# Question
Title: Training plan for going from High Class A/Low Expert to National Master... Help?
I'm currently hovering around 1970 USCF and am lucky enough that in the next 6 months, I have nearly nothing to do. I'm a returning student, 27 years old, who only needs 1 class to get my degree. I don't need a job currently as my housing is paid for through scholarship.

So, I've decided to take a make a strong leap towards one of my life aspirations, which is to achieve the NM title. I know I'd have to play in a ridiculous amount of tournaments in the next 6 months to get there, but that is okay (I've got the time).

My problem is that I need some structure to really push ahead. If I'm not given any structure or set one for myself, I'll probably play League of Legends and Dragon Age Inquisition and then go... crap, wth was I doing!?

I've tried putting a few plans together, but everything seems a little rough. I know I need work across the board (Opening, Middlegame, Endgame, Calculation, Strategy, etc.) but due to the sheer volume of stuff, I'm a little lost.

I also have nearly unlimited resources. I have Chessbase, have roughly 200 books in CBH format along with another 300 or 400 books as PDFs. If there is a good chess book, I probably have it (which adds to my problem of figuring out what in the world I need to focus on).

I know I can set aside 3 hours a day, every day for certain (weekends included). More than 3 hours and some days I may have to cut it short. Any help in creating a solid training plan of what I should work on each day?

# Answer
I think you need 3 components to your campaign:

1) Play lots of tournament chess (which you are planning on anyway) preferably against players stronger and much stronger (+200) than you.

2) Analyze your own games and those of your opponents (where the draw is made far enough in advance and you can find their games - over time you will have games that you have played against them).

3) A course of theoretical study.

In your game analysis you are looking to identify when and how you lose games with a view to fixing your problems. Feed them into a chess engine. Stockfish is powerful and free. ChessDB is a good free equivalent of Chessbase in case you have an old or crippled version. At this stage you are aiming to identify lapses of concentration, weak tactical ability / poor chess imagination and "drift" where you aimlessly let your advantage slip away (planlessness or bad plans) or that of your opponent gradually build up (poor fighting spirit).

When you analyze your future opponents' games you are looking to see what they play against your repertoire and look for chances to unsettle them and take the initiative. Prepare what you are going to play against their different likely possibilities and familiarize yourself with the plans appropriate to the position.

In your theoretical studies you are going to want to systematically address 3 or 4 areas.

1) Opening preparation. Decide which openings suit your style and available time for study. Very sharp, current openings will require a lot of work to stay uptodate. You may prefer to limit your required study by choosing openings where you can quickly limit your opponents good replies.

2) Every time you lose an ending or draw one you should have won make a point of going over the theory of that particular ending in something like one of John Nunn's books. Gratuitously study endings you are unfamiliar with. This may not pay off in immediate extra points from getting into these endings (although over time it likely will) but it will improve your general endgame play and in particular your approach to the endgame. A good example of this would be KNBvK.

3) Hone tactics. There are lots of books out there stuffed of tactical problems. Pick one and do a few every day.

4) General chess study. There are several book-series courses out there. The most famous is Dvoretsky's "School of Chess Excellence" series. No offence meant, but I think this is likely to be too advanced for you. I have several of these on my bookshelves but have never managed to read more than a few pages. Maybe when you are going for your IM or GM title ;-). Yusupov has done 3 series of 3 books each - "Build Up Your Chess", "Boost your chess" and "Chess Evolution" which I would recommend you start with. I'm a similar level to you and have actually worked through 2 out of the 9 books and felt I got a lot out of them. You have the time so work through them systematically.

Under the heading of general chess study you should also read "left field" books which will broaden your chess outlook. Example books would be Jonathan Rowson's "Chess for Zebras" and "The Seven Deadly Chess Sins", John Watson's "Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy", Willy Hendriks' "Move First, Think Later"
> 3 votes

---
Tags: software, training, books, study
---


title: Maximum possible movement in a turn

text:
# Question
Title: Maximum possible movement in a turn
I've read that for any position, there are on average approximately 35 possible moves. But what's the maximum number of possible moves for a position?

