# Question
Title: How to use dice to determine starting position in Fischer Random?
Using a set of Platonic dice (tetrahedron, cube, octahedron, dodecahedron, and icosahedron), what way of choosing the initial position in a game of Fischer Random Chess (Chess 960) uses the fewest dice throws?

I am looking for a way that

* does not simply yield a number between 1 and 960 which you then look up on an ordered list of starting positions
* allows pieces to be placed in sequence - for example, first the rooks, then the bishops, then the king, or in some other order
* yields each of the 960 positions with equal probability

The rules state that for each player bishops must be on squares of opposite colour and the king must be between the rooks.

You do not have to use every die. If only, say, the octahedron needs to be used, that is fine!

# Answer
> 10 votes
Several methods to do so are described on Wikipedia. For example:

> Roll all the dice in one throw and place White's pieces as follows:
>
> * Place a bishop on one of the eight squares (counting from the left, 'a' through 'h' ) as indicated by the octahedron (d8).
> * Place the other bishop on one of the four squares of opposite color as indicated by the tetrahedron (d4).
> * Place the queen on one of the remaining six squares as indicated by the cube (d6).
> * Take the value of the icosahedron (d20), divide by four (round up), and let 'x' = the quotient, and 'y' = the remainder + 1. Place a knight on the 'x'-th empty square. Then place the other knight on the 'y'-th remaining empty square. In other words, see the d20 as a d5 for the first knight: 1-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16 and 17-20. Then for the second knight, look within the group to get a d4. For example, a 20 is in the fifth group and the fourth spot in that group, so place the knights on the fifth square and the fourth square. An 11 is in the third group and the third spot.
>
> You can also use just a d10 since there are only ten unique placements of the knights once the bishops and queen has been placed. Hold one knight on the leftmost square and count one, two, three, four with the other knight on the empty square, then when it loops, move the leftmost knight one square to the right, five, six, seven, then it loops again, eight, nine, and finally with ten both knights are as far right as they go. For example, with a six the knight would be placed on the second of the five empty squares, then the second knight would be place on the second of the three squares that are empty to the right of the knight. Using a d10 in this way after two different colored d4:s and a d6 is a minimal one-roll way since 4×4×6×10 is exactly 960. (And, by subtracting one from each die and multipying with 1, 4, 16 and 96 respectively, then adding those numbers together, you find the number in the Chess960 numbering scheme.) The d8, d4, d6, d20 still give equal chance for all 960 positions, but with every position being represented in four different ways.
>
> Or alternatively (using an additional die and different calculations): Place the first knight according to the value of the d20 die, by counting the five empty squares and looping back to the left whenever reaching the rightmost empty square. Then with four empty squares remaining, do the same for the other knight using the dodecahedron (d12) die. With this method, every position is represented in 48 different ways.
>
> * Place the king between the rooks on the remaining three squares.

It is stated (but not proven) that this method (and the others) "generat\[e\] random starting positions with equal probability".

# Answer
> 4 votes
Numbering from white's left, and assuming each die carries consecutive integers starting at 1, you can do it in the order BQN as follows:

* throw a tetrahedron; if n is up, place the white-squared B on the nth free white square
* do the same for the other B, except place it on the nth free black square
* throw a cube; if n is up, place the Q on the nth free square
* throw a cube; rethrow until a number n≠6 is up; place a N on the nth free square
* throw a tetrahedron; if n is up, place the other N on the nth free square
* now place RKR on the remaining free squares in that order

This method uses two dice: a tetrahedron and a cube. The tetrahedron is thrown 3 times; the cube a minimum of 2 times and a mean of 2.2 times.

Equivalently, use a single dodecahedron and interpret n base 4 or 6 according to whether you would otherwise use a tetrahedron or cube. You then need to throw at least 5 times and a mean of 5.2 times.

This is neat because all you need to remember is "BQN". But I do not know whether this yields all 960 positions with equal probability.

# Answer
> 4 votes
In the year 2005 or earlier, an Edward D. Collins, wrote the following procedure "How to Create a Fischer Random Opening Position".

The pawns go on their original squares. The pieces will be placed randomly on the back rank, subject to the rules of Fischer Random chess. The bishops must be on opposite colors and the King must be between the two Rooks. For each of the first five steps below, simply roll the die and act accordingly to place the white pieces. After placing White's pieces, Black's pieces are simply a mirror image.

Step #1 Select a black square for the bishop If you roll a 1 place a bishop on a1. If you roll a 2 place a bishop on c1. If you roll a 3 place a bishop on e1. If you roll a 4 place a bishop on g1. If you roll a 5 or a 6, roll again.

Step #2 Select a white square for the next bishop If you roll a 1 place a bishop on b1. If you roll a 2 place a bishop on d1. If you roll a 3 place a bishop on f1. If you roll a 4 place a bishop on h1. If you roll a 5 or a 6, roll again.

Step #3 Place the Queen on the empty square of the number that you roll. For example, if you roll a 1, place a Queen on the first empty square. If you roll a 3, place the Queen on the third empty square.

Step #4 Place a knight on the empty square of the number that you roll. Again, for example, if you roll a 2, place a knight on the second empty square. If you roll a 6, roll again.

Step #5 Repeat Step #4 for the other knight. If you roll a 5 or a 6, roll again.

Step #6 Finally, place the King in-between the two rooks.

This procedure creates any of the possible 960 opening setups with equal probability.

EDIT: The source is http://www.edcollins.com/chess/fischer-random.htm

---
Tags: fischer, chess960
---


# Question
Title: Why is it allowed to request an increment in time trouble?
From the FIDE Handbook:

> **III.2.2** These Guidelines shall apply only to standard chess and rapid chess games without increment and not to blitz games.
>
> **III.4** If the player having the move has less than two minutes left on his clock, he may request that an increment extra five seconds be introduced for both players. This constitutes the offer of a draw. If the offer refused, and the arbiter agrees to the request, the clocks shall then be set with the extra time; the opponent shall be awarded two extra minutes and the game shall continue.

According to this, if I crush my opponent in a rapid game using all of my clock time except for a minute, then I can simply request an increment of 5 seconds for continuing the game (my opponent gets two minutes, but that will not affect the game due to his/her hopeless position). Is this fair enough?

There have been many examples where this rule could be used but wasn't, for instance, the Unofficial Chess960 World Championship, Carlsen could have requested an increment and tried to win the R + B vs R endgame instead of flagging. Why didn't he do so?

# Answer
> 16 votes
> but that will not affect the game due to his/her hopeless position

Well, if your opponent has a hopeless position, they would be better off accepting the 'automatic' draw offer which is implied whenever you make this request: "This constitutes the offer of a draw."

Therefore, invoking this III.4 rule is *only* beneficial if you have a worse position *and* very little time left on your clock, which sort-of makes sense: especially in classical games, we want the stronger side to win *on the board*, not by simply moving their pieces around.

One of the strengths of this rule is that it's an *objective* rule. An older rule (III.5.1) is that the player in time trouble can claim their opponent isn't trying to win by normal means; validating this claim required a *subjective* decision by an arbiter. I had never heard of rule III.4; I wouldn't be surprised if once it's wider known, rule III.5.1 will be abandoned entirely.

---
Tags: rules, time-control
---


# Question
Title: Proof of irreversibility of 50 move rule
I recently edited the Wikipedia article 50 Move Rule as follows:

> The rationale for this rule is that pawn moves and captures are the only '''irreversible''' types of moves. That is, after each pawn move or capture, it is impossible for any previous position in the game to be repeated.

Unfortunately, my edit was quickly removed with the comment: `This is unreferenced. Come up with a reference if you can.`

I think this is pretty clear just by thinking about it, but is there any "formal proof" published anywhere that what I tried to add to the article is true?

**EDIT:** The words "the only" should be deleted. In addition to captures and pawn moves, losing the right to castle on either or both sides (by moving a rook or king), or failing to capture a certain pawn "en passant" (thus giving up the right to do so later) are also irreversible. These logically should also reset the 50-move count but are omitted from the rules for reasons of simplicity.

# Answer
The two irreversible moves can be proved irreversible (it is impossible to replicate that board state later in the game) like so:

Assumptions: \- Pawns can't move backward. \- Every pawn move moves it forward. \- Pieces can't be added to the board. \- There is no way to create a pawn (unlike queens, bishops, knights, and rooks which can be created via pawn promotion).

Firstly, captures can be proved irreversible because they always remove a piece from the board. If a board state has N pieces and one is removed you now have N-1 pieces. There is no way to increase the number of pieces so you can never return to N pieces.

Secondly, since every pawn move moves it forward, a pawn can never return to its original position. The only way to have a pawn in that position later on is to have it be occupied by another pawn. But for another pawn to occupy the position *that* pawn has to move. There is only a finite number of pawns so after every pawn has moved to fill the position left by the previous pawn there are no pawns left to fill the position of the last pawn, preventing the board state from being reached again.
> 8 votes

# Answer
The only 'formal proof' you need is a reference to the rule book of the appropriate governing body. In the US, this could be the USCF. For international events, it would be FIDE.
> 3 votes

# Answer
Whoever gave the reason they did for removing your edit was being kind. Your supposed rationale for the rule is not correct. The 50 move rule and the 3 fold repetition rule are there to cut short games which are going nowhere.

If there are captures or pawn moves then the nature of the position is changing and there is the possibility of one side or the other winning or losing via these moves. In blocked positions where such moves are either impossible for either side or suicidal it makes no sense to just go on pushing wood. Irreversibility has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: rules, 50-move-rule
---


title: Storing tournaments for use in Arena

text:
# Question
Title: Storing tournaments for use in Arena
I want to store a collection of games (say 20) from a certain tournament as a *single unit*, so when I open the file, I can view *all* the matches of the tournament as one, instead of viewing each game separately(each game in a different file).

Arena does this automatically for engine tournaments (tournament files) , but how do I do it for OTB games whose PGN I have?

**As an example**, how do I save the matches of the ongoing Chess World Cup as one unit?

# Answer
> 1 votes
You don't need Arena. Simply open a new notepad window. Then proceed by opening each individual PGN file in notepad, copy its contents and paste them in the new window you opened (i.e. put the contents of all of the PGN files in one file), then save as a PGN file. Open this file in arena and you will have all games in one file.

---
Tags: pgn, arena
---


# Question
Title: What is the best way to get games for the multiple editions of The Week In Chess?
I am looking for getting all games played in 2013 as quickly and painlessly as possible. A batch file to download many ziped pgn files would be non-ideal, but ok. I prefer the Week in Chess as a source due to their high DB consistency quality, but the ultimate goal is to compile a single high quality DB of all games played in the year 2013.

# Answer
Here is your requested zip: 2013\_TWIC.zip

I created a command script for this. See attached. I assumed you are running Windows, but the script is easily adapted to other OSes.

For downloading, it uses curl. You can get that at http://curl.haxx.se/download.html, and for Windows, I recommend the msi installer.

For unzipping, I used Java's Jar tool, which is free. But use whatever you prefer.

When running the script, run dos shell as Administrator in Win8 or Win7. At the end of the script it puts all PGNs into one large PGN file called 2013\_TWIC.pgn HTH.

