Great Player of the Past: GM Ulf Andersson
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 лис 2022
- Check out Ben's Chessable courses here! www.chessable.com/author/BenF... GM Ben Finegold lectures on great player of the past, Ulf Andersson, a leading Swedish chess player. FIDE awarded him the International Master title in 1970 and the Grandmaster title in 1972.
Recorded on November 7, 2022. Thanks to Jeroen Peper for requesting this lecture! You can find more videos like this in our "Great Players of the Past" Playlist!
04:59 Anatoly Karpov - Ulf Andersson, Milan 1975
16:45 Ulf Andersson - Anatoly Karpov, Match 1995
28:56 Ulf Andersson - Mikhail Tal, Malmo 1983
If you're interested in sponsoring a lecture of your choice, email Karen at karen@atlchessclub.com
Signup or gift a chess.com Premium membership to get access to their lessons, remove ads, improve your chess, AND help Ben at the same time!! Upgrade your chess.com membership or join! - go.chess.com/finegold.
Buy Merch today! ccscatlmerch.com/
Watch live at / gmbenjaminfinegold
Follow me on Twitter: / ben_finegold
#BenFinegold #chess #UlfAndersson - Ігри
I played GM Andersson once in a tournament in 2013. He traded queens early in a French Tarrasch, went into an equal endgame and outplayed me. He won after 48 moves with great technique. I was very happy to play such a Chess legend.
I played Ulf Andersson in 2009 with black and was lucky not to suffer in a "boa constrictor" style of position, instead reaching an uneventful draw:
1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 c5 3. g3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. Bg2 Nc6 6. d4 e6 7. O-O cxd4 8. Nxd4 Be7 9. Nc3 Nxd4 10. Nxd5 Nxe2+ 11. Qxe2 exd5 12. Qb5+ Qd7 13. Qxd5 Qxd5 14. Bxd5 O-O 15. Bf4 Bf6 16. Rfd1 Bh3 17. Bxb7 Rad8 18. Bc7 Rxd1+ 19. Rxd1 Bxb2 20. Bg2 Be6 21. Bd5 Bh3 22. Bg2 Be6 23. h4 h5 24. Bd5 Rc8 25. Ba5 Bxd5 26. Rxd5 Rc1+ 27. Kg2 Rc2 28. Bb4 g6 29. Rd7 Rc4 30. a3 a5 31. Bxa5 Bxa3 32. Bb6 Bb2 33. Be3 Kg7 34. Kf3 Be5 35. Rd5 1/2-1/2
@@DarkSkay He wanted to force the match a bit with 23.h4 instead of accepting your draw offer. But there was nothing to do in that position.
Hey, me and Andersson do have something in common! We both like positions that we like
My chess is the same as Andersson's, except for one thing
@@thedamnmoron vv b€f4
@@amangmartin4308 so true!
This is a great video, as usual. I did want to mention one thing in favor of Karpov, one of the greatEST players of the past: wikipedia gives Karpov's record against Andersson as +6/-1/=16. I wondered how this could be right, given what we saw in this video. The answer is that the 1995 game was a rapid game, which maybe provides some further context. (Of course it's a very bad day for Karpov to play like that in any time control. But we all have our bad days.)
That surprised me too, since in a very recent interview Andersson said he only beat Karpov once. Clearly he meant the game from 1975 in Milan, the only classical game.
In Sweden we call him Ulf the Wolf
I feel like if I could choose the type of good to be, I'd love to be Ulf Andersson's type. There's something so alluring about simply slowly being better than your opponent. The quick crushing style will always be fun, but ooh there's something to be said for the slow burn.
Slow burn is what I play for too. We are the sadist
Ulf Anderson used to play an open weekend tournament close to my hometown, in Utrecht (Netherlands). I have met him there and talked with him in the tram back. Very nice gentleman.
This type of teaching is so good ben! Appreciate you
Thanks for the presentation. The series "Great players of the..." are really great.
Excellent! Thank you
Wow great video I watched the whole thing.
My all time favorite chess series.
No better place to draw inspiration than the greats of history.
Great lecture great.
Thanks Ben for this video about one of my favorite players (yes I´m Swedish too;-) - however I learned to play chess with help of my father and the book "Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess" a complete different style of course, but I admire both for different reasons.
I love how Ulf Andersson plays!
Love GM Ben ☺️
Dear Ben's editor, please check the audio after 41:52, it's very loud and rough
I played him yesterday in the chess tournament of Laren (netherlands). I lost against him after he outplayed me in an endgame after 105 moves in a ruy lopez. Truly my best opponent ever.
My dream came true
He clearly used an engine to beat the world champion with black
Even worse, he obviously used both a time machine and an engine. That's like, what, double cheating?!
Computers are slowly teaching us that our understanding of rooks is wrong. I think we teach chess students to overvalue and be overprotective of rooks. Not by much, but it's pretty clear to me that in the standard 1-3-3-5-9 valuation system, the rook is definitely worth too much. Two minor pieces are way better than a rook, a queen is preferred to two rooks in most circumstances, a rook and bishop is nowhere near a good as a queen... You can go on and on. In every case it's because the rook isn't holding up its end of the trade.