# Answer
> 18 votes
After some searching, it seems that this composition is the current record holder. 218 moves; legal position with promotions:

```
R6R/3Q4/1Q4Q1/4Q3/2Q4Q/Q4Q2/pp1Q4/kBNN1KB1 w - - 0 1

```

Another version of the position (same number of moves):

```
3Q4/1Q4Q1/4Q3/2Q4R/Q4Q2/3Q4/1Q4Rp/1K1BBNNk w - - 0 1

```

**Bonus:**

79 moves (for black); from actual game between Davis and Panchanathan, source from Tim Krabbe's list of chess records:

```
4r1k1/p4pp1/2n2n1B/2b5/N6Q/P2q1N2/1r4PP/R4R1K w - - 0 1

```

99 moves (for white); all pieces on board:

```
q2Q3r/n6R/kpB1N1K1/p1p1Bppp/1PN3P1/1n1pp1b1/P1PPPP1P/r5Rb w - - 0 1

```

164 moves (both sides counted); all pieces on board:

```
R6R/pbpppK2/1B1QNNp1/1p3p1p/P1P3P1/1Pnnq1b1/2kPPPBP/r6r w - - 0 1

```

324 moves (both sides counted):

```
1QqQqQq1/r6Q/Q6q/q6Q/B2q4/q6Q/k6K/1qQ1QqRb w - - 0 1

```

412 moves (both sides counted); a curiosity, illegal position:

```
QQqQqQqq/q6Q/Q6q/q6Q/Q6q/q6Q/Q6q/QqQqQqQq w - - 0 1

```

Main source: Guide to Fairy Chess. The book is a bit old, so there might be new record holders, but if that's the case, I was unable to find them.

# Answer
> 4 votes
This position from actual play has 79 moves available for Black

# Answer
> 4 votes
This is a legal layout with 195 possible moves. I'm sure it isn't the absolute maximum, since I just made this one by creating a pattern with the promoted Queens and then continually optimizing the layout from there. It should give you some idea about how you might achieve the maximum number of possible moves though.

* Thanks to bof for finding a way to add 2 additional moves.

---
Tags: problems, records
---


title: Opening with Nf3 - beginner

text:
# Question
Title: Opening with Nf3 - beginner
I came across the opening Nf3 wich I find very beatiful. I know that it could lead to the Réti opening. My question is: beside the Réti opening what are the most commun openings following the Nf3 and what are considered to be the weackness of this move?

# Answer
> 6 votes
`1.Nf3` can transpose into almost any opening depending on your opponent and you, it is ultra-flexible.

Just to show its flexibility:

If you play `1.Nf3` and your opponent responds with `1...d5` then you can play `2.c4` to go into the Reti or `2.g3` to maintain flexibility and play the King's Indian Attack or some other pseudo-slav with Bf5/g4, all this stuff. Or you could play `2.d4` and it would transpose to a Queen's Pawn opening then from that point it would be a different story.

The same goes with `1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4` where it transposes to a queen's pawn opening with an early Nf3.

As user3671618 said you could also go into King's Pawn openings after `1.Nf3 c5 2.e4` which would be a Sicilian.

Also after `1.Nf3 g6 2.e4` would also transpose to a modern.

The point is that most Grandmasters use 1.Nf3 as a trans positional tool, like for example to get to the Catalan after `1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.0-0 Be7 5.c4` and later d4 and White has avoided all the Bb4+ problems associated with employing the Catalan through its classical move order which is out of the scope of this post. Of Course Black does not have to play in such fashion and the drawback of the early fianchetto is that Black usually has the luxury of bringing his dark squared bishop out instead of blocking it in via e6.