Click: Script to get 2013 TWIC PGN files
> 4 votes

# Answer
An easy solution in C++:

```
    #include <urlmon.h>

    #pragma comment(lib, "urlmon.lib")

    const int firstnumber = 920, lastnumber = 1104;
    const char * const Spath = "http://www.theweekinchess.com/zips/twic"; // source path
    const char * const Dpath = "C:\\Users\\<username>\\Downloads\\twic\\"; // destination path

    void main()
    {
        int x;

        for (x = firstnumber; x <= lastnumber; ++x)
            URLDownloadToFile(nullptr, (Spath + std::to_string(x) \
    + "g.zip").c_str(), (Dpath + std::to_string(x) + ".zip").c_str(), 0, nullptr);

    }

```

A powershell unzip script:

```
$shell = new-object -com shell.application

for ($x = 920; $x -le 1103; $x+=1) {

    $zip = $shell.NameSpace(“C:\Users\<username>\Downloads\twic\$x.zip”)

    foreach($item in $zip.items())
    {
        $shell.Namespace(“C:\Users\<username>\Downloads\twic”).copyhere($item)
    }

}

```

A simple command line pgn file merge: `copy *.pgn twic.pgn`
> 3 votes

# Answer
I was trying to solve the same problem but since I am not familiar with C++ I did it in Python instead. My program also unzips and extracts the PGN files from the downloaded zip files.

## Code:

```
  import pycurl
  from io import BytesIO
  import os
  import zipfile
  from pathlib import Path

  c = pycurl.Curl()

  for i in range(start, end + 1):

    url = "http://theweekinchess.com/zips/twic" + str(i) + "g.zip"

    save_location_path = Path("/home/paluchasz/Desktop/chessbase_stuff/downloading_twic/twic" + str(i) + ".zip")
    unzipped_location_path = Path("/home/paluchasz/Desktop/chessbase_stuff/downloading_twic")

    with open(save_location_path, 'wb') as f:

        c.setopt(c.URL, url)
        c.setopt(c.WRITEDATA, f)
        c.perform()

    with zipfile.ZipFile(save_location_path, 'r') as myzip:
        myzip.extractall(unzipped_location_path)

    os.remove(save_location_path)

  c.close()

```

## Notes:

* Firstly to find the url I just put my mouse pointer on the download pgn button on the TWIC website. I noticed that the urls have a common structure and the only thing that changes are the numbers. However, that url appeared to be incorrect as I was getting a 301 (moved permanently) error. As it turned out it moved to the same url but without the 'www' at the start.
* Adjust the range function depending on what files you want to download, so if you want to download from 1100 to 1250 then set start = 1100 and end = 1250
* The unzipped\_location\_path should be the path to the folder where you want the pgn files to be saved to. The save\_location\_path will be a path to where the zip files will be downloaded to first (I chose the same folder for this). These also need a file name at the end of the path which needs to be different for each zip. Hence the *str(i) + ".zip"* ending.
* It is not necessary to use *Path()* \- it's use is that this script can now be run on another operating system which perhaps has the same path (Windows for instance uses backslashes instead and this path would not work)
* The pycurl library downloads the files. Zipfile then reads these files and extracts them. Finally *os.remove(save\_location\_path)* removes the no longer useful zip files.
* Finally, I originally downloaded CBV Chessbase files instead. However, I could not see an easy way to combine all those files together and I would have had to append to my database one file at a time. That is why I downloaded PGN instead as now I could use the cat command ($ cat * \>twic1100-1250.pgn) to merge all the files into one.

## Automating the process
> 3 votes

# Answer
Write a script that downloads the files, one at the time. The filename structure will allow you to use a loop to capture all the files you wish to get. Then, write a script that unzips the files and concatenates them in a single large PGN file. Then, write a script that finds and discards duplicated games. Other strategies seem to include a Firefox add-on (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/downthemall/) and in general, the topic has been discussed in other places (http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/13-million-master-games), (http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-equipment/quotlost-issuesquot-of-twic), (http://chessdb.sourceforge.net/tutorial/twic-retriveal.php).
> 1 votes

---
Tags: database, download-games
---


# Question
Title: What should a chess beginner do with his/her knights after 2. Nf3 or 2. Nc3?
Let us suppose I am a chess beginner. I often lose my games. Well, it depends on the opponent but generally I can hardly win. My problem is I do not know what I should do with my knights.

Usually chess textbooks or people whom I asked for advice tell me, "You must develop your knights very early in the game; it's necessary for castling." After that, they don't give any more useful information.

I simply do not know what to do after I castled... For example, I've played 1. e4 2. Nf3 3. Bc4 4. 0-0. After that, I am stuck. A few times, I tried to be brave and to advance my knight forward in hope of giving a smothered checkmate, but I always had to encounter the opponent's queen, which is extremely powerful. Returning my knight to initial square doesn't make any sense for me. And not making any further moves with my knight seems to be pretty stupid as well.

# Answer
> 8 votes
The knights don't necessarily move beyond the third rank in the opening. The middlegame is more variable and depends on the opening, but I think the main "rule" you need to remember is that knights, being slow pieces, work best when they are supported. You generally should avoid advancing a knight unprotected, where it could be lost to a tactic. The best support for a knight is a pawn, but also you don't want your knight to be "kicked back" by an enemy pawn (unless that move would be bad for your opponent for some other reason), so the ideal square for a knight is an *outpost*, which quoting the Wikipedia definition is "a square on the fourth, fifth, sixth, or seventh rank which is protected by a pawn and which cannot be attacked by an opponent's pawn."

One more thing to consider is that, if you castle short, the f3 knight also has an important defensive role since it defends the h2 pawn, which is often a target of attack. That doesn't mean you can never move the knight, but you should be wary when there are enemy pieces threatening that pawn. A famous attacking pattern known as the "Greek gift" begins by sacrificing a bishop for the h2 pawn (or h7 against Black, of course!).

# Answer
> 3 votes
Think **pawn breaks**. A pawn break is when you move one of your pawns so that it can be captured by an opponent's pawn. They are what changes a position, what opens lines, etc.

After 1.e4 e5, those two pawns block each other. You can move a few pieces out, but that ends soon -- you need a pawn break, either d2-d4 or f2-f4. All openings following 1.e4 e5 try to achieve one or the other.

If you play 2.Nf3, then you go for d2-d4, either on the next move or after further preparation.

After 2.Nc3, it's more logical to aim for f2-f4.

If you play both either you go for d2-d4 or have to play a much slower game and then eventually go for d2-d4 anyway.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Short answer: You wait! You don't move them again until you develop more pieces unless for good reasons. Such reasons usually involve captures in the center after pawn breaks.

The nights there are already active pieces doing their share of the game. Nf3 puts pressure on e5 and d4 squares. Nc3 eyes d5 and e4. These are the four central squares and of utmost importance. Thus, having the knights exert pressure there is a good idea.

As an amateur, begin to see where your pieces apply influence, rather than to where they are sitting!

# Answer
> 0 votes
The most general opening goals are

1. Develop your knights and bishops (all of them, usually N before B)
2. Castle
3. Move the queen and connect your rooks

At which point the opening stage is done and it is now middle game.

You might want to learn some particular opening lines (eg Italian/Sicilian) and memorize and understand the first few moves. If you are at a loss, try to achieve the above opening goals before going on something adventurous.

---
Tags: opening, knights
---


# Question
Title: How to use crafty chess engine in the gui chess64.exe link provided
Given below is the crafty chess engine of xboard or winboard version free version.

https://github.com/MichaelB7/Crafty/releases/download/25.2/Crafty-25.2-Win64.zip

Given below is the book

https://github.com/MichaelB7/Crafty/releases/download/25.2/Crafty\_Chess\_Informant.Opening\_Books.zip

Given below is the GUI open version.

https://github.com/SigmaPT/asm.git

I could not able to use xboard or winboard protocol in the gui.

Please help me in fixing the issue. Please tell the command to be inserted in console window of the gui. Please note I request to put crafty chess engine ONLY in GUI and test.Other UCI chess engines are working GUI.

