1 Strategy and Tactics

As we shall see later, it is difficult to divorce the middle game from other aspects of the struggle which serve to define it as ‘that part of the game between the opening and the ending’. To avoid such philosophical questions as where the opening ends and the ending begins, it seems best for our purposes to view the middle game as beginning the moment a player leaves established theory and starts to think for himself, whether this be on move 3 or 30, and ending where acquired endgame technique takes over. Admittedly, there are standard positions and techniques we need to learn in the middle game too, but matters are rarely as clear-cut as in the opening or ending.

Herein, then, lies our problem. Since we are no longer dealing with easily classifiable material, although brave attempts have been made on these lines, we must seriously consider what we can hope to teach and how we can carry it out. Broadly speaking, our chapter heading provides us with the background against which we shall be working. Bystrategy we mean the general principles that guide us in our planning and bytactics we mean the specific moves and operations required in order to achieve these aims. Our first example pinpoints the dilemma we face:

Fischer v Benko
USA Championship 1963

From astrategic viewpoint, White has weakened Black’s kingside and opened up attacking lines but, from a more urgenttactical viewpoint, both 1 e5 f5! and 1♘e2♕e5! offer Black adequate defensive resources. So, have Fischer’s efforts been in vain? Not at all. Firstly, a goodstrategic plan does not necessarily guarantee a win and, secondly, White has in fact calculated a brillianttactical winning sequence that cuts out the above defences. Play continued:1♖f6!!♔g8 Or 1...♗xf6 2 e5 followed by mate on h7.2 e5 h6 3♘e2! when Black resigned because White mates on h7 after both 3...♘b5 4♕f5 and 3...♗xf6 4♕xh6.

Here is another illustration of the same theme, reached after the moves1 e4 g6 2 d4♗g