`1.Nf3` is mainly used as an ultra-flexible trans-positional tool to avoid certain lines. For example after `1.Nf3 d5` many grandmasters play `2.d4` and so they avoid all the King's Indian, Grunfeld, Nimzo, Benoni, Benko systems as the pawn on d5 is already committed. One of the most famous practitioners of this approach was GM Alexander Wojtkiewicz, there is a famous book series written on him titled Wojo's Weapons, he played `1.Nf3` exclusively as a trans-positional tool.

`1.Nf3` is just as good as `1.e4` and `1.d4`, this can be best explained by the simple opening principle that it develops a Kingside piece towards the center! Former World Champion Vladimir Kramnnik is another `1.Nf3` devotee and many of the World's best players employ it in their repertoires.

The drawbacks are that you just cut out so many openings and lose many options, but this is why many `1.Nf3` players play it! They want to avoid the problematic defenses associated with `1.d4` and `1.e4`. It is mainly used as a move-order trick and to maintain flexibility.

But I would recommend for a beginner not to play `1.Nf3` as many times you would have to venture into the English and complex sub-variations of other openings which I believe contain so many subtle-move orders so `1.d4` or `1.e4` are much better in improving your play since they are much easier to understand for the improving amateur and you gain a greater wider variety of positions from them which exposes you to many different themes and ideas and would contribute greater to your improvement.

# Answer
> 3 votes
Nf3 is part of a lot of openings, so we can find a lot of transpositions, for example:
Slav defense 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 d5 3.c4 c6
King Indian defense 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3
Queen Gambit Declined 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 c6
Sicilian defense 1.Nf3 c5 2.e5
English opening 1.Nf3 c5 2.c4

1.Nf3 is not weak, and it is flexible. It is the third most usual first move, after 1.e4 and 1.d4
As a beginner, people will advice you 1.e4 though, because it leads to open games in which you will practice your tactics.

---
Tags: opening, beginner
---


# Question
Title: When Black opens with Nf6 after e4 - Beginner question
I would like to have some analysis in the following setting: `1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5`.

Now, what is best for white? The move `3. c4` continues the attack, but can create a "pawn weakness".

# Answer
> 4 votes
1.e4 Nf6 is called Alekhine Defence. It's an hypermodern opening as it doesn't directly fight for the center but more aim to provoke weakness in White camp and then counter-attack.

Also White has several option, first he can try not to push by playing : 2.Nc3 2.Bc4 as after 2...Nxe4 White get back the pawn with 3.Bxf7 Kxf7 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qd5+

Still, it's better to take the center : 2.e5 Nd5 and now White has to decide whether or not he will push his pawns, so 3 systems are relevant :

1. the modern approach, White delays c4 : 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 just finishing his development without giving weakness
2. 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.exd6 and now Black has a choice between ...exd6 or ...cxd6 depends where he wants to put his bishop f8.
3. the most agressiv : 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 just taking as much space as possible, I think this is the most critical continuation.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Read up on The Alekhine Defense. It's a Hypermodern opening wherein Black purposefully allows his King's knight to be harassed by pawns. The intent of this is for Black to allow White to induce weaknesses in his pawn structure which eventually collapses. On the other hand, if White can keep it together, he retains a tremendous amount of space in which to develop an attack.

Here's an example where Shabalov beats Nakamura with this defense.

```

[Result "0-1"]
[White "Nakamura, Hikaru (2658)"]
[Black "Shabalov, Alexander (2606)"]
[Event "USA-ch"]
[Site "Stillwater"]
[Date "05/18/2007"]
[Round "4"]
[FEN ""]

1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. d4 d6 5. exd6 cxd6 6. Be3 g6 7. d5 Bg7 8. Bd4 Bxd4 9. Qxd4 O-O 10. h4 e5 11. Qd2 f5 12. Nf3 Qf6 13. Nc3 Na6 14. Qh6 Qg7 15. Qd2 h6 16. Nb5 Rf6 17. Qa5 Nd7 18. Qa3 Qe7 19. Be2 e4 20. Nd2 Ne5 21. O-O-O Nc5 22. Kb1 Ncd3 23. Bxd3 Nxd3 24. Rhf1 Bd7 25. Nd4 Qe5 26. Qc3 b5 27. cxb5 Rf7 28. f3 Rc8 29. Nc4 Qxd5 30. fxe4 Qxc4 31. Qxd3 Qxd3+ 32. Rxd3 fxe4 33. Rxf7 exd3 34. Rf1 Rc4 35. Nc6 d2 36. Ne7+ Kg7 37. Rd1 Kf7 38. b3 Rc1+ 0-1