# Answer
> 0 votes
I played a quick game as White.

```
1.e4 Nc6 2.Ke2 d5 3.Ke3 dxe4

xboard
st 1
e2e4
e1e2
e2e3

```

Logs:

```
./crafty-25.3-gcc
unable to open book file [./book.bin].
book is disabled
unable to open book file [./books.bin].

Crafty v25.3

machine has 8 processors

White(1): st 1
search time set to 1.00.
White(1): e2e4
              time used:   4.80
        time surplus   0.00  time limit 1.00 (1.00)
        depth     time       score   variation (1)
         18->   1.00/1.00     0.33   1. ... Nc6 2. Nf3 e5 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Nc3 Bc5
                                     5. O-O O-O 6. d3 Na5 7. Nxe5 Bd4 8. Nxf7
                                     Rxf7 9. Bxf7+ Kxf7 10. Bg5 d6
        time=1.00(100%)  nodes=5906541(5.9M)  fh1=92%  pred=0  nps=5.9M
        chk=40.8K  qchk=64.5K  fp=1.7M  mcp=1.4M  50move=1
        LMReductions:  1/236.3K  2/183.8K  3/125.8K  4/33.9K  5/1.3K
        null-move (R):  3/295.8K  4/20.0K  5/377
Black(1): Nc6
              time used:   1.00
White(2): Nf3 [pondering]
        time surplus  29.00  time limit 1.00 (1.00)
        depth     time       score   variation (17)
         19     1.15/1.00     0.22   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Be7 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. O-O
                                     O-O 6. d3 d6 7. a3 a6 8. Be3 b5 9. Bd5 Bd7
                                     10. Qe2 Nxd5 11. Nxd5 Kh8
         19->   1.28/1.00     0.22   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Be7 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. O-O
                                     O-O 6. d3 d6 7. a3 a6 8. Be3 b5 9. Bd5 Bd7
                                     10. Qe2 Nxd5 11. Nxd5 Kh8
         20     1.94/1.00     0.26   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Be7 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. O-O
                                     O-O 6. d3 d6 7. a3 a6 8. h3 b5 9. Ba2 Be6
                                     10. Bxe6 fxe6 11. Be3 Qd7 12. Qe2
         20->   2.22/1.00     0.26   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Be7 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. O-O
                                     O-O 6. d3 d6 7. a3 a6 8. h3 b5 9. Ba2 Be6
                                     10. Bxe6 fxe6 11. Be3 Qd7 12. Qe2
         21     4.24/1.00     0.24   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. O-O
                                     d6 6. d4 exd4 7. Nxd4 Nxd4 8. Qxd4 O-O
                                     9. Qd3 Be6 10. Bxe6 fxe6 11. Be3 Ng4
                                     12. f3 Nxe3 13. Qxe3
         21->   4.56/1.00     0.24   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. O-O
                                     d6 6. d4 exd4 7. Nxd4 Nxd4 8. Qxd4 O-O
                                     9. Qd3 Be6 10. Bxe6 fxe6 11. Be3 Ng4
                                     12. f3 Nxe3 13. Qxe3
         22    11.23/1.00     0.13   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. O-O Nf6 5. d3 d6
                                     6. Nc3 O-O 7. Bg5 Be6 8. Bxe6 fxe6 9. Qd2
                                     Qe7 10. Kh1 Nd4 11. Nxd4 exd4 12. Bxf6
                                     Rxf6 13. Nb5
         22->  11.51/1.00     0.13   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. O-O Nf6 5. d3 d6
                                     6. Nc3 O-O 7. Bg5 Be6 8. Bxe6 fxe6 9. Qd2
                                     Qe7 10. Kh1 Nd4 11. Nxd4 exd4 12. Bxf6
                                     Rxf6 13. Nb5
         23    15.56/1.00     0.18   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5
                                     Nxd5 6. O-O f6 7. Nf3 Bg4 8. Re1 Nd4 9. c3
                                     Nxf3+ 10. gxf3 Bh5 11. d4 Nb6 12. Be6 Bd6
                                     13. Nd2 Qe7 14. dxe5 Bxe5
         23->  16.08/1.00     0.18   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5
                                     Nxd5 6. O-O f6 7. Nf3 Bg4 8. Re1 Nd4 9. c3
                                     Nxf3+ 10. gxf3 Bh5 11. d4 Nb6 12. Be6 Bd6
                                     13. Nd2 Qe7 14. dxe5 Bxe5
         24    19.01/1.00     0.25   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5
                                     Nxd5 6. O-O f6 7. Nf3 Bg4 8. Re1 Nd4 9. c3
                                     Nxf3+ 10. gxf3 Bh5 11. d4 Nb6 12. Bb3 Be7
                                     13. Na3 Bxa3 14. bxa3 Qd6
         24->  20.78/1.00     0.25   2. (Nf3) e5 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5
                                     Nxd5 6. O-O f6 7. Nf3 Bg4 8. Re1 Nd4 9. c3
                                     Nxf3+ 10. gxf3 Bh5 11. d4 Nb6 12. Bb3 Be7
                                     13. Na3 Bxa3 14. bxa3 Qd6
         25    30.02/1.00     1/22?  2. ... e5      (6.4Mnps)
ok.

ok.
e1e2
White(2): e1e2
              time used:  35.73
        time surplus  29.00  time limit 1.00 (1.00)
        depth     time       score   variation (1)
         17->   1.01/1.00    -0.94   2. ... d5 3. exd5 Qxd5 4. Ke1 Bf5 5. Nc3
                                     Qc5 6. Nge2 O-O-O 7. Ng3 Qe5+ 8. Be2 Be6
                                     9. d3 Nf6 10. Kf1 Nd4 11. Nge4
        time=1.01(100%)  nodes=6286981(6.3M)  fh1=87%  pred=0  nps=6.2M
        chk=177.9K  qchk=408.3K  fp=2.1M  mcp=805.1K  50move=3
        LMReductions:  1/119.7K  2/76.9K  3/51.9K  4/20.2K  5/1.8K  6/1
        null-move (R):  3/160.8K  4/10.7K  5/175
Black(2): d5
              time used:   1.01
White(3): exd5 [pondering]
        time surplus  57.99  time limit 1.00 (1.00)
        depth     time       score   variation (16)
         19     1.25/1.00    -0.83   3. (exd5) Qxd5 4. Ke1 Bf5 5. Nc3 Qc5
                                     6. Bb5 O-O-O 7. Bxc6 Qxc6 8. Nf3 Nf6 9. d3
                                     e6 10. Kf1 Bg4 11. Ne5 Qxc3 12. Nxg4 Qc4
         19->   1.80/1.00    -0.83   3. (exd5) Qxd5 4. Ke1 Bf5 5. Nc3 Qc5
                                     6. Bb5 O-O-O 7. Bxc6 Qxc6 8. Nf3 Nf6 9. d3
                                     e6 10. Kf1 Bg4 11. Ne5 Qxc3 12. Nxg4 Qc4
e2e         20     4.67/1.00    -0.71   3. (exd5) Qxd5 4. Ke1 Nf6 5. Nc3 Qc5 6. d3
                                     e5 7. Nf3 Bd6 8. Be2 O-O 9. Kf1 Re8
                                     10. Ng5 Nd4 11. Bh5 g6 12. Bf3 h6 13. Nge4
3        20     4.67/1.00     2/29?  3. ... Bg4+    (7.0Mnps)
White(3): e2e3
              time used:   4.93
        time surplus  57.99  time limit 1.00 (1.00)
        depth     time       score   variation (1)
         14->   1.01/1.00    -2.57   3. ... dxe4 4. Ke2 Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+
                                     6. Nxf3 Qd6 7. Nc3 O-O-O 8. Ke1 Nf6 9. d3
                                     Nd4 10. Be2 Qb4 11. Kf1
        time=1.01(100%)  nodes=6260401(6.3M)  fh1=86%  pred=0  nps=6.2M
        chk=169.6K  qchk=373.8K  fp=2.4M  mcp=534.1K  50move=2
        LMReductions:  1/100.5K  2/56.5K  3/38.1K  4/16.5K  5/1.0K
        null-move (R):  3/134.8K  4/6.3K  5/23
Black(3): dxe4
              time used:   1.01
White(4): Ke2 [pondering]
        time surplus   1:26  time limit 1.00 (1.00)
        depth     time       score   variation (13)
         16     1.38/1.00    -2.33   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. Nxf3 Bxf3+
                                     7. gxf3 Qd6 8. Bh3 e6 9. Nc3 O-O-O 10. d3
                                     Nf6 11. Kf1 Nd4 12. Be3 Qb4 13. Bxd4 Rxd4
         16->   1.44/1.00    -2.33   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. Nxf3 Bxf3+
                                     7. gxf3 Qd6 8. Bh3 e6 9. Nc3 O-O-O 10. d3
                                     Nf6 11. Kf1 Nd4 12. Be3 Qb4 13. Bxd4 Rxd4
         17     5.31/1.00    -2.52   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. gxf3 Bf5
                                     7. c3 e6 8. d4 Qh4 9. Be3 O-O-O 10. Qe1
                                     Bd3+ 11. Kd2 Qxe1+ 12. Kxe1 Bxf1 13. Kxf1
                                     Nf6 14. Ne2
         17->   5.34/1.00    -2.52   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. gxf3 Bf5
                                     7. c3 e6 8. d4 Qh4 9. Be3 O-O-O 10. Qe1
                                     Bd3+ 11. Kd2 Qxe1+ 12. Kxe1 Bxf1 13. Kxf1
                                     Nf6 14. Ne2
         18     5.34/1.00     1/33?  4. ... Bg4+    (6.3Mnps)
ok.
         18     7.00/1.00    -2.62   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. gxf3 Bf5
                                     7. d3 e6 8. Qe1 Qe7 9. Kd1 O-O-O 10. Nc3
                                     Nf6 11. Nge2 Ne5 12. Ng1 Nc4 13. b3 Nd6
                                     14. Be3
         18->   7.06/1.00    -2.62   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. gxf3 Bf5
                                     7. d3 e6 8. Qe1 Qe7 9. Kd1 O-O-O 10. Nc3
                                     Nf6 11. Nge2 Ne5 12. Ng1 Nc4 13. b3 Nd6
                                     14. Be3
         19     8.82/1.00    -2.51   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. gxf3 Bf5
                                     7. d3 Nf6 8. Nc3 Qd6 9. Ke1 O-O-O 10. Nge2
                                     Qb4 11. Bg2 Qh4+ 12. Kf1 e5 13. Be3 Bh3
                                     14. Qe1 Qh5 15. Rg1
         19->   8.98/1.00    -2.51   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. gxf3 Bf5
                                     7. d3 Nf6 8. Nc3 Qd6 9. Ke1 O-O-O 10. Nge2
                                     Qb4 11. Bg2 Qh4+ 12. Kf1 e5 13. Be3 Bh3
                                     14. Qe1 Qh5 15. Rg1
         20    10.28/1.00    -2.56   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. gxf3 Bf5
                                     7. d3 Nf6 8. Nc3 Qd6 9. Ke1 O-O-O 10. Bg2
                                     Qd4 11. Ne4 Qa4 12. Ne2 Nb4 13. b3 Qc6
                                     14. N4c3 Bg4 15. Rf1
         20->  10.42/1.00    -2.56   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. gxf3 Bf5
                                     7. d3 Nf6 8. Nc3 Qd6 9. Ke1 O-O-O 10. Bg2
                                     Qd4 11. Ne4 Qa4 12. Ne2 Nb4 13. b3 Qc6
                                     14. N4c3 Bg4 15. Rf1
         21    15.82/1.00    -2.50   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. gxf3 Bf5
                                     7. d3 Nf6 8. Nc3 Nd5 9. Ne4 e6 10. Bg2
                                     Nd4+ 11. Kf1 Bxe4 12. fxe4 Nb4 13. c3 Ndc2
                                     14. cxb4 Nxa1 15. a3 c5 16. Bf4
         21->  16.34/1.00    -2.50   4. (Ke2) Bg4+ 5. f3 exf3+ 6. gxf3 Bf5
                                     7. d3 Nf6 8. Nc3 Nd5 9. Ne4 e6 10. Bg2
                                     Nd4+ 11. Kf1 Bxe4 12. fxe4 Nb4 13. c3 Ndc2
                                     14. cxb4 Nxa1 15. a3 c5 16. Bf4
         22    23.04/1.00     1/33?  4. ... Bg4+    (6.5Mnps)Nc6

```

---
Tags: engines, computer-chess
---


# Question
Title: What does it take to become a professional chess player?
I need to know how start to become a professional chess player so that I can participate in tournaments.

I first tried to find someone who knows how to play, but didn't find anyone. So I started looking through the web.

# Answer
> 6 votes
You don't need to be a professional to participate in a tournament, you just have to sign up for the tournament (as long as it's not by invitation only or has minimum rating requirements). You may need to register with your national chess federation first.

As for becoming a professional, I'm not one but I guess the old "practice, practice, practice!" rule is a start. Of course, it also helps to start young, have talent and a good mentor.

# Answer
> 5 votes
To become a professional player who makes a living from tournaments, you really need a GM+ level. Even as a GM, you might find yourself struggling for your bills.

Raise your FIDE to 2500, come back then we talk.

# Answer
> 2 votes
You would probably need to be 2600+ and play a lot of tournaments in order to make a living, and don't expect to get rich. I'm from the Netherlands though, and the prize pool in most tournaments isn't as high as in the US for example.

I know several strong grandmasters who play poker because you can earn a lot more. Even Hikaru Nakamura used to play poker a lot (though I'm not sure if money was the main reason there).

If you want to make a living in chess, you need to either be really good, or do coaching on the side.

---
Tags: chessboards
---


# Question
Title: Why is 5...Be7 played before ...b5 in the main line of the Closed Ruy Lopez?
Here is what I've seen described as the main line of the Closed Ruy Lopez up to move 7:

```
[fen ""]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6
5. O-O Be7 (5... b5 6. Bb3 Be7 7. Re1 d6) 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6

```

I'm interested in Black's fifth move in particular. The top three options, with number of games according to the lichess opening book, are

* Be7 (43,520). Described in books as going to the Closed Ruy Lopez.
* b5 (8,126). Described as going to the Arkhangelsk variation.
* Nxe4 (4,844). Open Ruy Lopez.

