Articles
I Lost My Queen! Help!

I Lost My Queen! Help!

Gserper
| 105 | Other

One of the first things we learn in chess is the enormous power of the queen. Then, after we discover the tricky Scholar's Mate, the importance of the queen reaches a truly mythic proportion in our minds. Not surprisingly, for many inexperienced players, losing the queen means exactly the same as losing the game. Here is an example from a game by my student:

I asked my student why he resigned, and he explained that since he had lost his Queen, there was no point in keep playing. "But did you realize that even after you blundered your queen you were still up by five points?" I kept asking. "No, I just thought I was completely lost since I was down a queen." He was so upset that he missed that, instead of resigning, he could have played 18...Nf3+! getting back the queen he had just lost! Yes, he was just a very young kid, but his logic is quite typical. In fact, even experienced masters sometimes equate winning or losing the queen with winning or losing a game. Here is a good example:

Here is what Alexander Ilyin-Zhenevsky wrote in his annotations to the game:

I have to admit that even now I do not understand this combination and share the opinion of Bogoljubov, who wrote in his notes to the game that Black has run grave risks of losing by this sacrifice. At the time, I thought that Lasker had blundered—and the other players, including Bogoljubov, held the same opinion. This thought really set me going. Just think. The day before, I had beaten Capablanca, and now I was winning against Lasker. Things were really going my way! So I started playing sharply, partly because I was in time trouble.

As you can see, after Emanuel Lasker's queen sacrifice, the material was even since Black had a Rook, a Bishop, and a pawn for the queen. And yet, a very experienced master, Alexander Ilyin-Zhenevsky, thought he was winning. That's how chess players perceive the magic of the queen!

By the way, Lasker loved to sacrifice his queen for a rook, a minor piece, and a pawn. Sometimes this is even called "Lasker's compensation." Here is one more example of such a sacrifice:

This type of sacrifice has a strong psychological element. While material is essentially even, your opponent might think that they're winning and, as a result, lose their concentration. In the game Ilyin-Zhenevsky vs. Lasker, White thought he was winning while material was even.

Now, you can imagine the emotional state of your opponent if they indeed have an extra queen. The following game of another student of mine is a good example:

This is an excellent example of the correct attitude after a blunder. Yes, White lost his queen as early as move six, and unlike Lasker, he got only one pawn in return. Yet, he kept playing as if nothing had happened, and his opponent, who probably expected resignation in a short time, eventually blundered.

You probably think that lucky escapes like the last one can happen only in online games played by lower-rated players. Well, the next game was played in the National Open, and White was a master:

White was completely winning most of the game, and at some point, he was up a queen for just a pawn, yet Black still managed to win the game!

This article wouldn't be complete without a game of "one of America's brightest talents."

As you can see, despite being down a queen, GM Hans Niemann played as if nothing had happened and managed to win the game!

Finally, let's see what happens when a similar situation happens in a game of elite players:

As you can see, losing the queen doesn't automatically mean losing the game. First of all, don't give up, and remember that your opponent is probably already celebrating their victory and, therefore, is prone to mistakes. Help them to make such mistakes by creating threats and setting traps. 

Let me conclude this article with a quote by Lasker: "The loss of the queen is not necessarily fatal, but the loss of one's head usually is." To be honest, I don't know if Lasker really said that. OK, OK, I just made up this quote, but I am sure that Lasker would certainly agree with this statement!

More from GM Gserper
The Most Important Tactical Pattern In Chess

The Most Important Tactical Pattern In Chess

The Unexpected Advice Given To A Future World Champion

The Unexpected Advice Given To A Future World Champion