Natural sciences and chess: A romantic relationship missing from higher education curricula

Abstract

Chess is a game that delicately weaves analytical thinking around artistic experience, yet recent conversions of STEM (Science-Technology-Engineering-Mathematics) to STEAM (Science-Technology-Engineering-Art-Mathematics) have omitted adding chess as an elementary coursework to K-12 and higher education curricula. Chess, as per arguments presented in this essay, can be considered as a language and a tool for furthering the development of artistic skills among scientists and analytical, pattern-recognition skills among artists. It can also serve as a missing link between science and art in STEAM curricula thanks to its finding itself halfway between the two. A handful of analogies are drawn here from chess, illustrated sporadically with positions from real-life chess games and converted to lessons in creativity for students in natural sciences. The discussion centered around these analogies is reinforced by a literature review of studies conducted over the past 80 years to assess the effect of exposing students to lessons in chess on their learning in distant domains. Overall, great benefits can emerge from complementing science education with chess and it is hoped that chess will become an integral part of basic education in primary schools and universities worldwide in the near future.

Keywords: Chemistry; Chess; Creativity; Culture; Education; Instruction; Science.

Fig. 1

(a) Chessmaster 2100 vs. Uskoković V., Belgrade, 1993, 0–1. In this position, Black must find 50 … h1 = Q, which would force White to take the promoted queen, and only then play 51 … Rb6 if White takes with the rook (51.Rxh1) or 51 … Rf2 followed by … Rc2 and … Rc1 if White takes with the king (51.Kxh1). Playing 50 … Rb6 right away instead of 50 … h1 = Q would have been an error because White would not take on h2, but rather play 51. Kh1, which would lead to a draw by stalemate after 51 … Kd4 52.Rxb2 Rxb2. (b) Uskoković J. vs. Uskoković V., Belgrade, 1991, 0–1. In this position, Black sacrifices the queen with 26 … Qxd4 and the checkmate is unavoidable after 27. Rxd4 Rxa3+ 28. bxa3 Bxd4#. (c) Uskoković V. vs. Colossus Chess 4.0, Belgrade, 1991, 1–0. In this position, White played 26.Kh2, a quiet but crucial move in disguise, preparing for a pawn and bishop sacrifice in the two moves that followed: 26 … Rfd8, 27. e4 Rxd4 28. e5 Rxd3. The push of the white pawn to e5 enables the white knight to reach f6, which after 29. Nf6+ Bxf6 30. exf6 leads to checkmate in four. With the king on g3, this maneuver would not have been possible because after 26. e4 Rxd4 27. e5 Rxd3+ 28. Kh2 fxg4, Black would gain a winning advantage. (d) Uskoković V. vs. Uskoković D., Belgrade, 1991, 0–1. In this position, Black finds 18 … Qd6, tempting White to take on f7 and force the black king to move toward the middle of board after 19. fxg6 hxg6 20. Bxf7+ Kh7 21. Qg2 c5 22. dxc5 Qxc5 23. Bxg6+ Kxg6 24. Qe4+ Kxg5, which, paradoxically, does not threaten its safety, but works greatly to improve the activity of black pieces, as indicated by the Stockfish 14+ evaluations of +0.4 before 18 … Qd6, −0.6 after 20. Bxf7+, and −2.3 after 24 … Kxg5.

Fig. 2

Bogoljubov vs. Alekhine, Hastings 1922, 0–1. Position on the board before 20 … Ne7 21.a4 Nc6. Black returned the knight to c6, having recognized that now it could penetrate White's position via b4 and d3 squares.

Fig. 3

Structurally similar, but strategically distinct central pawn structures: c4-d4-e3 (a) and c5-d4-e3 (b).

Fig. 4

Tokhirjonova vs. Wu, 2022 US Women's Chess Championship, Saint Louis, MO, 1–0. Position on the board after 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.f4 g6 and before 4.Bb5+ Bd7 5.Bc4. White willingly loses a tempo by moving the light-squared bishop twice and provokes the development of Black's light-squared bishop with the idea that after the moves played in the game, 5 … Bg7 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.d3 e6 8.f5: (i) any fxe6 capture by White cannot be left unattended to because the white pawn on e6 will be attacking the black bishop on d7; (ii) a move such as Bf4 would attack the black d6 pawn, now undefended by the black queen because the bishop on d7 stands in the way; (iii) Black's main counterplay involving the opening of the center with … Nge7 and … d5 is not feasible because the d5 square is no longer supported by the black queen.

Fig. 5

(a) The World vs. Karpov, Internet, 1996, 0–1. Position on the board before 32 … Rc1, the move with which Karpov sacrificed the rook and prompted the world to resign in its first game against a single chess player in history. (b) The World vs. Kosteniuk, Internet, 2004, 0–1. Position on the board before 33 … g5, the move with which Kosteniuk, the former women's world chess champion, gave away the passed pawn on e3, having assessed that the rook endgame with two passed pawns on g and h files was winning for Black.

Fig. 6

(a) Bernstein vs. Capablanca, Moscow 1914, 0–1. Position on the board before 15 … c4. (b) Petrosian vs. Botvinnik, Game 5, World Championship, Moscow 1963, 1–0. Position on the board before 32.Kc4. (c) Karpov vs. Spassky, Game 9, Candidates semifinals, Saint Petersburg 1974, 1–0. Position on the board before 24.Nb1. (d) Kramnik vs. van Wely, Corus tournament, Round 13, Wijk aan Zee 2007, 1–0. Position on the board before 40.e5.