```

# Answer
> -2 votes
It indeed creates a pawn weakness, that's why you should play d4. and if develops his knight, then go one with c4

---
Tags: opening, knights, beginner, alekhines-defense
---


# Question
Title: Forced checkmate examples where engines fail
Do you know example where recent chess engines (Houdini, Rybka, Komodo, ...) failed to find a forced checkmate.

I guess they must find mate in 1 or 2 all the time but maybe are they failing to be as creative as human some times.

# Answer
> 10 votes
Positing this answer in addition to the answers/comments on tablebases and endgames with ridiculously long forced mates.

White to move and win (I do not know the author of this study, unfortunately). The engines will tend to fail on this and similar problems. As far as I tried, all recommend to move hxg8=Q. Some show 0.00 and are soon thereafter putting black in a stalemate; some show slight advantage for white and are trying to play the game out by letting black to activate his pieces. Further explanation (and hint to the solution) given in the spoiler block below the diagram.

```
6r1/p1p1p1pP/P1PpP1P1/8/2P1B3/2K3pp/3P2rq/R5bk w - - 0 1

```

Explanation spoiler:

> The forced mate is not found because the engines use pruning heuristic. It removes certain branches from search tree, after deeming them as irrelevant to the search result (see: http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Pruning). In case of this puzzle, the solution consists of many subsequent sacrifices and its branch tends to be discarded when searching. Note: Possibly, with tweaked parameters and mate-search heuristic when exact number of moves required is provided, they could find the solution, but I have not tried that.

Solution spoiler:

> Depending on black's move choices, a few solutions exist (the idea is always the same, though and up until move 12 the line is always the same, too). Here's an example: 1. hxg8=N d5 2. Bf3 d4+ 3. Kb4 d3 4. Nh6 gxh6 5. g7 h5 6. g8=N h4 7. Nf6 exf6 8. e7 f5 9. e8=N f4 10. Nd6 cxd6 11. c7 d5 12. c8=N dxc4 13. Nb6 c3 14. dxc3 d2 15. Kb3 d1=Q 16. Rxd1 axb6 17. a7 b5 18. a8=Q b4 19. Be2 bxc3 20. Bf1 c2 21. Rc1 f3 22. Qxf3 Bf2 23. Bxg2+#

# Answer
> 4 votes
There are some tricky positions, where it looks like there is no solution, but then it turns out white must be able to take en passant. In these positions engines might overlook the mate, because they don't have the information about the last black move, whereas a human can deduce this information by retrograde analysis.

```
4k2r/8/5B1P/3R1KpP/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1

```

In this position it is impossible to determine which variation leads to mate in two. It is only possible to show that there must be a mate in two-variation. Either black moved the pawn on his last move - then taking en passant leads to mate. Or he moved his king or rook - then king e6 leads to mate, as there is no more castling possible.

Edit: Another answer, that is just as irrelevant for all practical purposes: As we all know thanks to tablebases, there is a big number of forced checkmates out there, that are far beyond the calculation horizon of any engine. Of course we can use tablebases to detect those mates, but it doesn't take any stretch of the imagination, to acknowledge the existence of forced checkmates over thousands of moves, that aren't now, and likely never will be stored in a tablebase.

---
Tags: engines, checkmate
---


# Question
Title: Maximum number of captures in a position
I was wondering what the maximum number of captures in a position is, either in a real game or a problem.

# Answer
I have some records from a book published in 1969. They might have been surpassed since then, but if that is the case, I was not able to locate that information. I guess, since there is no reply after ~2 weeks, this should be better than nothing. These are records for captures by one side.

