RISK MANAGEMENT
Dealing with risk is a permanent task when playing chess, as delivering check mate is not the only goal. Averting check mate is equally important. Wisely maneuvering between these two objectives is one of the hundreds of skills which make a good chess player.
345. What is my general risk profile?
The risk profile is the foundation of risk-sensitive decisions. Everybody knows and feels his personal tolerance for risk. This will strongly influence the decisions during a game.
346. What is my specific risk profile?
The specific risk profile can deviate from the generic one, depending on the tournament or match situation. There might be games, where winning or drawing is of utmost importance, for instance if a draw will guarantee first place. Apart from that, the difference in Elo between you and your opponent might inspire you to play harder for a draw or a win. Then there is your current constitution. If you are sick or lack sleep, you should lower your appetite for risk.
347. Do I want to play for two results?
There are many situations, where you can decide to exclude losing (except for blunders) and allow either a win or a draw as a natural result. Often you will have to pay the price in the shape of diminishing your winning potential. Hence, the choice is between a likely draw + plus moderate or small winning chances on the one hand or decent winning chances, a potential draw and small losing chances on the other hand.
This choice can already be made by choosing the opening as White. Especially in the realm of the non 1.e4-openings, you have the options to diminish your risk considerably. Referring to the topic of value distribution in the section on the holistic view, it boils down to the question whether you want to play with a short or long balance sheet. A short balance sheet would look like this: You have one advantage somewhere in the value system, your opponent has none (no genuine winning plan). A long balance sheet could have this structure: You have 3 different kinds of advantage, your opponent 2. The bottom line is still plus 1 for you, but the is more imbalance and overall winning potential is much higher.
348. How can I prevent counterplay?
As was pointed out in the section on the holistic view, you should prevent counterplay when having a static advantage, as the trend is in your favor and you want to keep it like that. However, preventing counterplay or activity in general is a good instrument for risk management. The section on prophylaxis will provide you with the relevant information.
349. How much safety do I need for my king?
Strong players take king safety very seriously, as a notoriously unsafe king is a big liability for a position. Hence, being reckless is out of questions. However, according to your style you could tolerate moderate or potential danger to your king, like opposite side castling or allowing your opponent to have space advantage on the kingside. By trusting in your defensive skills in solid positions you give yourself more room for imbalances. The alternative is to systematically avoid any kind of potential problems with your king and play a rather low variance kind of chess.
350. Do I want to tolerate damages to my pawn structure?
Also here you can reduce the risk by avoiding any kind of flaws in your pawn structure like isolated or backward pawns etc. However, not conceding advantages to your opponent reduces the ability to generate advantages for you. With that attitude your draw rate will be pretty high.
351. Can I transform my advantage?
A game of chess is like a market place for values (advantages). There is a constant flow of value, either cumulative, corrective or transformative. When having a dynamic advantage, you want to transform it into a static advantage. The latter is easier to handle, as the former can evaporate. Now imagine, this static advantage is an extra pawn and your opponent has some activity, not nearly enough to compensate for the pawn, but a bit uncomfortable to play against. A common method to make life easier for you is to return the pawn for a non-material static advantage, such as the better pawn structure, if this means drying up your opponent’s activity. Now you have a short balance sheet and can comfortably play for two results.
352. What are the risks of an attack?
For the sake of completeness, I have to repeat what was already stated in the section on king safety (attack). Never attack carelessly. Never attack strength. Always be patient. Always assess the risks before deciding to attack. There are four types of them:
- You sacrifice material and are left without compensation.
- You weaken your pawn structure and suffer in the endgame.
- You expose your king to a counter attack.
- Your attack gets repelled, after which you have lost precious time.
353. How do I preserve my winning potential during the game?
Preserving the winning potential is normally equivalent to accepting more risk compared to a reduction of the winning potential, which normally goes both ways.
Winning potential is equivalent to the notion of complexity. The more complex a position, the longer the balance sheet, the more winning ideas for both sides. Factors that feed complexity are, amongst others: presence of material, asymmetric pawn structures, the evolutionary potential of the pawn structure and the relevance of king safety.
1. presence of material
With every exchanged piece the variation tree of possible chess games diminished considerably. The position loses complexity and hence winning potential. On the other hand, your winning potential normally growths when executing favorable exchanges. Both of the last sentences are true, but the latter is normally overriding the former.
2. asymmetric pawn structure
The problem with symmetric pawn structures is that they are void of pawn majorities, mostly void of pawn breaks and full of open files, where rooks can be exchanged. Hence, they are anti-complex.
3. evolutionary potential of pawn structures
The complexity of a pawn structure usually rises, the more potential substructures, sub-substructures etc. exist. Strong players can benefit more from this evolutionary potential, as they have more knowledge of pawn structures and a better ability to assess which structure to opt for.
4. king safety
If king safety is irrelevant (e.g. both sides have castled short with no attack possible), then there is a whole dimension of complexity missing. Every dimension serves as a multiplicator. So, we can say (without wanting to be too accurate here), without king safety playing a role, the position is an order of magnitude less complex compared to a position where (mutual) attack-defense dynamics are involved.
354. Should I play second best moves to keep the position complex?
Imagine you are the better player with the black pieces in a Hedgehog position with white pawns on e4 and c4 and black pawns on e6 and d6. In our fictitious example you could easily equalize by playing …d6-d5. After cxd5 exd5 / exd5 Nxd5 / Nxd5 Qxd5 the pawn structure is symmetrical and dead drawn. By refraining from the liberating pawn lever, you could retain the imbalanced structure and thus the considerable winning potential the Hedgehog normally offers. It doesn’t matter, if the engine assigns an edge to White due to his space advantage. Sometimes, less is more.
355. Should I bluff?
Bluffing in chess is an ambitious action, which runs the risk that the bluff is called. For instance, could you leave a pawn unprotected and just continue with your development, banking on your opponent to be too afraid of capturing the pawn. Such a bluff would be acceptable under the following circumstances: 1) You have some advantage before the bluff. 2) If your opponent called the bluff, you would have enough compensation for the pawn in an equal position. 3) If the bluff is successful, your advantage is bigger than before. The decision to bluff depends on your risk tolerance and your assessment of your opponent.
356. Should I accept a pawn sacrifice?
The principled approach would be to take pawns, if you don’t see enough compensation for the opponent. However, if you feel that the sacrifice is incorrect, but the position is too unclear for you to have a high conviction, you can refrain from taking the risk. Or you clearly see that the sacrifice is flawed, but feel uncomfortable defending. Also here you could be pragmatic and say no.
357. Should I play for trap?
This is a matter of taste. If the trap is well hidden and the reward is high, you might risk a bit of equity in case the trap is discovered.
358. Should I take risks in clearly better positions?
In clearly better positions you generally should play conservatively. Let’s say the position is equal and your equity is 50%. Now you have the option to sacrifice a piece with unclear consequences. If your opponent fails, you might win the game. If the sacrifice is incorrect or your continuation flawed, you might lose. You are risking 50% equity to win 50% equity. Now let’s assume you are clearly better with round about 75% equity. Risking 75% to gain 25% would be a losing proposition. On the flipside you can play more riskily on bad positions. Risking 25% to gain 75% is very attractive.
359. When do I offer a draw as the better player?
Offering the draw at the right time is a skill that adds to your overall Elo-rating. As the distinctly better player you shouldn’t be too hasty. Wait for a clear disadvantage and decide how big it must be before you use this weapon. When browsing games, I sometimes see draws being agreed to in positionally won positions. Many people have a strongly hierarchical world view and consider a draw against a better player a victory.
