvious.   
28...e4†? is tempting but wrong: 29.¢c2    
Alas the e4-pawn closes the diagonal, for the 
moment, to the f5-bishop. 29...a1=£ (bad And White’s king cannot escape Black’s
for Black is 29...exf3† 30.¥d3) 30.¦xa1 knights.
¦xa1 31.fxe4! ¥xe4† 32.¥d3 ¦a2† 33.¢d1
¥xd3 (after 33...¤xh1 34.£d8† ¢f7 26.£xd3 ¥f5
 Chapter 9 – Losing Winning Positions 151

 position, however, is the two black pawns on

    a3 and b4 that White neglected to destroy
    earlier in the game. They create a cage around
White’s king. The only task for Black is to find
     a route for his rook into White’s camp, which
   Black solves with his next maneuver.
    30...¦c8! 31.¦h7 ¢g6 32.¦h1 c6! 33.¦g4†
  ¢f6 34.¦h7 ¤f5 35.dxc6 ¦xc6
   
       
    
27.£xf5†?
Averbakh was an endgame expert and wrote
   
what was, at the time, the standard three-    
volume treatise on the endgame that everyone   
owned and relied on. He transposes the game
to an endgame, but it is not good for him.   
  
Much better was 27.¦e4!! ¤xh1 28.¦f4! exf4
29.£xf5† ¢g8 and despite Black’s material
   
advantage, the position is far from clear. The 
chances appear to be about level. In this moment, Averbakh was in severe time
trouble, and Black thought the game was over.
27...¤xf5 28.¦xh7 ¢f7 29.¦h3 ¤d4 30.¦e4 I remember thinking that it would be enough
 for me to play ...¦c6-c5 and ...d6-d5, and the
game would be over. I recall thinking what a
    beautiful game it would be to win, and what a
    great way to start the championship. Generally,
I was very proud of myself.
     Then Averbakh, with only a few seconds left
    on his clock, played:
   36.c5
  I guessed this move must have been played
   in desperation, and without really thinking, I
played:
   
 36...dxc5??
Instead after 36...¦xc5 37.¦xb4 ¥h6 38.¦c4
Averbakh hoped that the rook and pawn
would be sufficient compensation for Black’s ¦d5 White’s position would be hopeless.
two minor pieces. The decisive factor in this
152 Gulko & Sneed – Analyzing the Chess Mind

 White has time to run with his king and

     destroy Black’s pawns, which were the cause of
    so much trouble for him during the game.

    Such a sad result, after playing such a nice

    game, is unfortunately not a rare thing in
    chess. Chess players often say the most difficult
thing to do is win a won game. The losing side
   is fighting hard and concentrating, whereas the
   ‘winning’ side often loses concentration and
daydreams about their fine victory.
    We will have more to say about this and
 offer specific advice for the improving player in
37.¦gxg7! ¦d6 Chapter 12, Improving Your Chess Psychology.
I had overlooked 37...¤xg7 38.¦h6†. Essentially, we need to follow Capablanca’s
example. He had a reputation for not being
38.¦d7 ¦d4 39.¦xd4 cxd4 40.¢c1 ¤e3 so aggressive in equal positions but with the
41.g3 ¤d5 42.¢d2 ¤c3 43.¦h6†! advantage, he became extremely focused and
Before this move, the game was adjourned would not give his opponent any chances.
and in home analysis Averbakh found a nice
way to win. In the following game between two great giants
of chess, we will discuss a different reason for
43...¢g5 44.¦h1 losing a winning position.

     Mikhail Botvinnik – Jose Raul Capablanca
     Moscow 1936

     1.¤f3 ¤f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 b6 4.¥g2 ¥b7 5.0–0

     c5 6.b3
     
     
    
       
     
44...e4
44...¤xa2 did not promise salvation after
   
45.¦e1 ¢f5 46.¢d3 ¤c3 47.¢c4 a2 48.¦a1   
e4 49.g4†! ¢e5 50.fxe4 ¢xe4 51.¢xb4.  
45.fxe4 ¤xe4† 46.¢c2 d3† 47.¢c1 ¤xg3  
48.¦g1 ¢f4 49.¦xg3! 
1–0
 Chapter 9 – Losing Winning Positions 153

6...¤c6?!

This move demonstrates that the opponents   
belong to different epochs in the history of
chess. Capablanca follows a strategy developed

by Morphy: develop your pieces as quickly   
as possible onto reasonable squares and then     
develop a strategic plan. Botvinnik ushered in
a new, more scientific, approach to chess. He    
researched the opening and created strategic   
plans that were rooted in the opening while
also having an eye on the endgame.
 
It can be said that this game reflects the   
old versus new guard in chess. This position
was unusual in those years but strangely the