Now 5...Be7 is clearly the most popular choice, but after 5... b5 6. Bb3, Black could choose to transpose to the Closed Ruy Lopez with 6... Be7 (shown as a variant in the diagram above). Here are the frequencies after 6. Bb3:

* Bb7 (3,452). Arkhangelsk variation.
* Bc5 (2,827). Neo-Arkhangelsk variation.
* Be7 (1,765). Transposing back to the Closed Ruy Lopez.

My question is why is 5...Be7 overwhelmingly more popular than 5...b5? Assuming Black wants to get into the Closed Ruy Lopez, what would they lose by playing 5...b5? An argument for the latter is that by playing 5...b5, Black doesn't need to worry about the Delayed Exchange variation.

Judging by the book, the transposition is doable and some people do play it, but they are a small minority (less than 5%).

# Answer
> 7 votes
After 5....b5 6.Bb3 Be7, white has the strong option to play 7.d4. Now, 7....exd4 is a mistake, as white obtains a big advantage after 8.e5 Ne4 9.Bd5, which was played in Grischuk-Nepomniachtchi (blitz). Instead, 7....d6 is more stubborn.

In contrast, after 5....Be7, 6.d4 is relatively harmless for black, for example 6....exd4 7.e5 Ne4 8.Re1 Nc5.

```

      [StartPly "9"]

      [FEN ""]
      1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O b5 (5...Be7 6.d4?! exd4 7.e5 Ne4 8.Re1 Nc5) 6.Bb3 Be7 7.d4! exd4? (7...d6) 8.e5 Ne4 9.Bd5

```

---
Tags: opening, ruy-lopez, transpositions
---


# Question
Title: Which chess players are/were best at the endgame? Can you refer me to their exemplary games?
I need inspiration. I'm an amateur. One of the areas that I find least likeable and just plain boring, is the endgame. I sometimes feel like I'm making no improvement there whatsoever. That's why unless I am significantly up in terms of material and can force a win fast I try to get a draw or just resign. But anyhow I want to get better and find the motivation to improve my endgame, so I figured one way is look at some examples of masters of endgame. Maybe that will help me see the exciting aspects.

I've looked at several resources but I was reading a few days ago that high rated grandmasters these days are all good in every aspect of the game, including the endgame (or they would not be up there), and that old grandmasters who were seen as great in endgame, were actually not that positionally sound when their moves are compared with today's chess engines.

So I figured I just ask about that here, as I've got different opinions, someone saying Magnus Carlsen is the best in endgame, while many others go to historical figures like Capablanca, Rubinstein, and Smyslov (couple others also whom I forget).

And if there are particular games/books by a particular master that really brings endgame to life, I would appreciate you mentioning that so I can look and be inspired. Thank you!

# Answer
> 8 votes
Here are a few candidates for great endgame players, where I give a feeling of their playing style and recommended sources:

## Capablanca

Capablanca is considered to be a balanced player, but one who excelled particularly in the endgame.

> The game might be divided into three parts, the opening, the middle-game and the end-game. There is one thing you must strive for, to be equally efficient in the three parts.

Recommended sources:

* *Capablanca's Best Chess Endings: 60 Complete Games* by Irving Chernov
* *Capablanca: Move by Move* by Cyrus Lakdawala

## Smyslov

Smyslov is best known for the simplicity of his play. He adopted an intuitive approach to most moves.

> \[By studying 'simple' endgames,\] I was able to gain a deep feeling for what each piece was capable of, to sense their peculiarities, their strength and impotence in various different situations on the board, the limits of their capabilities, what they 'like' and what they 'don't like' and how they behave.

Recommended sources:

## Karpov

Karpov is best known for reducing the options his opponent had, even in the endgame. Zugzwang and prophylaxis was his forte.

> I still remember Botvinnik's reaction to each of my games, right from the opening moves. At first he would express amazement, then annoyance, and, finally irritation.

Recommended sources:

# Answer
> 5 votes
Given your view that the endgame is boring, your study of it is bound to be (understandably) half-hearted, at best. So the first element in a successful endgame training strategy is to build enthusiasm for it. This is best done by gaining a respect and admiration for the creative possibilities in actual endgame play. This is *not* the time to tackle the 48-or-so types of piece constellations in single-rook endgames, or any other deep theory.

I would recommend Van Perlo's *"Endgame Tactics"*, published by New In Chess, 2nd edition. You will find that often even in the dryest-looking position there are tricks and traps that can save or win a game that looks lost or drawn. Once you have begun to appreciate the potential for surprise and beauty in the endgame, you will be much more likely to attack the learning process with enthusiasm. You will also soon see how endgame theory builds on itself, with fundamental principles and techniques at the bottom of the pyramid, and novel combinations at the pinnacle, and find the former easier to remember, and the latter easier to create.

I hope you grow to enjoy the creative potential and excitement of the endgame as much as I do.

# Answer
> 4 votes
The classical players - Flohr, Rubinstein, Capablanca. All excellent endgamers, the beauty in the simplicity. But, you are putting the cart before the horse, so to speak. It's hard to appreciate the beauty of endgame play if you do not understand it. Saying you are "bored" with it is sooo millennial snowflake-ish it isn't funny. Your fast-food attitude towards chess has to be modified.

I suggest you cozy up with a small set next to the fireplace and open up one of many excellent basic chess endgame books and deliberately go through it front to back. Spend 30 minutes a day on just this. A really good, practical book is "100 endgames you must know". A second choice might be "A guide to chess endings" by Euwe and Hooper, if you can handle descriptive notation (you being a snowflake and all), and you can find it. Both of those are deliberate and address the practicality of endgame play. If you just can't control yourself, try Van Perlo's Endgame Tactics. If you catch fire get Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual, which is just awesome, but not for children.

Good luck, and avoid melting.

# Answer
> 3 votes
Grandmaster Ulf Andersson's technique in the endgame (and in queenless middlegames) is quite proverbial.

Several books collect his best games, and you can also find much material online:

https://thechessworld.com/articles/endgame/perfect-endgame-andersson/

https://www.modern-chess.com/en/chess-databases/database=49

http://www.kingpinchess.net/2014/03/keith-arkell-celebrates-a-sage-of-strategy/

https://www.chess.com/article/view/endgame-virtuoso

# Answer
> 1 votes
The Classical Player whose End game was Best was Mikhail Botvinnik & at present the Best Player who excels in it is Magnus Carlsen . Rubinstein had very innovative examples of Rook endings which cannot be paralleled even to this day .

The best way to find the best chess endings is to search in Chessgames.com where you can filter the games accordingly . There are some tools in Chessgames like Guess the Move where you can look for a Position with Rook/Queen/Knight endings and even play with that tool . There is even an at par Score which will decide how good you are .

# Answer
> 0 votes
IMO all the world champions were great endgame players. Rubinstein has been called the greatest player in Rook and pawn endgames. Check out his games http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1005102

---
Tags: endgame, grandmaster
---


title: Decent Playing Strength Chess Engine

text:
# Question
Title: Decent Playing Strength Chess Engine
I'd like to make a chess program to play decent strength chess (say around 2100 ELO). What are the factors in Eval & techniques in Search that one would consider to achieve that rating?

# Answer
> 1 votes
* Bug-free material evaluation
* Null move heuristic
* Common knowledge such as rook on the seventh rank, king safety, weak squares etc
* Q-search
* Transposition table
* Killer heuristic
* Efficient move generator
* Nega-max
* Iterative deepening
* Aspiration windows

---
Tags: engines, analysis, tactics, evaluation
---


title: Why should I sacrifice Bishop?

text:
# Question
Title: Why should I sacrifice Bishop?
I had a game with a friend, I obviously lost, but now I don't understand why, while reviewing my game, the CPU suggest that at this point the best move is Bishop in b5.

If the Queen decides to take the Bishop, there is nothing taking the Queen back:

Even continuing the game from there against CPU, the CPU doesn't take Bishop in b5. I don't get why.

# Answer
> 11 votes
When ... Qxb5 is played, **White can play Bxd6**. This is a great spot for the bishop, because now your opponent can't castle and your bishop is controlling some nice squares. If Black doesn't capture on b5, then he pretty much needs to move his queen, since you're threatening it with that bishop. Once he retreats, **you have another piece developed, while your opponent has wasted a move running away.**

# Answer
> 2 votes
Queen takes b5, Bishop takes d6

# Answer
> 2 votes
The only immediate advantage of Bb5 is that it develops a piece with a tempo, which is usually a good idea. I would say that both whites light square bishop and blacks dark square bishop are probably worth around the same. At the moment it's going to take some tempos for the light square bishop to contest the diagonal with either moving the Nd2 away or Bb5 to a4 then c2.

---
Tags: tactics
---


# Question
Title: How do I determine the bye player in a Swiss tournament?
The FIDE basic rules for Swiss systems mention:

> **(c)** Should the number of players to be paired be odd, one player is unpaired. This player receives a pairing-allocated bye: no opponent, no colour and as many points as are rewarded for a win, unless the rules of the tournament state otherwise.
>
> **(d)** A player who has already received a pairing-allocated bye, or has already scored a (forfeit) win due to an opponent not appearing in time, shall not receive the pairing-allocated bye.

However, who gets the bye is never spoken of. So my questions are, how do I determine the bye player:

* in the first round, and
* in other rounds?

I am looking for how FIDE deals with it, and not any other Swiss system.

# Answer
> 4 votes
In the first round, it should go to the player with the lowest initial ranking. After that, it depends, but it would ordinarily go to a low ranked player in the lowest score group.

According to rule A.2:

> For pairings purposes only, the players are ranked in order of, respectively
> (a) score
> (b) pairing numbers assigned to the players accordingly to the initial ranking list and subsequent modifications depending on possible late entries or rating adjustments

Rule B.2 says:

> To make the pairing, each bracket will be usually divided into two subgroups, called S1 and S2.
> S1 initially contains the highest N1 players (sorted according to A.2), where N1 is either M1 (in a heterogeneous bracket) or MaxPairs (otherwise).
> S2 initially contains all the remaining resident players.

And rule B.3 says:

> S1 players are tentatively paired with S2 players, the first one from S1 with the first one from S2, the second one from S1 with the second one from S2 and so on.

There is ordinarily no reason to change the tentative pairings in the first round, and everyone's score is 0. If there are an odd number of players, then S2 will contain one more player than S1. When you pair S1 with S2 as the rule says, there will be one player left over, and this player receives the bye. So, the bye in the first round would ordinarily go to the last player in S2, which in this case is simply the player with the lowest initial ranking.

In later rounds, however, those tentative pairings could change. As you noted, the bye cannot go to the same player twice. Other pairing rules also come into play; for example, if switching who gets the bye will improve the number of players who get the color they are due, then it will be switched. You may have to pair everyone before you can confidently determine who gets the bye in later rounds.

The bye would ordinarily go to someone in the lowest score group - however, it is also possible that score groups will collapse into each other in certain circumstances (see rule A.9), and this *could* result in someone with a higher score getting the bye instead of someone with a lower score, even if neither has yet received a bye.

# Answer
> 2 votes
> Note: Independently from the route followed, the assignment of the pairing-allocated bye (see C.2) is part of the pairing of the last bracket.

https://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=170&view=article

In simple terms, this means that the bye normally goes to one of the players currently tied for last place, but there may be complications if this conflicts with other rules (for example, if every player in the last bracket already got a bye).

