On the Center and Development

Development is the strategic advance of the pieces in the opening.

Development is a collective conception. To have developed one, two, or three pieces does not mean that we are developed. On the contrary, the situation demands that all pieces be developed. Let each piece make one move only, and dig himself in, in order to later penetrate into enemy territory.

A pawn move must not in itself be regarded as a developing move, but merely as an aid to development.

However, the pawn-less advance is in reality impossible, since the enemy pawn center would drive back the pieces which we had developed. For this reason we should, in order to safeguard the development of our pieces, first build up a pawn-center.

The wrecking of a pawn-less advance is illustrated by the following:

Another example is the following:

It follows that pawn moves are only admissible in the development stage when they either help to occupy the center, or stand in logical connection with its occupation; that is to say a pawn move which protects its own or attacks the enemy's center.

For example, in the open game after 1. e4 e5, either d3 or d4 — now or later — is always a correct move.

To sum up: in the open game speed in development is the very first law. Every piece must be developed in one move. Every pawn move is to be regarded as loss of time, unless it helps to build or support the center or attack the enemy's center. Hence, as Lasker truly observes: in the opening one or two pawn moves, not more.

To be ahead in development is the ideal to be aimed at.

It would be inopportune to throw away valuable time. If, however, I can induce my opponent to waste time then I should get an advantage in development over him. The repeated moving to and fro of the same piece would be described as an action of this kind. Accordingly, we force our opponent to lose time if we make a developing move which at the same time attacks one of his pieces which he has already moved.

This very typical situation arises in the following:

Exchange with resulting gain of tempo.

The moves just given show in the compactest form a maneuver which we may call a compound one. For, why do we take the D-pawn? (2. exd5). The answer is, to entice the piece which recaptures it onto a square exposed to attack. This was the first part of the maneuver. The second (3. Nc3) consisted in the utilization of the queen's position which is, in a certain sense, compromised.

The compound maneuver which we have just outlined is one of the greatest value to the student, and we proceed to give a few more examples:

In either case, White with his 4th move will have made a developing move of full value, which Black will be forced to answer by wandering about. But perhaps the beginner may say in his heart: why should Black recapture? But the master unfortunately knows that he is under compulsion, there’s no remedy for it; he must recapture, else the material balance in the center would be disturbed. It follows from the fact that this is compulsory that the capture retards, for the moment at any rate, the enemy’s development, except in the case when the recapture can be made with what is at the same time a developing move.

A further example:

An intermezzo is possible in the maneuver exchange with gain of tempo.

Exchange, intermezzo, gain of tempo: the exchange and the gain of a tempo are related; the intermezzo alters nothing.

Liquidation, with consequent development or disembarrassment.

I mean by this that when one's development is threatened with being held up, one must adopt a radical cure, and on no account try to remedy matters by palliative measures. I will first illustrate this by an example:

This relief of tension in the center, taken with the exchange, is a characteristic of complete liquidation.

Thus, timely liquidation has brought back onto the right track Black's questionable process of development.

Another example is furnished by a well-known variation in the Giuoco Piano:

As we have seen, the exchange properly used furnishes an excellent weapon, and forms the basis of the typical maneuvers which we analyzed above: 1) exchange with consequent gain of a tempo; 2) liquidation followed by a developing or freeing move.

We must, however, give a most emphatic warning against exchanging blindly and without motive; for to move a piece several times in order thus to exchange it for an enemy piece which has not moved, would be a thoroughly typical beginner’s mistake. Therefore only exchange in the two cases outlined above.

An example of a wrong, unmotivated exchange:

The center and its demobilizing force. Some examples as to when and how the advance of the enemy center is to be met. On the maintenance and the surrender of the center.

As we have already noticed, a free mobile center is a deadly weapon of attack, since the advance of the center pawns threatens to drive back the enemy pieces. In every case the question is whether the hunted knight, losing all control over himself, will have to flit aimlessly from pillar to post, or whether he will succeed in saving himself or the tempi for which he is responsible.

An example:

Another example:

In general, the knight seeks to establish himself in the center, and only exceptionally on the side.

An example of how such establishment is maintained:

It is, nevertheless, more prudent to hold the center intact. Even should we succeed in breaking the shock of the advancing mass of pawns (by a proper withdrawal of the knight as outlined above), the line of play is difficult and, additionally, the pawn-roller need not advance at once, but may hold its advance as a continual threat over our heads. Hence, if it can be done without disadvantages, hold the center.

In order to maintain the center, support by a pawn is indicated, since the pawn is the born defender. If a piece has to protect any attacked piece or pawn, he feels himself under restraint, whereas in similar circumstances a pawn would find himself perfectly at ease.

Surrendering the center.

To this end the following postulates are necessary. 1) If one has allowed the enemy to establish a free, mobile center pawn, the latter must be regarded as dangerous. Against him all our chess fury must be directed: so that the second postulate follows at once: 2) Such a pawn must either be captured or be put under restraint. Or we can combine the two by, say, first keeping him under restraint until he is impotent and then capturing him. White on his side will do all in his power to make the pawn mobile.

A game like this might run somewhat as follows:

Each side has completed its mobilization. White will try to force e5, and Black will try to prevent this advance. This situation gives rise to most interesting struggles, and we recommend the student to practice playing in turn for and against the center, for he will strengthen his positional insight. Such training will be valuable.

The restraining process is not easy, and to kill off the mobile center pawn seems simpler, though cases when this is feasible do not often occur.

A few examples follow:

A similar fate overtook the center pawn in the game Lee - Nimzowitsch, Ostend, 1907:

As a third illustration, take the opening moves of the game Yates - Nimzowitsch, Baben-Baden, 1925:

On pawn hunting in the opening. Usually a mistake, except in the case of center pawns.

Since the mobilization of the forces is by far the most important operation in the opening stages, knowledgeable players may become amused when less experienced players plunge into pawn hunting. This eagerness to get the scalps of perfectly harmless pawns will come to grief. What, therefore, the new player must take to heart is the commandment: Never play to win a pawn while your development is unfinished! There is but one exception to this, which we shall discuss later.

We shall begin by showing the best manner of declining a gambit, which we can do very quickly, since we have already considered some analogous cases.

The Danish Gambit:

Again, in the Evans Gambit:

4... Bb6 has by no means lost a tempo, since the move 4. b6, which White was able to throw in gratis without Black being able, in the meanwhile, to develop a piece, was, in the sense of development, unproductive: unproductive as every pawn move must be if it does not bear a logical connection with the center.

The beginner should also decline the King's Gambit:

But this gambit can also be accepted:

A center pawn should always be taken if this can be done without too great danger.

For example:

For the ideal win (of a pawn), which the conquest of the center implies, is not dear if it costs a tempo. The win of a pawn anywhere on the side of the board brings no happiness, but if you gain a pawn in the middle, then you really have something, for thus you will get the possibility of expansion at the very spot round which the opening stages the fight usually sways, namely the center; in other words you will get elbow room.

-- Aron Nimzowitsch, 1929