Karpov: A Primer

Anatoly Karpov is one of the greatest chess players of all time. He won over 160 tournaments over his career, a record, was the clear best or second best player essentially for 20 years, and holds one of the greatest tournament performances of all time (Linares 1994). But Karpov isn't nearly as talked about as Kasparov or Fischer; why? Well, Karpov is (rightly) known as a positional genius, but his style isn't thought of as flashy or exciting; and he always seemed to take second next to Kasparov.

I don't think this reputation is entirely deserved. Within Karpov's games you can find a level of beauty and sophistication that's hard to match, and tactical flashes that the history books gloss over. With this blog post, I want to show what chess players miss out on when they brush over Karpov, and what you can personally gain from studying his games. Below are a few elements of his play and style, and some great examples for each. Enjoy!

Squeezing Water from a Stone

Kasparov famously described Magnus Carlsen as a "lethal combination of Fischer and Karpov". A la Fischer, Carlsen was "very dynamic, just fighting to the last pawn". What did he define as Karpov's main trait? "He had an unparalleled ability to use every piece with the maximum effect; minimal resources always produced maximum [results]."

Kasparov certainly knew this well; here's a famous position from his 1984 clash with Karpov, where Black (Kasparov) has just played the innocuous - but losing! - 46...gxh4:

And, as is expected from a 160-time tournament winner, Karpov knew how to approach every game with his goal in mind. In this masterpiece against Korchnoi, the last game of their 1974 Candidates Final match (and the match that would determine the new World Champion, after Fischer's refusal to play), Karpov keeps complete control of the board, threatening Korchnoi with a draw and leading him slowly into a lost position, where he had to accept one. Pay attention to Karpov's board-wide prophylaxis - he seems to move pieces square by square with little purpose, but Black finds himself completely bound, while White's army has their roles perfectly designated. The annotations are by Karpov himself, so enjoy them!

Creative Play

When we think of 'creative chess', we might think of players like Rapport or Dubov - tactical geniuses, throwing pieces around and making unexpected Rook lifts or maneuvers. But Karpov shows us a more strategic sense of creativity; and, in my opinion, it's just as (if not more!) exciting than a tactical maelstrom. For example, take his amazing novelty against Gata Kamsky in 1993 - probably his most famous move ever:

Isn't that just as fascinating as any exchange sacrifice?

The next example I have is an incredible game by the young, World-Champion-to-be Karpov against Spassky (in the same Candidates cycle he would win to become Champion). Watch as Karpov makes a two-time World Champion look like a complete amateur, and in Karpov's own words; first he achieves a space advantage, repositions his Rooks constantly as opportunity allows, throws his Knight to the bank rank, and breaks through without any effort. Enjoy one of the best games in chess history:

And Karpov's creativity didn't just come through positionally, of course - he could produce some nice attacking games, like this one against Hort, featuring an incredible Rook sequence:

'The Squeeze'

Magnus Carlsen is known today for his python-like ability to crush the life out of his opponents' position - infiltrate slowly, gain more and more space, until his opponent cannot do a single thing. But before Carlsen, there was Karpov. Look at the position he achieved against Timman in 1979, not even 30 moves in!

Now, read through Karpov's notes on the game, and really pay attention - his points on opening research, the slow accumulation of early-game advantages, and his path to conversion are all beautifully written and incredibly instructive:

Here's another beautiful game demonstrating the 'Karpov squeeze' - this time, Karpov shifts his Kingside build-up to the Queenside, blasting through the c-file (which Black had so proudly held) and destroying Black with a 'Queen dance':

Versatility

In his first Candidates match, against Polugaevsky (we have examined the other two!), Karpov made a surprising sacrifice of two pawns in a slower Sicilian position. That might seem unusual for him, and it was; but he explains his choice in a great note to the game:

"Here I should clarify several things. I have at times been accused of dry, economical play. Yes, I am practical and my play is to a great extent based on technique. I try to play “correct” chess, without the risks taken by say, Larsen, for example. As White, I seek an advantage from the first move; as Black, I first try to equalize the position.

Some of the solutions I select are not the simplest, however, but the most purposeful. If I have several different continuations at my disposal, my choice depends in large part on who my opponent is.

For example, against Korchnoi or Tal I prefer simple positions that may not be to their artistic tastes, and against Petrosian I choose something more complicated. But if I realize that there is only one correct route to take, then I have no choice and I take that route.

Furthermore, I feel that recently my style has undergone some changes. Take the present game, for example. The sacrifice of two pawns, which I am now offering Polugaevsky, would formerly never have entered my head. Everyone thought that this was something I had prepared at home. But only God and my trainer know that this was improvised over the board. Even now my my decision seems strange."

Here's the game, by the way (both sides misjudged several moves and tactics here, so it's great training material):

I also want to take time here to point out that Karpov, despite his reputation, really could attack! Here are a few games from his younger days:

Conclusion

I hope that, after this post, you will have been able to appreciate the genius of such a great player, and that you've become interested in looking at more games of his. Magnus Carlsen was termed the 'Mozart of chess', but I think his games can be too far over our collective heads to really appreciate the technique and understanding within. Karpov was no patzer, but he's much more approachable - all his moves make sense, and you feel like you could have found them all; but we're not World Champions for a reason, and his opponents certainly couldn't deal with those ideas very well.

This is my first blog post, and I'm interested in getting more into the space, so let me know what you liked about this post and what you'd like to see improved upon! I'll leave you all with one of my favorite World Championship games ever, a fighting draw in the Scotch that shows us Karpov wasn't just a perpetual #2 to Kasparov - here, he stands on his own two feet and makes White sweat for the draw!