9...¤xd4 10.¤xd4 ¥xg2 11.¢xg2 cxd4
correct plan for this position was formulated 12.£xd4 £c7 13.e4 ¦ad8 14.¦ad1 £b7
by Tartakower. In his annotations, he argued 15.f3 ¤e8?!
that Black’s queenside knight belonged on d7. Like all great players, Capablanca tries to
avoid a passive position, but his plan to free
In the 1970s, players such as Ulf Andersson, his position with ...f7-f5 will only create
Ljubomir Ljubojevic, and Zoltan Ribli would weaknesses.
play in this position: Better was: 15...d6! The difference between
6...¥e7! 7.¥b2 0–0 8.d4 this position and the position after 9...d6 (in
Thirty years after this game with Capablanca, the note after 6...¤c6) is that there are fewer
Botvinnik developed a new strategy in this pieces on the board (two sets of minor pieces
position: 8.e3 And after this move, White have been exchanged). This usually favors
would put his queen on e2, his king’s rook on the side with less space, but this position is
d1 and then play d2-d4 as was demonstrated an exception. It is more difficult for Black to
in Botvinnik – Larsen, Palma de Mallorca create counterplay and White, with his pieces
1967. ideally placed, will be able to start a pawn
8...cxd4 9.£xd4 d6! attack on the kingside.
Not winning a tempo by attacking the queen
with the wrongly conceived ...¤c6. 16.¦d2
And then Black would put his pawn on a6,
bring his queen’s knight to d7 (as Tartakower 
suggested) and White would not be able to   
penetrate Black’s rock-solid position. This
construction is known as the Hedgehog, 
and we will devote an entire chapter to the    
psychological peculiarities of playing against it
(see page 161).
    
  
7.¥b2 ¥e7 8.¤c3 0–0 9.d4!   
  
   

154 Gulko & Sneed – Analyzing the Chess Mind

16...f5?

A positional mistake. He was not familiar    
with the kind of positions that would become
popular and well researched forty years later.

He still had to play 16...d6.   
   
17.¦fd1 ¥g5 18.¦d3 ¥f6 19.e5 ¥e7
   
  
      
     
    
    25...b5!?
    25...¥h6 would not have worked after:
26.¤xe6! ¤xe6 (if 26...¥xd2 27.¤xd8 £c8
  28.¤xf7 and Black will lose quickly) 27.£xh6
   f4 28.g4 With a winning position for White.
    In the case of the passive 25...£c8, Black
 would suffocate after 26.a4 ¥h6 27.¦d6.
20.£f2!
Botvinnik’s style has been compared to a Instead, Capablanca understandably tries to
steamroller. He transfers his queen from d4 to create counterplay.
f2 to d2, significantly increasing the pressure
on Black’s position (White’s d3-rook belongs 26.cxb5 £xb5 27.¦c1! £b7
in front of the queen).

20...¦f7 21.£d2 ¥b4 22.a3 ¥f8 23.¤e2!    
White brings his last piece to its ideal
attacking position on f4.

  
23...¤c7 24.¤f4 g6 25.h4    
    
 
   
    

28.¦xc7?
In his annotations, Botvinnik complains
more than once about his lack of tactical
 Chapter 9 – Losing Winning Positions 155

vision. He was a great strategist, but he did not 39.¥f6?!

sense dynamic positions as well. Now he wins A new mistake just before the time control,
a pawn, but instead he could have resolved the probably because of time pressure.
game quickly with: 28.£a5! d5 29.exd6 ¥xd6
(even worse would be 29...¦xd6 30.£e5) Correct was: 39.£c3! e5! The best try (after
30.¥e5 And Black has to resign. 39...¢e8 40.£c6† ¦d7 41.¥e5 Black is
paralyzed). 40.£c6 £d7† 41.¢h2!!
28...£xc7 29.¤xe6 dxe6 30.¦xd8 f4 31.g4 
£e7 32.¢h3 £b7 33.£d3 ¢g7?!     
More resilient was 33...a5!. Instead now
White’s extra pawn starts to move.
 
  
34.b4! a5 35.b5 a4 36.g5 ¥c5    
    
        
    
      
   
    41...£e6 42.b6 And White wins, as the black
queen cannot find counterplay with 42...£b3
    because it would allow a killing queen check
  on c8.
     In the related position that could have resulted
after 38...¢g8, 42...£b3 would draw because
     the queen check on c8 could be met by ...¦f8.
 39...¢e8
37.¦d6?!
Not practical and giving away the advantage, 
but not yet a total disaster.
Botvinnik was under time pressure and
   
received very valuable advice from Capablanca  
after the game: When you have a winning
position, don’t rush. Let the opponent collapse
  
of his own accord under the pressure. Botvinnik    
repeated this advice often in his writings.    
Here it made sense to protect his f3-pawn  
with 37.¢g2! keeping all the advantages in his     
position.
    
37...¥xd6 38.exd6† ¢f8? 
The black king needed to go to g8, when it 40.¥e7??
is level. The difference will be explained below. The last move in time trouble.
156 Gulko & Sneed – Analyzing the Chess Mind

Botvinnik could have played 40.¢g2 ¢d7

41.£c4 but this position only offered equality.

40...¦f5!
Suddenly the rook obtains freedom and
Black is winning.

41.£c3 ¢d7 42.b6


    
 
  
   
   
  
    
    

42...£c6
White’s last hope was connected with:
42...¦b5 43.£c7† £xc7 44.bxc7 ¦b3? (correct
and winning is 44...¦b2!) 45.¢g2 ¦xa3?
46.c8=£† ¢xc8 47.d7† ¢xd7 48.¥xa3 And
White wins, but Capablanca does not overlook
such simple tactics.

43.£g7 £xf3† 44.¢h2 £g3† 45.¢h1

£xh4† 46.¢g1 £e1† 47.¢h2 ¢c6 48.£b2
¦d5 49.£c2† ¢b5
0–1

Botvinnik won the strategic struggle in this

game, but he was too impatient to use his
advantage. Botvinnik repeated Capablanca’s
advice very often: Do not rush in a winning
position. Maintain the pressure and allow the
opponent to self-destruct.