It is not stated, but I think that it makes sense to give the bye to someone in the last bracket because that way the bye is least likely to influence who wins the tournament.

---
Tags: tournament, swiss-pairing, bye
---


title: When does a chess clock start?

text:
# Question
Title: When does a chess clock start?
* Lichess.org starts the clock of each player after their first move.
* Chess.com starts the clock when the players agree to a match, before their first move.

I think Lichess is correct, that's what we do where I play. What's the rule?

# Answer
According to the FIDE rules,

> 6.6 At the time determined for the start of the game White’s clock is started.

In over the board chess, it's usually Black who does this (you can't have an arbiter start all clocks simultaneously) after the players shake hands and wish each other good luck. If White isn't present, Black may start the clock anyway at the designated time; if Black isn't present, White should start his/her own clock, make a move and press their side of the clock to start Black's. (Of course, in some events, failing to show up at the designated start time constitutes an immediate loss anyway.)

So actually chess.com's method is closer to the official rules, though those games are of course not regulated by the FIDE rules.
> 24 votes

---
Tags: rules, chess-clocks
---


# Question
Title: The London 2018 World Chess Championship live coverage sources
Which TV channels are going to stream the WCC? Preferably with English commentary. (With live video from the playing board, not only the moves).

# Answer
> 6 votes
I believe the live video footage is restricted to the official broadcast and you probably have to pay to get access to it. The footage aside, the games will be broadcasted live on chess24 for free (even without an account) with a phenomenal team of commentators, namely, Peter Svidler, Sopiko Guramishvili, Alexander Grischuk, Anish Giri for the English commentary and there will also be separate commentaries in Spanish and German covering each round.

# Answer
> 3 votes
The Norwegian National Broadcasting (NRK) will be covering the championship, both online and on their main TV channels, with Norwegian commentary led by IM Torstein Bae. They probably won't have a *constant* camera at the board and the contestants, but it will feature front and center much of the time.

Earlier productions they have done (and thus, I would presume, this one too) have been aimed at a lower level (I would expect them to explain things like en passant, the exact limitations on castling, and the concepts of pins and discoveries, possibly several times over the course of these days, especially if any game reaches a position where it is relevant), but they still make good analyses of positions and tactics, and it's generally well produced and fun to watch.

**Edit:** I have realized since writing this that it's only available in Norway. I've been abroad myself and unable to reach it.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Try https://www.chess.com/tv. It is a popular streaming channel.

---
Tags: world-championship
---


# Question
Title: Why isn't Gata Kamsky considered the first American since Bobby Fischer to fight for the World Championship?
As in the title above, since we read it everywhere about Caruana... why isn't Gata Kamsky considered the first American since Bobby Fischer to fight for the World Championship? He played Karpov in 1997 for the FIDE World Championship.

# Answer
> 6 votes
Kamsky played Anatoly Karpov for the championship during the time after Garry Kasparov and Nigel Short had split from FIDE to form the Professional Chess Association and hold their championship match under its auspices. Thus, the World Championship was "split" at the time - Kasparov held the PCA title and Karpov the FIDE title. In a sense, a split title such as this is no title, so Kamsky misses out on credit for playing for the championship.

This is partly commentary, but hopefully adds a little insight: While my skills are nowhere near good enough to say, it seems that Kasparov is generally seen as the stronger player (vs. Karpov). Thus most people who pay attention probably see Kasparov at the "true" world champion from that time. Between the fact that Kamsky played for the FIDE championship at a time when the title was split and also when the FIDE champion was not the then strongest player, he doesn't get credit for playing for the World Chess Championship.

---
Tags: world-championship, fischer
---


# Question
Title: Why are Mato Jelic's Youtube chess videos so popular?
As in title above, why are Mato Jelic's Youtube chess videos so popular? I like them a lot, but I must confess that I am a bit surprised (not unhappy, just surprised), to see nearly millions of views for them...

# Answer
Lots of possible reasons why people like him, here are a few:
1. His videos are on interesting games that people want to see analyzed.
2. He has a lot of great insight, including other possible moves that could have been played.
3. He adds humanity to chess by sometimes telling personal stories: including how he got into chess.
4. His voice is calming.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: chess-videos
---


# Question
Title: Who has the advantage at this point in the game?
I was playing the following game and at this point I thought black had the advantage but upon thinking about it for a little while was not sure.

At this point in the game who has the advantage and by "how much"? …and I don't mean just counting piece points which I know how to do—I mean taking the positioning into account as well.

Additionally, how could I figure this out myself without bothering the folks on Stack Exchange?

```
[fen "2k5/1pp2p2/p5p1/3b4/2NBq2P/1PK1N1r1/P7/3R4 b - - 0 1"]

```

# Answer
In this position, the material imbalance pretty much tells the whole story, as a queen and two pawns against two knights is, barring significant positional compensation, an overwhelming material advantage. And in this case, the non-material positional considerations only serve to emphasize Black's advantage: the white king is exposed, and his pieces are not well coordinated (one knight pinned, and the remaining forces at risk of becoming overloaded trying to protect one another). The upshot is that White is powerless to prevent Black from further increasing her (already winning) material advantage, liquidating to a situation in which White has nothing left to play for or with. Resignation wouldn't be unreasonable for White.

To illustrate, if Black has the move (the OP doesn't say whose move it is), then `1...Bxc4` already yields `2.bxc4 Rxe3+ 3.Bxe3 Qxe3+`, when Black has a queen and two pawns for a rook, and can win at her leisure. But even if White has the move, he is so tied up in knots that he can't stop that operation (or something similar). For example:

```
[FEN "2k5/1pp2p2/p5p1/3b4/2NBq2P/1PK1N1r1/P7/3R4 w - - 0 1"]

1.Re1
    ( 1.Rd3 Bxc4 2.bxc4 f5 3.Kd2 f4 )
1...Bxc4 2.bxc4 f5 *

```

Black can continue to pick up material with her queen in the open field, and White won't even have an army with which to dream of mounting an improbably comeback.
> 18 votes

# Answer
White is doomed. Black's material advantage is overwhelming. Black wins by trading the pieces away. White's chances go away too. It will come down to Black's Q overpowering the White R, or the Black pawns running downfield to score a touchdown. If it's Black's move:

```
[title "Black to move"]
[fen "2k5/1pp2p2/p5p1/3b4/2NBq2P/1PK1N1r1/P7/3R4 b - - 0 1"]

1... Bxc4 2. bxc4 Rxe3 3. Bxe3 Qxe3+ 4. Rd3 Qe1+ (4... Qxd3 5. Kxd3 Kd7)

```

White has no immediate threats and can't really lose more material. So the exchanges are rather forced. The reason I recommend trading the pieces off here is that Black has a significant material advantage. Each even trade makes Black's remaining pieces relatively stronger. In addition, Black can create passed pawns on both sides of the board. Black can trade his Queen for the Rook and have an easy win that way, if he wishes.

If it is White's move, it isn't so easy because White has no moves. I can't really think of a good move. `1. Rd3` maybe. The only thing White has is a cheap-shot checkmate by `Bf6` followed by `Rd8#`. It is unlikely Black will let him do it.

Regarding your other question, how could you figure this out, there's really no way except to try. You're on the right track when you count points and know Black is way up. After that, you examine the board and come up with a strategy. My strategy for this position is to trade pieces. So then I ask myself, "how can I do this?". The Bishop capture on `c4` was the first thing I saw. I realized he had to recapture, so he had 2 choices, pawn or King. If he used the pawn, I'd weaken his pawn structure even further - disconnected pawns are weak. So that was good. It's a combination of having a strategy, then looking for tactics to implement the strategy. When I see a poorly placed King and I have my Queen, I am trying to find forks everywhere. Or pawns that can't defend themselves. The `Qf2` queen move forks the `a` and `h` pawns. One will drop. I am not too worried about White's Rook because if it gets too far from his King, I'll be able to grab it.
> 10 votes

# Answer
The material imabalance is BAD, like so bad that the only hope is a fortress. And a fortress is impossible due to some 1...g5 stuff followed by 2...Rxe3 3. Bxe3 Qxe3+ among onther things.
> 0 votes

# Answer
This is winning for black after 1. ...Bc4 2.bc Re3 3.Be3 Qe3. Even if white could somehow avoid losing a pawn or two in this line, black can create a passed pawn on the kingside and then use the queen to usher it up to the 8th and increase the overwhelming material advantage.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: analysis, learning, strategy, tactics
---


title: Tactics to counter Queen's Gambit

text:
# Question
Title: Tactics to counter Queen's Gambit
I am a novice player. I have seen many White players using the Queen's Gambit (1. d4, 2. c4) which actually dominates the center and inflicts humongous damage at the expense of only one white pawn. What should be my response towards such a strategy?

# Answer
If White wants to gambit a pawn, then give him a taste of his own medicine. The Albin Countergambit takes the game in a rather different direction that might be more to your liking.

And of course, there's always the option of not playing 1... d5. Indian defenses (1... Nf6) are obviously popular, and the Dutch (1... f5) has a character of its own.
> 4 votes

# Answer
You do not have to accept the gambit with 2... dxc4. This is chess, not draughts; capturing is not mandatory. (You know that, but this is a standard reply to gambits and other sacrifices.)

Both 2... e6 (the 'orthodox' Queen's Gambit Declined) and 2... c6 (the Slav) are solid choices, many grandmasters have them in their repertoire. Black's position might be a little cramped in some of the lines that follow, but (s)he'll keep a strong influence in the center.
> 5 votes

---
Tags: opening, queens-gambit
---


# Question
Title: Where can I find the saved games or PGN files in the Play Magnus app?
I have completed games on the Play Magnus app and clicked on the option "Export game as PGN file " but I don't know where to find those saved games.

# Answer
> 1 votes
Unfortuately, the Play Magnus app is not capable of creating PGN files. So, when you click on "Export game as PGN file", the game is copied to clipboard. You can then paste the game in a text editor and save it as a PGN file.

---
Tags: computer-chess
---


# Question
Title: Is it better to move a pawn or knight first?
As stated in the title, I have always wondered whether it is better to move a pawn or knight first. Which one makes you generally more likely to win?

# Answer
> 3 votes
You can see statistics at a site like this one.

There are four pawn moves (1. d4, 1. e4, 1. c4, 1. g3) and one knight move (1. Nf3) that form a top tier of first move choices.

The other twelve pawn moves and three knight moves vary in terms of viability.

# Answer
> 3 votes
The question seems to imply that the very first move is directly influencing one's chances to win. This is not the case, the first move alone does not do anything in terms of improving or worsening your chances, as long as you follow correct opening principles. So either a Pawn (i.e. 1.d4) or a Knight (i.e. 1.Nf3) is O.K. in my view. A better question would have been, IMHO, which Knight or Pawn move would be better according to general opening principles? (i.e. 1.Nf3 vs 1.Na3, or 1.e4 vs 1.h4).

# Answer
> 2 votes
Neither is better. It's mostly a matter of opinion. However, there are certain themes that a lot of the commonly played moves all have in common. They try to get the center, to develop their pieces to useful squares, and often king-safety is achieved by castling either king-side or queen-side.