Fig. 7

(a) Uskoković V. vs. Chessmaster 2100, Belgrade, 1992, 1–0. Owing to the pressure exerted by the rooks doubled along the d file, the position on the board is evaluated as equal (0.0) by Stockfish 14+ even though White is a piece down. Moreover, in order to maintain equality or gain advantage, White must sacrifice another piece, that is, the bishop on g5, playing either 25.c5 or 25.R1d7, with possible continuations being 25.c5 fxg5 26.Bc4+ Kf8 27.R1d7 (+1.3) or 25.R1d7 fxg5 (if … Kg8, then 26.Bc1 is winning for White) 26.Rxe8 (0.0). (b) Uskoković J. vs. Uskoković V., Kumbor, 1991, 0–1. Position on the board before 27 … b5 28. cxb5 Qxg5+, where Black first gave away the b pawn to open up the a8-h1 diagonal for the light-squared bishop and then sacrificed the queen to create an indefensible attack on the white king, leading to either an immediate checkmate after 29. fxg5 Rh2+ 30. Kf3 Bd5# or checkmate in nine after 29.Kf2 Bxf4. (c) Uskoković D. vs. Uskoković V., Belgrade, 1991, ½ – ½. Position on the board before 50.h6. After this move, Black is in zugzwang and the game ends in a draw because after 50 … Bg8 51.Ke4 b4 52.Kf5, the black and a white pawn would promote simultaneously. If, however, it was Black's turn to move in this position, White would win because after 50 … Bg8 51. h6 Bh7, the light-squared bishop would cover the e4 square and force the white king to retreat and thus lose a precious tempo in the run toward g6 or f7 to help promote the g7 pawn. (d) Uskoković V. vs. Uskoković D., Kumbor, 1991, 1–0. Position on the board before White played 20. f5, thus removing the defender of the central d5 square so as to bring the knight to the center and create a passed pawn on the seventh rank after 20…Bxf5 21. Bxf5 exf5 22. Nd5 Qb7 23. Ne7+ Bxe7 24. Qxb7+ Kxb7 25. dxe7 Rde8 26. exf6, around which White would build his attack in the further course of the game.

Fig. 8

Uskoković D. vs. Uskoković V., Belgrade, 2022, 0–1. In an unplayed variation, Black was to find 27 … Kh8, the only move that preserves the attacking momentum for it according to Stockfish 14+, as after 28. Rd7 Black sacrifices the queen with 28 … Qxd7 and gains a decisive advantage after 29. Bxd7 Bd4, whereas after 28. Bf5 Black capitalizes on the bishop pair in an endgame after 28 … Rf3 29. Rd7 Rxg3+ 30. Qxg3 Bxg3 31. Rxg7 Kxg7 32. Rf1 Bf4. The way in which the retreat of the king to the edge of the board in the middlegame can act as the most attacking of moves - seemingly made to avoid the pin threat and loss of queen after 28. Rd7, but only for that very same queen to be sacrificed a move later - can be a definite source of amusement and inspiration. A scientist confining herself to a quiet corner to study her science can, likewise, be the most effective move in her attempt to save the world.

Fig. 9

Vukcevich, duplex helpmate in 2, Bad Pyrmont, 1996 [solution: 1.Ng6 f8 = Q 2.Ne5 d8 = N#, 1.f8 = R Nf7 2.d8 = B Nd6#]. This exemplary allumwandlung chess problem created by my first cousin and the first American FIDE grandmaster in chess composition illustrates the versatility and scope of potential of pawns, which are such that they exceed those of any other pieces in chess despite the fact that they are least valued. Deemed so much weaker than other pieces that they usually do not even earn the attribute of a piece, pawns can transform to any of these stronger pieces in addition to defining the game structure (open vs. closed) and serving as the first line of protection for the king. The game of chess also begins with pawns and their struggle to occupy the center, while endgames invariably revolve around the coordinated effort of all the pieces to either enable or prevent their promotion. This intrinsically political point, inaugurating the least valued into the most valuable, like many other points, can be glimpsed on the chessboard, be it in real games or composed positions such as this one.

Fig. 10

(a) Stockfish vs. Jonny 6, TCEC 2014, 1–0. Position on the board before 37.Kh2, which threatened the sacrifice of the second white rook with Rd1 so as to distract the black queen from the a3-f8 diagonal at the cost of allowing the seemingly dangerous pinning of the knight on e5 with 37 … Ng6. (b) Rybka vs. Houdini, TCEC 2011, 0–1. Position on the board before 22 … b4 23.bxc4 Kf7. (c) Stockfish vs. Leela Chess Zero, TCEC 2022, 1–0. Position on the board after 13.Nh3. The knight will eventually be sacrificed on g6 to distort the pawn structure in front of the uncastled black king. (d) AlphaZero vs. Stockfish, AlphaZero – Stockfish match, London, 2018, 1–0. Position on the board before 21.Kb1 g6 22.Rgg1 a4 23.Ka1 Rg7 24.e4 f4 25.c5 Qe7 26.Rc1 Nf6 27.e5 dxe5 28.Rhe1 e4 29.Bxe4 Qf8 30.d5 exd5 31.Bd3.