**74 captures; legal position:**

```
[Title "T. W. Marlow & William Cross, Problem 05/1967"]
[FEN "r1n1n1b1/1P1P1P1P/1N1N1N2/2RnQrRq/2pKp3/3BNQbQ/k7/4Bq2 w - - 0 1"]

```

Additional Source: Die Schwable Chess Problem Database Server

**Edit: In response to the comment - here's a legal position without underpromotions in play, 65 captures possible.**

```
[Title "T. W. Marlow & William Cross, Problem 05/1967"]
[FEN "k2Kb2R/1RrQnQN1/8/BqQbQqQn/8/1QbQqQNB/8/3rQq2 w - - 0 1"]

```

Additional Source: Die Schwable Chess Problem Database Server

Source: *Guide To Fairy Chess* by Anthony Dickins.
> 7 votes

---
Tags: problems, records, captures
---


title: Kings and check

text:
# Question
Title: Kings and check
Is it ever legal for a king to put the other king in check, even if after the king is taken by the opposing king, the king doing the taking puts himself into check?

# Answer
> 3 votes
Simply, no. The rules do not allow this.

BUT, there are two occasions where this is allowed:

* Some Chess Variants : Losers Chess for example.
* In Odds Chess. A not so popular odd was to give the weaker opponent's king two squares to move. Thus, it is possible to check the other king.

# Answer
> 2 votes
This is illegal. A king cannot capture another King. The king is the only chess piece that cannot be captured like other pieces, where they are physically removed from the chess board. The kings cannot be on adjacent squares, that is on squares next to each other.

Please note that my response is for normal chess not the other variants where such moves are allowed.

---
Tags: rules, kings, check
---


# Question
Title: Productive tactical puzzles: random or themed?
Simply, which of the following two approaches will typically improve tactical ability the fastest:

1. Doing puzzles around a known theme or tactical motif - i.e. do 100 puzzles that involve a discovered attack, or a skewer, or mate in 3, mate in 2 etc. etc.
2. Doing random puzzles where you don't know the theme or motif behind the puzzle. You may even throw in a number of puzzles without a tactical solution to simply force you think about the next best move.

I always assumed number 2 would be better, but is there any research/authoritative anecdotes/good reasoning that show it is better to do 1?

# Answer
> 3 votes
In my experience if you are starting out it is better to solve same thematic tactical problems in a series and slowly moving onto other themes. After you get accustomed with the themes random problems or problems which doesn't tell you what to do helps.

# Answer
> 2 votes
I had the same question when I thought about tactical improvement. What seems to be working for me is an "inclusive" approach. Don't stick to one method, as each method seems to be helping in different ways. This applies to degree of difficulty of chess problems as well. At one point in time, I could solve tactics problems rated 1800+ on lichess very easily only to stumble on problems rated 1500 and below. So a mix of all seems to be working well for me.

---
Tags: tactics
---


# Question
Title: Why didn't Giri go for the pawns against Ding Liren (Tata Steel 2015)?
This game at move 69 - https://chess24.com/en/watch/live-tournaments/tataSteelMasters2015/9/1/3

```
[fen "8/2p5/1pBpK1k1/1P1P2N1/7r/8/8/8 w - - 0 1"]
[White "Anish Giri"]
[Black "Ding Liren"]
[Event "Tata Steel Chess"]
[Date "2015.01.20"]

```

Giri thought for 6 minutes and decided to save the knight. Is the continuation for sacrifice, i.e. playing Kd7, really counterintuitive?

# Answer
> 9 votes
When I saw the live broadcast yesterday I was sure he would go for the knight sacrifice. And I still think he probably intended to. It is in no way counterintuitive, I think it is rather the obvious candidate for a winning continuation.

But of course a knight is a knight and the queening of one of the white pawns is still some ten moves away. He probably tried to work it out completely to the point where black has to give his rook and the ending is beyond any doubt one hundred percent winning, and after 68 moves of an extremely hard fought game he just couldn't do it.