This led even the very strongest players in the pre-computer era to be very stodgy with rook play. Now we see rook pawns being pushed early and often, and rooks developed up the rook file to attack the center from the side. I who learned chess thirty years ago just can't get used to the ideas.
A queen is not preferred to two rooks at the highest level
If you can your rook out early in the opening or middle game, then it probably has less value compared to a knight or a bishop. Garry believes so too and he mentioned this in his game against Shirov in 1991(?).
@@bed2149 there are all sorts of theory examples of the queen being preferred, but that's not the point: two rooks are 10 and the queen is 9, but the actual matchup is roughly even (maybe more situations, especially endgame situations, where two rooks are better) but it's not as decisive as two minor pieces versus rook for example; no one ever takes the rook in that situation without further compensation.
I am 50/50 on this. I agree with the "stodgy play", but imo, it had less to do with overestimating the rooks value and much more to do with the fact that those positions lead to a lot of dynamics where tempo is extremely important. It's entirely understandable that people steered away from them if the compensation wasn't immediate because rooks are still more valuable than minor pieces in a static sense even if not by as much as the generally stated 2 pawns. Computers don't have this instinct of steering away from those positions like humans do because there is much less uncertainty for them. They just calculate better and deeper, see that the end result is favorable, evaluate it's the best outcome they have seen and then play it. So yeah, we did learn from them, but it was less so about the concept itself and more so that they gave us many more examples of the concept in action because they have no instinct to avoid it like we do. But the positional" exchange sac has been around forever, as has been the rook lift, so I think top players have always grasped this flexibility of evaluation when it comes to the rook in the middlegame especially.
Yeah, I also learned the 1-3-3-5-9 system as a kid (~18 years ago) but changed it after a few years of play. It was more like pawn=1.1, knight=3, bishop=3.2, rook=4.75, queen=9 in my head. I often consider minor+2 pawns > rook, especially in endgames. Also, this system considers 3 pawns > minor, queen+pawn > 2 rooks, 3 minors > queen, and 2 minors > rook+pawn. However, there's no general rule that will cover all situations - each position requires its own evaluation, and there are certainly examples where any/all of these comparisons could be reversed.
At first I thought this was an episode of Frasier.
Yeah, because of his surname, the German player Adolf Anderssen must have had some Scandinavian heritage. But Ulf's surname is pronounced differently, something like "Andeshon."
Ulf is a cool name. Another cool name, also Germanic, but Dutch, is Eef. He's a jazz guitarist (Eef Albers). Another cool name is "Hans," because it could be Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic, Faroese, Dutch, German, or even Estonian. And don't even get me started on "Berg."
Ulf means wolf, of course. Andersen must be a bit of a funny name in German, since anders means others. But they have plenty of funny names. Like if you're cursed with the name von Krummdorf, perhaps you shouldn't have named your son Krumm von Krummdorf (Crook from Crooked Village?) Gun is a Scandinavian girl name that English speakers think is fun. And it is really the same word as the weapon, it means "killer". Times were rough 1000 years ago. But the English themselves still have the same word in the name Gwyneth.
@@bjorntorlarsson Yup, a thousand years ago it was a wild time. Lots of Scandinavians visited Britain and Ireland. There are tons of Scandinavian derived surnames there to this day of course. I suppose they are mostly Norwegian though probably some Danish and Swedish too. Recently it was confirmed that Scandinavians were the first Europeans to arrive in North America. I think the Swedes mostly went eastward, and with their longboats got to the Middle East or even further. But I'm sure to some extent they all went in all directions.
It's always interesting to us outsiders to hear Scandinavians sometimes converse across their languages (although English is often used as Scandinavians are known for their mastery of it). Although Norwegian, Swedish, and especially Danish are different from each other, they are still perhaps the most closely related languages on Earth, and depending on dialects and "adjustments", conversation is possible. English on its own is pretty much useless for understanding any other language.
@@kdub1242 Funny enough most Germans don't seem to know how similar the Scandinavian languages are. One can impress them by listing the languages one understands (not speak because pronunciation is too different) fluently. I'm near fluent in German too if I brush it up for a few weeks. But I understand nothing of what the so called German speaking Swiss say, not even after having lived there for half a year. I suspect they have many dialects. I can't even understand a cashier saying what I am supposed to pay for shopping food. Switzerdütch, same in Lëtzebuerg (Luxembourg). All of Germany used to be like that before unification and state schools in the 19th century (or perhaps even until the arrival of radio) when Hannover Deutsch was made the national language. Italians picked the language used in operas to not privilege any particular city. That's why Italian is the world's most beautiful language.
Danes under Knudt the Great ruled England proper. The battle of Hastings was fought between Danes and Norwegians, there were not yet any real Englishmen. That's why there's no logic to the pronunciation of English vowels either, as with the crazy Danish. In Swedish we simply say it the same way we write it. To spell a "sch"-sound one simply writes sch. Or sh or ch or sj. Or sc, st, stj, tj, skj, kj, sk, rs, s, k, t, j or g. In rare cases also stg, ssj and in a single case xky. Learning what gender a noun has is however the briefest reading of all, because there are no rules for it. Anyway, Swedish vowels are straight forward once one gets used to å, ä, ö, the both a and the proper way to pronounce u. My first name Björn (meaning bear, people here still name their children after human eating monsters in the forest) is hopeless for Englishmen or French to pronounce, but Germans do it perfectly.