---
Tags: opening, pawns, knights
---


# Question
Title: How do I defend against players who keep pawn pushing in the Sicilian?
I recently played a Sicilian as black, defending against a pawn storm.

Here is the game:

```
[Event "Rated Classical game"]
[Site "https://lichess.org/ZMFC6dP4"]
[Date "2018.11.11"]
[Round "-"]
[White "crowlol"]
[Black "JushBJJ2"]
[Result "1-0"]
[UTCDate "2018.11.11"]
[UTCTime "11:50:56"]
[WhiteElo "1608"]
[BlackElo "1644"]
[WhiteRatingDiff "+12"]
[BlackRatingDiff "-11"]
[Variant "Standard"]
[TimeControl "900+15"]
[ECO "B20"]
[Opening "Sicilian Defense: Bowdler Attack"]
[Termination "Normal"]
[Annotator "lichess.org"]

[FEN "..."]
1. e4 c5 2. Bc4 { B20 Sicilian Defense: Bowdler Attack } d6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Ng5?! { (0.00 → -0.65) Inaccuracy. Best move was Nc3. } (4. Nc3 a6 5. d4 cxd4 6. Nxd4 b5 7. Bb3 e6 8. O-O Qc7) 4... e6 5. d3 Nc6 6. Bf4 Be7 7. Nf3 O-O 8. h3 Bd7?! { (-0.86 → -0.30) Inaccuracy. Best move was d5. } (8... d5 9. exd5 exd5 10. Bb3 a5 11. a4 Bd6 12. Bxd6 Qxd6 13. O-O Nh5 14. Nc3 Nf4 15. Kh1) 9. g4? { (-0.30 → -1.60) Mistake. Best move was Nc3. } (9. Nc3 Nd4 10. a4 Nxf3+ 11. Qxf3 a6 12. O-O Bc6 13. Rfd1 d5 14. Bb3 h6 15. exd5 exd5) 9... e5?! { (-1.60 → -0.81) Inaccuracy. Best move was d5. } (9... d5) 10. Be3 Be6 11. b3? { (-0.80 → -1.87) Mistake. Best move was Bb3. } (11. Bb3 c4 12. Bxc4 Bxc4 13. dxc4 Nxe4 14. Qd3 f5 15. gxf5 Nc5 16. Qd5+ Kh8 17. Bxc5 dxc5) 11... Qa5+? { (-1.87 → -0.63) Mistake. Best move was d5. } (11... d5 12. exd5 Nxd5 13. Bd2 f5 14. Nc3 Qd7 15. Qe2 Ndb4 16. O-O-O Bxc4 17. dxc4 e4 18. Nxe4) 12. Bd2 Qd8 13. Ng1? { (-0.68 → -2.73) Mistake. Best move was O-O. } (13. O-O a6) 13... Bxc4? { (-2.73 → 0.04) Mistake. Best move was d5. } (13... d5 14. exd5 Bxd5 15. Rh2 e4 16. Nc3 Qd6 17. f4 exf3 18. Rf2 Bxc4 19. bxc4 Nd4 20. Nxf3) 14. bxc4 Re8 15. g5 Nd7 16. h4 a6 17. Qg4? { (0.44 → -1.28) Mistake. Best move was a4. } (17. a4) 17... Qc8?! { (-1.28 → -0.42) Inaccuracy. Best move was b5. } (17... b5 18. Ne2 bxc4 19. dxc4 Nd4 20. Na3 Nf8 21. c3 Nxe2 22. Kxe2 Qa5 23. Nc2 Rab8 24. Kf1) 18. h5?! { (-0.42 → -1.21) Inaccuracy. Best move was Nc3. } (18. Nc3 b5 19. Nd5 bxc4 20. dxc4 Rb8 21. Nf3 Nd4 22. Kf1 Nxc2 23. Rd1 Nb6 24. Qxc8 Nxc8) 18... Nb6? { (-1.21 → 0.23) Mistake. Best move was b5. } (18... b5 19. Kf1 Nd4 20. Nc3 bxc4 21. Rc1 Nb6 22. Qg3 Rb8 23. Nge2 Qe6 24. Rg1 cxd3 25. cxd3) 19. Qg3 Nd7?! { (-0.21 → 0.71) Inaccuracy. Best move was Nd4. } (19... Nd4 20. Na3 Qc6 21. g6 Qa4 22. c3 Qxa3 23. cxd4 Qb2 24. Rc1 cxd4 25. h6 hxg6 26. hxg7) 20. g6?! { (0.71 → -0.13) Inaccuracy. Best move was Nc3. } (20. Nc3 b5 21. Nd5 bxc4 22. Nf3 Nf8 23. dxc4 Nb4 24. Kf1 Nxd5 25. cxd5 Rb8 26. h6 gxh6) 20... Rf8? { (-0.13 → 1.22) Mistake. Best move was Nd4. } (20... Nd4 21. Na3) 21. gxh7+ Kh8 22. h6? { (1.07 → 0.05) Mistake. Best move was Nc3. } (22. Nc3 Nd4 23. Rc1 Ne6 24. Nge2 Qd8 25. Rb1 b5 26. cxb5 axb5 27. Rxb5 Bg5 28. a4 Bh6) 22... g6 23. Bg5? { (0.10 → -1.47) Mistake. Best move was Nc3. } (23. Nc3 Nd4 24. Rb1 Nf6 25. Bg5 Nxc2+ 26. Kd2 Nd4 27. Qh4 Qd8 28. Rxb7 Ne6 29. f4 Nxg5) 23... Qd8?! { (-1.47 → -0.81) Inaccuracy. Best move was Bxg5. } (23... Bxg5 24. Qxg5 Nd4 25. Kd1 b5 26. Nd2 Ne6 27. Qh4 b4 28. a3 a5 29. Ngf3 Qd8 30. Qxd8) 24. Be3?! { (-0.81 → -1.52) Inaccuracy. Best move was Bxe7. } (24. Bxe7 Qxe7 25. Nc3 Nd4 26. Rc1 Qd8 27. Kf1 b5 28. Nd5 bxc4 29. dxc4 Rb8 30. Ne2 Kxh7) 24... b5 25. Nc3 Nd4 26. Bxd4 cxd4 27. Nd5 Nf6?! { (-1.87 → -1.34) Inaccuracy. Best move was bxc4. } (27... bxc4 28. Nf3 Nf6 29. Nxf6 Bxf6 30. Nd2 cxd3 31. cxd3 Kxh7 32. Nc4 Rb8 33. Kf1 Qe7 34. Ke2) 28. Nxf6?! { (-1.34 → -1.92) Inaccuracy. Best move was Nxe7. } (28. Nxe7 Qxe7) 28... Bxf6 29. Ne2?! { (-1.92 → -2.43) Inaccuracy. Best move was Nf3. } (29. Nf3) 29... Qa5+ 30. Kf1 Qd2 31. Rc1 Qg5? { (-2.43 → -1.01) Mistake. Best move was Rac8. } (31... Rac8) 32. Qxg5 Bxg5 33. Ra1?! { (-1.33 → -1.94) Inaccuracy. Best move was Rb1. } (33. Rb1 bxc4 34. dxc4 Rac8 35. Rb4 Rc7 36. Rh3 Rfc8 37. Rf3 Rxc4 38. Rxc4 Rxc4 39. c3 dxc3) 33... Kxh7?! { (-1.94 → -1.26) Inaccuracy. Best move was bxc4. } (33... bxc4) 34. a4? { (-1.26 → -2.35) Mistake. Best move was Rh3. } (34. Rh3 Rac8 35. c3 dxc3 36. Nxc3 bxc4 37. Rd1 Rfd8 38. Kg2 Rd7 39. dxc4 Rxc4 40. Rg3 Bh4) 34... b4? { (-2.35 → -1.11) Mistake. Best move was bxc4. } (34... bxc4 35. dxc4 Rac8 36. Rh3 Rxc4 37. c3 dxc3 38. Nxc3 Rb8 39. Ra3 Bxh6 40. a5 Kg7 41. Rd3) 35. a5 Bxh6 36. Rb1 Rab8 37. f4 Kg7 38. fxe5 dxe5 39. Rb2?! { (-1.60 → -2.46) Inaccuracy. Best move was Kg2. } (39. Kg2 Be3 40. Kf3 f5 41. Rh2 Kf6 42. Ng3 Rf7 43. Ke2 Bf4 44. Rh3 Bxg3 45. Rxg3 Rh7) 39... f5 40. exf5?! { (-2.33 → -3.03) Inaccuracy. Best move was Kg2. } (40. Kg2 fxe4 41. Ng3 e3 42. Ne4 Rf4 43. Rf1 Rh4 44. Rfb1 Bg5 45. Rxb4 Rxb4 46. Rxb4 Bd8) 40... Rxf5+ 41. Kg2?! { (-2.64 → -3.31) Inaccuracy. Best move was Ke1. } (41. Ke1 Be3 42. Rb1 e4 43. dxe4 Rxa5 44. Rd1 Rc5 45. Nxd4 Rxc4 46. Nb3 Rxc2 47. Rd7+ Kf6) 41... Rg5+? { (-3.31 → -1.43) Mistake. Best move was Be3. } (41... Be3 42. Rf1) 42. Kf3?! { (-1.43 → -2.13) Inaccuracy. Best move was Kh3. } (42. Kh3 e4 43. Nxd4 Rxa5 44. c5 exd3 45. cxd3 Be3 46. Nc6 Rh8+ 47. Kg2 Rxh1 48. Kxh1 Rxc5) 42... Rf5+ 43. Ke4 Rf2 44. Ng3 Bf4 45. Rg1 Bxg3?! { (-1.34 → -0.54) Inaccuracy. Best move was Kf6. } (45... Kf6 46. Kd5 Bxg3 47. Rxg3 Rd8+ 48. Kc6 e4 49. Rxb4 e3 50. Rg1 Rxc2 51. Rb6 Ke5 52. Kc7) 46. Rxg3 Re2+ 47. Kd5 Re3?! { (-0.08 → 0.45) Inaccuracy. Best move was e4. } (47... e4 48. Rb1 Rd8+ 49. Kc5 exd3 50. cxd3 Re5+ 51. Kc6 Re3 52. Rg4 Rxd3 53. Rxb4 Kf6 54. Rb6) 48. Rxe3 dxe3 49. Rb1 Kf6 50. Re1 b3? { (0.62 → 2.04) Mistake. Best move was e4. } (50... e4 51. dxe4) 51. cxb3 Rxb3?! { (1.54 → 2.34) Inaccuracy. Best move was g5. } (51... g5) 52. Rxe3 Kf5? { (2.27 → 5.20) Mistake. Best move was Rc3. } (52... Rc3 53. Rf3+) 53. Rxe5+ Kf4 54. d4 Ra3?? { (4.00 → 7.58) Blunder. Best move was g5. } (54... g5 55. c5) 55. c5 Rxa5? { (7.21 → 10.26) Mistake. Best move was g5. } (55... g5) 56. Kd6 g5? { (8.52 → 11.30) Mistake. Best move was Rb5. } (56... Rb5 57. Re8) 57. Re8?? { (11.30 → 6.39) Blunder. Best move was c6. } (57. c6 Rxe5 58. dxe5 g4 59. c7 g3 60. c8=Q g2 61. Qc1+ Kg3 62. Kc5 a5 63. Kb5 Kh2) 57... g4?? { (6.39 → 42.68) Blunder. Best move was Rb5. } (57... Rb5 58. c6) 58. c6 Ra4 59. d5 Rc4 60. c7 g3?! { (16.97 → Mate in 15) Checkmate is now unavoidable. Best move was a5. } (60... a5 61. c8=Q) 61. c8=Q Rxc8 62. Rxc8 g2 63. Rc1 a5 64. Kc5 Ke5 65. d6 a4 66. Rg1 a3 67. Rxg2 Ke6 68. Ra2 Kd7 69. Rxa3 Kd8 70. Kc6 Ke8 71. d7+?! { (Mate in 2 → Mate in 4) Not the best checkmate sequence. Best move was Rf3. } (71. Rf3 Kd8 72. Rf8#) 71... Kd8 72. Ra8+?! { (Mate in 4 → Mate in 4) Not the best checkmate sequence. Best move was Rf3. } (72. Rf3 Ke7 73. d8=R Kxd8 74. Re3 Kc8 75. Re8#) 72... Ke7 73. d8=Q+ Ke6 74. Qe8+?! { (Mate in 3 → Mate in 4) Not the best checkmate sequence. Best move was Qg5. } (74. Qg5 Kf7 75. Ra7+ Ke6 76. Re7#) 74... Kf6 75. Rd8?! { (Mate in 4 → Mate in 4) Not the best checkmate sequence. Best move was Qh5. } (75. Qh5 Kg7 76. Ra7+ Kf6 77. Rf7+ Ke6 78. Qd5#) 75... Kg7 76. Qe6 Kh7 77. Rd7+ Kh8 78. Qe8# { White wins by checkmate. } 1-0

