The knight of QB3 is under obligation, the moment the enemy gives him the chance, of undertaking an invasion of the center by Kn-Q5.
A thorough knowledge of the elements takes us more than half the road to mastership
The chess world is obligated to organize a match between the champion of the world and the winner of this Carlsbad tournament - indeed, this is a moral obligation. If the world of chess should remain deaf to its obligation, on the other hand, it would amount to an absolutely unforgivable omission, carrying with it a heavy burden of guilt.
In the middlegame, the king is merely an extra, but in the endgame, he is one of the star actors.
When I today ask myself whence I got the moral courage, for it takes moral courage to make a move (or form a plan) running counter to all tradition, I think I may say in answer, that it was only my intense preoccupation with the problem of the blockade which helped me to do so.
First restrain, next blockade, lastly destroy.
No pawn exchanges, no file-opening, no attack.
Even the laziest King flees wildly in the face of a double check!
Strategically important points should be overprotected. If the pieces are so engaged, they get their regard in the fact that they will then find themselves well posted in every respect.
How can I lose to such an idiot?
Giving up the center must not here be regarded as illogical. Was happiness no happiness because it endured for just a short time? One cannot always be happy.
The beauty of a move lies not in its appearance but in the thought behind it.
If in a battle, I seize a bit of debatable land with a handful of soldiers, without having done anything to prevent an enemy bombardment of the position, would it ever occur to me to speak of a conquest of the terrain in question? Obviously not. Then why should I do so in chess?
Chess strategy as such today is still in its diapers, despite Tarrasch's statement 'We live today in a beautiful time of progress in all fields'. Not even the slightest attempt has been made to explore and formulate the laws of chess strategy.
How is it to be explained that something inside me revolts against the playing of obvious moves? Perhaps we may perceive the underlying reason in the fact that I derive satisfaction from seeking to reveal the concealed meaning of a position by means of maneuvering play and therefore I do not wish to see this satisfaction curtailed by a banal, more or less fortuitous decision. Naturally, this phenomenon is played out beneath the threshold of consciousness. The waking consciousness will, of course, in each individual case, give preference to the more rapid means of deciding the game.
The isolated Pawn casts gloom over the entire chessboard
How vain are our fears! I thought to myself. Sometimes we fear that which our opponent (or fate) had never even considered! After this, then, is it any longer worthwhile to rack one's brain to find new ghosts to fear? No, indeed: All hail optimism! - upon playing Hermanis Mattison after he overlooked an unusual knight manouevre.
The passed Pawn is a criminal, who should be kept under lock and key. Mild measures, such as police surveillance, are not sufficient
The great mobility of the King forms one of the chief characteristics of all endgame strategy. In the middlegame the King is a mere 'super', in the endgame on the other hand - on of the 'principals'. We must therefore develop him, bring him nearer to the fighting line.
The defensive power of a pinned piece is only imaginary
Do not always be thinking of attack! Moves that safeguard your position are often far more prudent.
The threat is stronger than the execution.
It is a well known phenomenon that the same amateur who can conduct the middle game quite creditably, is usually perfectly helpless in the end game. One of the principal requisites of good chess is the ability to treat both the middle and end game equally well.
The main Objective of any operation in an open file is the eventual Occupation of the seventh or eighth Rank.
Ridicule can do much, for instance embitter the existence of young talents.
Ridicule can do much, for instance embitter the existence of young talents; but one thing is not given to it, to put a stop permanently to the incursion of new and powerful ideas.
Many men, many styles; what is chess style but the intangible expression of the will to win.