@@bjorntorlarsson Yes Italian is beautiful, and also, like Spanish, very easy to pronounce from the written page even if one doesn't understand it. A few rules suffice to allow anyone to read it correctly; maybe that's also part of why it works so well for opera. Portuguese is harder, and French - well I don't know what happened with French! It's hard.
They say English is a Germanic language, which may be technically true. But I'd say its vocabulary must be 40% Latin in origin or loanwords. And the spelling makes absolutely no sense. German and Dutch obviously share their roots, although I don't believe they are anywhere as close to each other as the Scandinavian languages are. To an outsider, Dutch sounds a bit like a "kinder gentler" German. 😜 Change "von" to "van", relax a bit, and you can fake Dutch! And of course Ludwig van Beethoven must have had Dutch or Flemish heritage as his surname is not German.
Yeah... we English-only speakers miss out on a lot. No linguistic neighbors to our language.
@@kdub1242 Most Latin words are borrowed from German languages! Or are cousins. What the English today believe are Latin words were Germanic words before the Romans ever got there. And btw the Roman elite stil in the time of Caesar spoke Greek. Rome was founded by survivors of the Trojan war (a.k.a. "the Sea people invasion"). The indigenous vast majority in Italy back then spoke Germanic languages, Indoeuropean at least while Greek was proto-Indoeuropean.
Even after 700 years Caesar et co still spoke Greek with the learned, and Latin with the peasants. He pronounced his name Kaiser! (Doesn't that sound familiar?) That is the oldest truly "Latin" word (Greek really, meaning gray) that the Germans adopted.
Fascinating stuff, the history of languages! Did you know that the Romans had a lower case alphabet too? For practical writing, not the upper case that was for cutting into stone like runes. The Senate 2,000 years ago literally invented the letter @ in a language reform.
Understanding Scandinavian and German and English, and some French all at once, it at first sight looks easy to recognizes Dutch words. But one doesn't, it's an illusion, a trap. Complete gobbledygook looking as they were words. Most laughable names in the world have either Dutch or Latvian origin. Like Professor Prido Puck, Jaap, Joop, Door, Niemandsvriend. Gekkehuis (=Madhouse).
Probably he is unknown exactly because of his style.
I've been a fan of chess for around a decade now, especially thanks to youtube and channels like the St Louis Chess Club. Never heard anyone mention his name before.
Did you really just say he is unknown because you don't know him?
Karpov has some really funny losses for a guy many would consider a top 5 player of all time
I've lost count of how many times the word boring was said
You already did a lecture about Anderson, why are you doing another one? RAWR
24:00 How could Karpov miss d5? It's the most thematic move in IQP positions and the tactics are quite simple.
Was the Nb4 move suggested in some book? The thing with "theory": always ask who's theory it is ;)
28:56
UA vs Tal
"This game was also played in the 90s."
Given Tal's location in the 90s it must have been correspondence....
always make sure my engine consulted its engine when doing prep.
His best match is Andersson-Tempone. The most instructive to learn, I mean.
“They’ve never been so angry at the free content”🤣🤣🤣
@ 41:52 RIP headphone users
Adolf Anderssen is my favorite of all time. Beautiful games.
22:30 I look specifically for short decisive games between strong players - what are the traps into which I might blunder
I think extrapolating themes is a good approach
Nepo messed up and (so )( so) won the end game 🎮 ,. Which so is the player ?
easy, the one whose name is spelled "s"o
@@danbrooks5060 you mean the notation that you made is emphasized on s sound
@@edwardjanuary1259 no, i mean whichever word is lowercase is the proper noun "s"o
Needs a much bigger Wikipedia page
Wasn't his exact reason why he likes Andersons style the reason why he doesn't like the style of Magnus?
Never got the impression Ben dislikes Magnus' style of play. When Magnus makes strategic exchange sacrifices, in particular, Ben drools in exctasy (Fedoseev*-Magnus game comes to mind, the "Artemiev can't move!" meme one). He does, however, hate with a passion the meta-strategy of playing for quick and/or theoretical draws, which Magnus has been partial to.
* - edit: Fedoseev, not Artemiev, as pointed out belo. The game w/commentary: ua-cam.com/video/h4Rn_EyVkwo/v-deo.html
@@abchernin I thought that was Fedoseev? world cup?
@@SveshMix You're totally right
I don't usually write comments, but here is one :)
12:00 but wouldn't white just get two pieces for the rook?
41:51 scared
Or maybe the first one… lol who knows
I love the videos. I am only saying that 'strategical' is grammatically incorrect in order to be helpful ;-)
It's a word, it exists. It has a meaning slightly different from 'strategic'. Or are you speaking American, and following Grammarly recommendations? "Grammarly" is enough of a clue. It is ungrammatical.
Another morphy one ☝️
Ulf Andersson even has a boring name.