```

How do I defend against players who keep pawn pushing in the Sicilian? I really stress against these kind of players.

# Answer
Pawn pushing is a well known anti-Sicilian strategy. The main problem here is that your play was too passive and you paid more than enough attention to your opponents while they were pushing their pawns. While your opponent were rushing their pawns, they allowed many chances where counterplay by you is possible yet you were focusing only on their pawns. Here are examples:

```
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[Event "Rated Classical game"]
[Site "https://lichess.org/ZMFC6dP4"]
[Date "2018.11.11"]
[White "crowlol"]
[Black "JushBJJ2"]
[Result "1-0"]
[UTCDate "2018.11.11"]
[WhiteElo "1608"]
[BlackElo "1644"]
[ECO "B20"]
[Opening "Sicilian Defense: Bowdler Attack"]
[Termination "Normal"]
[StartPly "17"]

1. e4 c5 2. Bc4 d6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Ng5 e6 5. d3 Nc6 6. Bf4 Be7 7. Nf3 O-O 8. h3 Bd7 9. g4

```

In the above position, **9... d5** would have been very annoying for your opponent. Your opponent is now forced to play **10. exd5**, placing their king in an open e-file. They won't be able to castle early then, since the kingside pawns have been advanced. Otherwise, they will lose a pawn (after say **10. Bb3 dxe4 11. dxe4 Nxe4**).

Another advantage of this move is that it takes away the center from you opponent. After **9... d5 10. exd5 exd5 11. Bb3** you have decent central control, in addition to freeing the bishop such that 10... Bd6 is possible.

Moving on to the middlegame, I would say your defense was brilliant. However, instead of maneuvering the knight to the queenside, the engine suggests **18... b5**, eventually starting an attack on the queenside. Obviously your plan was to free the queen, and **18... Nf8** was better in my opinion, as it puts the knight in the area where all the action is taking place.
> 8 votes

# Answer
If you find defending stressful, then a counterattack might be a good strategy for you. Generally, if the opponent is attacking your castled king when their own king is in the middle of the board, it's often good to try to open up the center to expose their king's vulnerability. There were some points where you could have played ...d5 to help with that.

After 20.g6, one option would have been ...fxg6 hxg6 h6 and now White would have to sacrifice a bishop with Bxh6 to keep up the attack. (Of course, you'd have to make sure that the sacrifice doesn't result in some unstoppable attack before playing that move.)

But overall your defense wasn't bad. You refrained from moving those pawns in front of your king too early, which would have given your opponent's pawns a good target to attack. You survived the attack and eventually wound up with an extra pawn.
> 1 votes

# Answer
Pawn storms are a pretty standard theme in the Sicilian. Usually, the response is to counterattack and try to checkmate them before they checkmate you.

Black almost always castles on the kingside, so that's where White's pawn storm happens. If White has castled queenside, then Black typically responds by attacking there with a pawn storm, and opening the c-file against the White King. If White castles kingside or doesn't castle at all, then their kingside pawn storm inherently weakens their king, leaving it open to attack.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: strategy, sicilian-defense
---


# Question
Title: How is it like for live audience watching long classic chess?
For the live audience that's watching chess in person, not online, how is it like?

Do they sit through it all, say 7h? Can they leave and comeback? Are their seats reserved if they leave? Do they have restaurants and so on to spend their time?

What was it like in the old days, say 90s or 80s when there was a huge crowd, did they sit still for 7h and comeback everyday?

I just wonder how it like to be in the audience, mainly in FIDE world classic chess championships, lets say the final match, since in theory it should attract the most audience.

# Answer
> 7 votes
I helped out at the 2008 match between Kramnik and Anand in Bonn and attended many other world class events as a spectator. (Like Kramnik-Fritz when he blundered the mate in one. Epic.)

Usually seats aren't reserved and people come and go. Often there is a separate commentary/analysis room that you might attend, although you can also hear commentary with headphones in the playing hall. If you are accompanied by friends you might occasionally slip out to discuss the current position.

But many people are actually sitting though almost the entire game, with only the occasional toilet break etc. Time flies when you are having fun. And of course 7h games aren't the norm.

---
Tags: tournament
---


title: Daily Strategy Traing

text:
# Question
Title: Daily Strategy Traing
There are many websites (such as chess.com and 365chess.com) which allow even a free account holder to practise a certain number of chess puzzles on a daily basis. However, I feel that most puzzles are about tactics instead of strategy, such as winning a piece, forcing checkmate, etc. Am wondering if there are (preferably free) online resources that allows one to daily train strategy (such as how to improve your position in a silent game, or create a weakness for your opponent) which does not necessarily resulting in immediate winning of material or checkmating. Any recommendation will be greatly appreciated.

# Answer
It is relatively easy for these websites to generate many thousands of tactical exercises: they run an engine over a corpus of games (for example, games played on the site itself) to look for blunders, and then turn the punishment of the blunder into a tactics puzzle (usually after additional filtering for example to choose only positions where there is only one move that is clearly best). They don't even need to worry about grading the puzzles for difficulty, because they determine that empirically after the fact, based on the ratings of the users who are able to solve the puzzle or not. The leave it to users to flag dubious machine-selected exercises for review.

The same is not true for strategy puzzles, since strategy is not so clearcut that you could let an engine search for strategically interesting positions. Therefore, strategy puzzles need to be laboriously created by experts. I know chess.com does have a "lessons" section, but you need to be a paid subscriber if you want unlimited access. Many of the lessons are about strategy, for example Roots of Positional Understanding by IM Jeremy Silman has 300 hundred brief "challenges" which you could use as daily puzzles for a while.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: strategy, websites
---


# Question
Title: How do chess websites relay the moves for tournaments?
I know the DGT boards are used for this. But, do they all do so? Does every chess website connect their server to the DGT board and relay the moves? Or do they simply "steal" the moves from another site?

# Answer
> 3 votes
That depends on the tournament organisation. If the tournament organiser is happy, they provide an online PGN file which is updated everytime the player makes a move. A good digital board software can easily do that. Broadcast websites such as chess24.com simply has to poll that PGN file. Easily scaled to any number of chess boards.

Obviously, the last strategy requires cooperation. The 2018 world chess championship has no such facility. The broadcast websites has to hire someone constantly monitor the offical website (they have to pay for subscription), and relay the moves manually.

Generally, organisers especially open competition are more than happy to assist. It's a nice way for promoting their events. Chess moves don't make money.

# Answer
> 1 votes
They "steal" the moves. The organizers of the last world championship didn't like that and sued, but lost. See some discussion at What are the laws concerning copyright of chess games?. In short, the judge said that "it is well-established that sports scores and events, like players' moves in the Championship, are facts not protectable by copyright".

I can't speak for every site, but in my experience you can tell that they are doing it this way based on comments like "I just heard there was a move" and by the fact that the clocks are generally wrong. Also, why would the organizer make it easy for sites which they see as freeloaders?

(Of course, this depends on the event. I wrote the above thinking of high-profile events such as the world championship which is taking place as of this writing, and which I thought might have been on the questioner's mind.)

---
Tags: tournament
---


title: Grunfeld Defense

text:
# Question
Title: Grunfeld Defense
I thought this was going to be a wild dynamic and fun opening to play. Database results show average results comparable to most other openings. Mainlines often lead to very drawish positions. Computer analysis confirms drawish nature of many lines. There is a lot of positive hype about this opening but I am a bit disappointed. What am I missing?

# Answer
You're missing the fact that every good opening leads to balanced positions when played perfectly. This is the case for the Grünfeld as well. But just because the position is balanced after optimal play in an opening doesn't mean that the opening is easy to play optimally.

In the Grünfeld the positions tend to quickly become rather unbalanced and sharp (black gives white the chance to occupy the center with pawns and thereby get a space advantage, and and hopes that the counterplay by attacking white's center is enough to offset white's edge in space), requiring both sides to play with precision not to get into a worse position. Therefore, especially on lower levels, anything can happen in a Grünfeld game.

The mainlines in the Grünfeld may lead to drawish positions, but to reach these drawish positions both players must know a serious amount of theoretical lines in the Grünfeld intimately. This is way more than the average club player can handle, and there are often less forcing sidelines to pursue for both sides than the main lines played by the pros. As a final remark, it's worth noting that when a computer evaluation of a position says something like 0.00 it just means that the computer thinks the position is equal, not that it's drawish.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: grunfeld-defense
---


# Question
Title: On the feasibility of a KBN-K mate within 50 moves using a particular method
Prove that it is possible, from any starting KBN-K position, to accomplish the mate by manoeuvering to arrive at key positions from a well-known method or strategy whilst the losing king actively tries to avoid reaching the key positions that would lead to mate within 50 moves. In terms of the players' goals, the winning player's goal is to reach the key positions and still have moves to mate within 50 moves, and the losing player's goal is to avoid getting mated within 50 moves.

Given a starting KBN-K position, there exist paths through the tree of variations satisfying the winning player's goal with optimal play by the losing player. Is this satisfied for ALL legal KBNK positions using that particular stratagem only? How would one go about attempting to prove this using KBN-K tablebases?

# Answer
> Is this satisfied for ALL legal KBNK positions using that particular stratagem only?

Absolutely not! Please don't try to prove something that's impossible. Consider this position.

```
[startflipped ""]
[FEN "3kB3/4N3/8/8/8/8/8/3K4 b - - 0 1"]

```
> 3 votes

# Answer
With the tablebase you can prove that all positions that can be won, can be won within 50 moves. But they're not designed to guarantee that certain "key positions" are visited in between (and if you pick them badly, then there are positions that can't be won in time anymore).

