From the scientific standpoint chess has all the qualities of a complex system:

1) the abundance of elements,

2) hierarchy and

<3) a so-called "chaos zone", where it is impossible, in principle, to predict the direction that the system would develop in certain positions.>

Ad (3) chess intuition takes an important role.

As far as algorithms are concerned, there are at least five different types of algorithms. "Tal's" algorithm is different from "Capablanca's" etc.

The main chess skill is evaluation of the position. At the moment I'm studying Carlsen's games and his way of thinking. Carlsen clearly stated: " I immediately know how to rate a situation and what plan is necessary." Answering the question how many moves can he calculate ahead, Carlsen replied : "That depends on the game situation. But the trick is to correctly assess the position at the end of the calculation."

When talking of researching the chess game as a complex system (using scientific methods) the main task is to determine the parameters of the position (and their values) which help to correctly assess the position and to select the right algorithm (among different algorithms).

The aim of the research is to improve POSITIONAL UNDERSTANDING (not "algorithmic chess"). A strong player will always adapt the model to his specific playing style.

One can draw analogy to music. There are unlimited styles, cultures, and traditions for composing or improvising music, but the underlying natural phenomena (music is a specialized sub-set of sound) and organization structures (rhythm, harmony, and melody) always apply. A better understanding of the natural and intuitive phenomenon of music provides means to achieve finer styles, compositions, improvisations, performances, and appreciation.

On the other hand, there is algorithmic music, the use of formal procedures to make music without human intervention.

Thanks for your kind and courteous reply.

Ont thing that strikes me as true is that, in any chess game, the opening and early middlegame are the most creative parts.

The endgame seems the most scientific, and thus the realm in which one can apply more algorithmic considerations. It seems to be the most scientific part of the game; the one in which most notable progress can be made by systematic study.

Capablanca - Devil

click for larger view

Capablanca now played <Kc2> and the Devil played <h1=King!!>

"You can't do that!" said Capablanca, but the devil answered: "You said that when a pawn of mine reached the eigth rank, I could get <any> piece".

How did Capablanca manage to win?

<<parisattack>: Four Chess Book Resources - Here's four not-so-well-known resources for purchasing English and foreign material at decent prices:

1) Karel Mokry of the ChessBookShop, www.chessbookshop.com.

Excellent resource for foreign material. Karel is a fine fellow (and also a GM).

One caveat is shipping; it can get $$$.

2) www.ebay.de - Be sure to ascertain (if you are in the USA) they will ship to you before bidding/purchasing. German postage is MUCH less expensive than either Brit or (the worst!) Australian.

3) For English these folks often have a nice selection of chess books - and occasionally good bargains:

http://www.chapter1.co.za

4) GM Alex Baburin's www.gmsquare.com has auctions 3-4 times a year. Some awesome material - and awesome prices to go with it! But an occasional sleeper - I bought the complete run of Myer's Opening Bulletin for $60 a couple auctions back.>

I bought Moskalenko's books on the French Defense-

1) The Flexible French

and

2) The Wonderful Winawer

In "The Flexible French" he mentions what he calls "My System in the Winawer" (page 213), which I find ridiculous.

We are talking about the variation with 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 b6...

Honestly, I thought this was the Petrosian variation for Black in the Winawer.

Moskalenko covers it quite superficially.

So I have 2 questions:

1) Is it correct or fair form him to call it "his system"?

2) Are there any other French Defense books that give good coverage of this variation/system?

This book http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Fren... by Psakhis has a short chapter (8 pages) on it. <Chapter 13: Winawer variation: 4 e5 b6 and others.>

Suetin (http://www.amazon.com/Defence-Tourn...) has about 2 pages, but the book is from 1988.

Vitugiov (http://www.amazon.com/The-French-De...) mentions the line briefly (about a 1/2 page).

Finally, Rolf Schwarz (http://www.amazon.com/Franz%C3%B6si...) has an old (1967) eight pages of annotated games.

That's all I could find.

In Moskalenko's book, there is no discussion of lines with Bxc3+ for Black; only with Bf8...and so on. I am sure at some point I will find more info on it.

My question arises because in a recent trip to Iceland, my opponent (Black) played

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Qd7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ba6, to which I responded 7.Bd3?! Bxd3 8.cxd3. My idea was to not let him dominate the white squares in the a6-f1 diagonal. It was an uphill battle, so I was looking for some theory on it.

Your line <1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Qd7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ba6> is impossible. I looked at your blog to get the right line.

Here are the only two games I have (with both players above 2200) that started off as you did. In the first, Black played your <9...Ne7> and won. In the second, Black played <9...Nc6> and lost. I haven't looked the games closely, thus I don't know that the ninth move was all that important, especially as you played <...Nc6> on the next move.

Zhigalko, S (2665) -- Kuzubov, Y (2633)
6th Femida Cup 2010 (2) Kharkiv UKR
2010.11.24 0-1 C16

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 b6 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qd7 7.a4 Ba6 8.Bd3 Bxd3 9.cxd3 Ne7 10.Qg4 Nf5 11.Nf3 Nc6 12.Bg5 h6 13.Qh5 Rg8 14.Bf4 O-O-O 15.g4 Nfe7 16.Bg3 Rdf8 17.O-O Qe8 18.Qh3 Rh8 19.Rfe1 h5 20.gxh5 Nf5 21.Qg4 Rfg8 22.Kf1 Kb7 23.Ra2 a5 24.Rb2 Qe7 25.Rb3 g6 26.hxg6 Rxg6 27.Qf4 f6 28.c4 fxe5 29.Nxe5 Nxe5 30.Qxe5 Rh5 31.Bf4 Ng3+ 32.Bxg3 Rxe5 33.Rxe5 Qd7 34.cxd5 Qxa4 35.Rb1 Qxd4 36.Rbe1 Qxd3+ 37.Kg1 exd5 38.Re7 Qc3 39.Rd1 Rg7 40.Re3 Qc4 41.Red3 Rd7 42.Rd4 Qe2 43.h4 c5 44.R4d2 Qg4 45.Rb1 d4 46.Rdb2 Rd6 47.Re1 Re6 0-1

Swinkels, Robin (2448) -- Berg, Emanuel (2601)
ENCI Limburg Open (3) Maastricht NED
2008.05.10 1-0 C16i