Google
Search Our Site
Search The Web
 
 
Winning with Reverse Chess Strategy

By William Reuter
149 pages
$19.95
Thinker's Press


Reviewed by Jeremy Silman

 

 

My first two thoughts when getting this book were: 1) Who is William Reuters, and 2) What is reverse chess strategy?

Looking at the back-cover blurb, we see that Mr. Reuter led the Village Vikings elementary team to first place in the 1998 Texas Junior Championship. On page 146 we learn that he had reached the Senior Master level in the 1980's. At this point I beg the reader to understand that I'm not making fun of Mr. Reuter. Teaching children is extremely difficult (in fact, it's something I've repeatedly failed at!) and to do it successfully takes a rare talent. However, that talent doesn't necessarily translate to the written page. Even getting a 2400 or 2500 rating (which, contrary to some people's views, isn't a guarantee that you really understand chess) won't, in itself, make you a successful author or analyst.

Jumping to my second thought ("What is reverse chess strategy?"), I experienced a more positive rush. Initially I thought he might be referring to Dr. Saidy's old writings (from Pre-Columbian Chess Life issues) concerning the "Power of Negative Thinking." However, Mr. Reuter was actually exploring (or so he claimed) the intricacies of subtle retreating moves.

Thus far we have an unknown player writing about a potentially interesting subject. Could he pull it off? Unfortunately, he wasn't up to the task.

My main gripe is that Mr. Reuter lumps most retreating moves together. To place Capablanca's deep and instructive 10...Bd7! (after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.c4 c6 4.Nc3 Bf5 5.Qb3 Qb6 6.Qxb6 axb6 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Nxd5 cxd5 9.e3 Nc6 10.Bd2) on the same page as Alekhine's obvious 27.Ba4 (after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.Bd2 Ne7 6.Nb5 Bxd2+ 7.Qxd2 0-0 8.c3 b6 9.f4 Ba6 10.Nf3 Qd7 11.a4 Nbc6 12.b4 cxb4 13.cxb4 Bb7 14.Nd6 f5 15.a5 Nc8 16.Nxb7 Qxb7 17.a6 Qf7 18.Bb5 N8e7 19.0-0 h6 20.Rfc1 Rfc8 21.Rc2 Qe8 22.Rac1 Rab8 23.Qe3 Rc7 24.Rc3 Qd7 25.R1c2 Kf8 26.Qc1 Rbc8) makes light of the flavor and profundity of a real retreating move (this Alekhine-Nimzovich game is a classic, but 27.Ba4 was simply the mopping up process of his earlier good play).

In fact, it seems to me that Mr. Reuter doesn't really understand what a real retreating move is all about. His lack of deep explanation, the scarcity of instructional dialogue and his insistence on equating obvious threats (even though they are backward) as proper retreating moves compounds this impression.

My feelings about this became even stronger when I took a look at the section on Reuter's poorly annotated games (starting on page 57 and slogging on to page 108). In game one we see him discussing a "retreating move" (31...Be8) that actually is an obvious attack on an enemy Knight. He gives it two exclamations points and says, "Extraordinary moves like this keep me coming back to the royal game."

In his next game Reuter makes another Bishop "retreat" from b2 to c1, attacking the h6-pawn and giving White a winning attack. Game three is more of the same (though it's a bit more interesting than games one or two). Reuters retreats his Queen from c4 to f1. Why? So he can attack an enemy Knight on h3.

This forces me to wonder: If I was White and moved my Bishop on c6 (perhaps it gobbled a pawn there a move or two before) backwards to d5, mating Black's King on the spot, would this also be a "brilliant retreating move?"

Overall (let's momentarily forget that I feel the author wasn't qualified to write about this subject), the book was poorly thought out. Why not give a section on elementary retreats? There could follow (not in this order) attacking retreats, aggressive retreats, positional retreats, subtle retreats, classic retreats, etc., etc. Looking at the retreating move from all angles (mixed with lots of instructive prose) would have led to a useful new addition to chess literature (it would also have led to a much thicker book. Am I wrong in insisting on more pages for my twenty bucks?). Instead, we are tossed yet another example of a failed chess project, and yet another reminder that publishers should cast a more discerning eye on the material that's sent to them.

 

YOU CAN FIND THIS BOOK AT

amazon_link