So you'd need to get your list of key positions and note in how many moves checkmate can be forced from there, using the existing tablebases.

*And*, for each key positions, you need to create *new* tablebases where the goal is not to checkmate, but to reach that key position.

Then for each KNB v K position, there needs to be at least one key position in the list for which the minimum moves to force it plus the minimum moves to checkmate from there is 50 or below.
> 1 votes

# Answer
the diagram is not a N and B ending as one of them is lost immediately. dropping a piece on the first move should disqualify these types of positions.

similarly any moves considered at any time should not drop a piece.

i assumed this was a serious and not a trick question.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: endgame, checkmate, tablebases, 50-move-rule
---


# Question
Title: If a player is significantly behind in time, does it mean he's bound to lose?
Let's focus on FIDE classical chess finals historically.

Caruana is always behind in time control, thinks more, waste more energy.

Statistically speaking, did the players who played faster won more titles? Is Caruana showing signs of weakness?

# Answer
I don't know about statistics, but I do know that they are not "bound" to lose. It depends on the position. Is it easy to play, or is it a very sharp, tactical position? Also, is there a time-increment? Often, in classical FIDE games, there is. Based on experience, I can tell you that it can be very stressful being low on time in a long game, even if there is an increment. However, if psychological (personal) influences are ignored, `it very much depends on the position and on the time-increment`.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: tournament, fide, world-championship, time-control, time-management
---


title: Comparison between best defense moves

text:
# Question
Title: Comparison between best defense moves
I am a novice player. I have just come across the Sicilian defense on the Internet which is also stated as "aggressive defense". The French defense (1.e4 e6) also is good. Does the French defense cramp Black's position in the midgame as a result of which it is considered next to Sicilian ? Because I find the French defense to be structurally more organised than the Sicilian.

# Answer
> 1 votes
I'm not certain what you exactly mean with `it is considered next to the Sicilian`. However, first of all, I would like to state that the `Sicilian Defense` is not always aggressive. It depends on the line you play. Often, if White castles Queenside, the game becomes very sharp. However, if White castles Kingside, the game often becomes less sharp.

The biggest problem with the `French Defence` is the development of Black's White Squared Bishop. The French has either very sharp lines and less sharp lines, such as `1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 exd5`, known as the `Exchange Variation`.

But in general, both openings can be really aggressive. You could take a look at:

For the `Sicilian Defense`:

`Sicilian Defense, Dragon Variation, Yugoslav Attack`

`Sicilian Defense, Dragadorf Variation`

`Sicilian Defense, Najdorf Variation, English Attack`

And for the `French Defense`:

`French Defense, Winawer, Poisoned Pawn Variation`. `French Defense, King's Indian Attack`.

Again, I'm not sure what answer you're looking for, but I believe that these (aggressive) lines may be very helpful comparing them. Seeing games (especially of higher-rated players, such as GMs, makes the opening-ideas a lot more clear, so I suggest doing that.

---
Tags: sicilian-defense, french-defense
---


title: Queen's Gambit Accepted Nc3 VS Nd2

text:
# Question
Title: Queen's Gambit Accepted Nc3 VS Nd2
Usually I play somewhere around move 5-Nc3 but I might start playing Nd2 more instead to get a different dynamic in the game.

Is this advised? Does this have dire consequences in QGA?

# Answer
> 5 votes
Unless you have a good reason, why would you block your own queen bishop and release tension on the important d5 square?

The idea of the gambit is to intensify pressure on the d5 square. Volunteering yourself away by Nd2 is unusual.

# Answer
> 0 votes
Agree with SmallChess answer. However, Nge2 ( you are talking about your Ng1 Knight, correct? ) is still problematic even if your bishop is out. In QGA lines where Black pushes queenside pawns the Knight on c3 often likes to retreat to e2 after ..b4 where the knight is well placed to spring back into action.

---
Tags: opening, queens-gambit-accepted
---


title: Why is this a draw?

text:
# Question
Title: Why is this a draw?
I just played a game of chess on my Mac and the Mac shows me this as a draw (I'm white). I can't get my head around it. Why is this a draw?

# Answer
> 3 votes
This is a case of stalemate. Black has no legal moves available, therefore the game is drawn.

# Answer
> 2 votes
This type of situation is called a stalemate in which the opponent is unable to play the next move ( probably because of king's check) but is not completely checkmated. To avoid it, ensure that you completely mate the opponent king. The probability of this kind of situation occuring is increased when you have more pieces (like Rook, Queen which can mate the king) and you don't actually know which piece is already blocking the opponent king's road beforehand.

---
Tags: draw
---


# Question
Title: Where does the phrase "Botvinnik moment" come from?
In his analysis of the first game in the 2018 world championship, Antonio Radić says that on move 9. ... b7-b6, Carlsen took six minutes to make a move that he probably already knew:

> And now Carlsen again goes b6, but it did take him some six minutes for this move. As the other moves Carlsen played relatively quickly, so I don't think this is a new position for him. I think he actually came very much prepared and he was just like a **Botvinnik moment**, where he takes six minutes to think about a move he already prepared.

The only other instance of "Botvinnik moment" was in a comment on the game Raymond Keene vs Mikhail Botvinnik, Hastings, 1966-1967. The annotation for the last move says, "At which point Botvinnik gasped, raised his hand to his forehead, and resigned," and a commenter added, "We have all been there and had this Botvinnik moment."

This is clearly not what Agadmator is referring to. Was Botvinnik really known for taking a relatively long time for moves that he had prepared? Is "Botvinnik moment" a common phrase for this?

# Answer
It is/was a common advice, in a game with a classical time-control, to take a small break during the opening instead of flashing out the moves, even if you know them by heart. The idea is to 'warm-up' your brain, to refresh your knowledge about the main ideas and plans in the variation, and to avoid starting out with a very long think after the first move by your opponent that you had not anticipated: first that would give him information about how deep your preparation was, second your very first thought would be about a difficult and important decision - when any mistake might be very consequential.

When he took a few minutes before playing 9...b6 (even though he already knew he would play that move), Carlsen was most probably mentally rehearsing the possible variations from that point, refreshing his positionnal guidelines in the given pawn structure and remembering which previous games of Caruana had already been played from similar positions.

The advice was originally spread within the infamous post-WWII 'Soviet Chess School', so it doesn't come as a surprise if it is somehow associated with Botvinnik - possibly Botvinnik formulated it first or endorsed it in a publication.

I consider the Keene-Botvinnik 'moment' to be something totally different: the commentator only stress out that every player has already found himself in that embarassing situation of having to resign a long-fought game after an oversight.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: terminology, time-management, botvinnik
---


title: Online Resource for Opening Plans

text:
# Question
Title: Online Resource for Opening Plans
I have been searching for a while for an online (preferably free) resource for opening plans. Up till now my study of openings has consisted of looking at popular lines and some master games. Is there any website or e-book that you are aware of that focuses on the plans behind each opening?

# Answer
The St. Louis Chess Club has a YouTube page full of video lectures, many of which delve into the opening ideas. iChess.net also has such videos, for example: "The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings! IM Vlaeri Lilov (Webinar Replay)"

Then there are some wiki pages that actually have decent explanation of some openings.
> 2 votes

# Answer
I had this book:

> https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Chess-Wisdom-Eric-Schiller/dp/1580423442

It's not free but it's simple to read for openigs.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: opening
---


# Question
Title: Why are there no more exhibition games between top players and computers?
The 1997 match between Kasparov and Deep Blue is likely the most famous chess match in history. This is because it was ground breaking - for the first time ever a computer had beaten the best player in the world.

The complete history of man versus machine contests is on Wikipedia, and it suggests that people lost interest after Kramnik lost 0-4-2 to deep fritz in 2006. Since 2007 or 2008, there has not been another serious match.

Is this just because computers are so much better now? What about odds matches? I know Rybka on a regular PC managed to draw a Grandmaster with white, where white was missing a rook, and black was missing a knight. Do people just find such matches boring?

Is there just no interest in watching a player such as Magnus Carlsen vs Rybka, or is it just that the players would never agree to it? (Or both)

# Answer
There are a combination of answers to this question. I will answer in what is, in my opinion, descending importance.

1. It's just boring now. Initially this was a case of human pride. A few decades ago it was a commonly held belief that no computer could ever perform at the master level or beat a grand master. It quickly became apparent that this was not the case. Due to the exponentially increasing power of computer hardware and sophistication of engine development grand master after grand master fell as systems went from needing to run on specialized hardware to beat a world class player to being able to run on a modern $1500 USD laptop. Notice that the rise of the Intel Core processor seems to fit with your time frame for lack of interest.
2. In the developed world we have become accustomed to the fact that computers can out-perform humans in nearly any field and I think most people just accept the fact that narrow AI will eventually have a place in every field - even if most don't have the vocabulary to express the idea in that way. Narrow (or Weak) AI is artificial intelligence that has expert, human level ability in only a single thing, such as chess. Strong AI is the boogieman of the Terminator movies and the Matrix.
3. Because of number 1 and number 2 there is no money in it. IBM put a lot of money into the Deep Thought/Deep Blue matches for PR reasons. Now it's Watson and language. And if there is no money, who's going to agree to play?

AI has moved on to driving cars and diagnosing cancer and heart disease. Chess was only ever just a stepping stone to more important things that can make money.
> 26 votes

# Answer
This is no more a challenge between Human & Computer . Man vs. Machine is over .

* Earlier this was a curiosity . This was not only related to the field of Chess but People from other professions wanted to know who is better .
* Playing against a top rated Computer somewhat seems lack of creativity . Computer mostly plays tactical and their opening repertoire is so vast that a Player needs to go out of the Box to think somewhat new and defeat it .
* Now almost every Computer rates to almost 3000+ Elo which is almost 200 points higher than the World's best player . So mathematically it seems Computer will win but it may not happen always but surely it does not rouse the Interest .

When Kasparov got defeated in 1997 he was shaken and even putting up his Best play he could not repeat the same in 1996 . So from there the Chess World's verdict was that a Computer can be made stronger and can defeat anybody .
> 2 votes

# Answer
It's not true that there are no more exhibition games between humans and computers. There're no more serious games between humans and computers, on equal terms, from the starting position; but there are still exhibitions on unequal terms. Hikaru Nakamura is the highest-profile player willing to play against engines, and he's said he does so because he enjoys the challenge of trying to beat the machine.

Here're some examples:

Nakamura vs. Komodo 2016 (Komodo wins 2.5-1.5)

Nakamura vs. Komodo 2018 (Nakamura wins vs. all the lower-levels, loses against the top level; also includes three games against Komodo MCTS)

Maxime Vachier-Lagrave vs. Komodo

Some of the odds games are actually quite fun, and led to unique strategies. For example it's commonly known that when playing against computers, go for long-term positional duels; in some of the odds games though MVL was actively trying to *open* the position. The "knightmare" starting position is also one-of-a-kind, and only a computer can hope to play with the white pieces.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: engines, world-championship
---