And in the end, instead of wasting any more time, he decided to play it safe. So my take on this is that tiredness and the irrational fear to overlook some miracle save lead to a more practical decision.

# Answer
> 7 votes
Why he played something is a question that can only be answered by asking him, or by speculating. However, the following seems reasonable:

It is not the goal of most players to play the strongest move in each position, but it is their goal to win the game.

Perhaps he just analysed till the point where he saw/thought that **Nf3 would be good enough to win the game** and then just played it.

---
Tags: analysis, endgame
---


# Question
Title: Software for tournaments, leaderboards and result tracking
guys,

What kind of software/apps do you use to track your results of games with friends or in clubs?

How do you track your wins/losses and progress while casually playing chess?

# Answer
> 1 votes
I recommend SCID. It's free and works on any operating system, and there are even mobile versions available.

As far as recording your games during casual play, I would just use regular score sheets and enter them in the computer later. If you play online, sites like Chess.com let you download your games in PGN format, which can be imported into SCID or other database software.

Most people who use databases prefer to only include their tournament games, since casual games are going to show patterns that might not apply when you're playing serious chess. You could keep them in a separate database if you really want to record everything.

For fun, see how much of a casual game you can play back from memory after the game is over. You will remember more if:

1. You are consistent with the openings you play.
2. Your moves follow a general plan.
3. You actively concentrate on what is happening on the board, how you got there, and where you're headed. This keeps the sequence of moves fresh and connected, for reconstructing later.

---
Tags: software, tournament
---


# Question
Title: Is 8...c5 good in this position, or does it restrict Black's mobility too much?
```
[fen "rn1qk2r/pbp2ppp/1p1bpn2/8/2P5/5NP1/PB1PPPBP/RN1Q1RK1 b kq - 0 8"]
[White "Villain (2075)"]
[Black "Hero (1950)"]

8... c5

```

I was Black in this position. To me, it immediately looks like the position calls for 8...c5: I need to prevent White from taking over the center, I need more space for my pieces, and I need to protect my queenside from attack on the long diagonal h1-a8. My plan was to play c5 and Qc7 to target the center with all my pieces.

However, after considering the move, I thought that it does not help me much: after I have played for example c5, Qc7, and Nc6, I didn't see any possible continuations. My bishop is going nowhere on the d6-h2 diagonal, and my knights have no good squares nearby if white protects d4, so I would probably need to continue with 0-0, Nfd7 and f6 to put something on e5 to get any control of the game. I also dreamed of building an attack with something like h7-h5-h4 but decided that it takes way too long and white has too many ways to defend.

So I decided that I really need to keep the c5 square free in order to have the choice to play Nc5 or Bc5 (or even Bb4 at some positions) later.

However, the queenside still is a problem, so I ended up playing 8...c6, which allowed 9.Re1 threatening e2-e4-e5, forcing me to block the e5 square with my pawn, resulting in a loss after 12 moves of misery (apparently 9.e4 would have been even better).

After the game, my opponent said that I should have played c5, but didn't say anything after I mentioned that I thought it restricts my mobility too much. Was it really a good move? Was it the least bad idea in this position? Is there something better? How can I know the answer during the game without calculating every variation?

# Answer
I think ...c5 is a good move. The c5 square is not available to your pieces (his d2-d4 would kick your pieces) so you may as well occupy it with the pawn.

...c6 is horrible because you block your b7 bishop which is currently your best piece!

Your position is slightly inferior because White has an extra central pawn available (he did well to manage to exchange his b-pawn for your d-pawn, effectively: he now has a half-open b-file to use, and he has better central control).

You can't allow him to play d4 and e4, you will get crushed. ...c5 stops d4 (or at least, means you can exchange that pair of pawns). At this stage I'd be looking to meet e4 with ...e5 , which would shut down both of his bishops (It harms your bishops too, but his bishops are better than yours, so you gain more out of this deal).

You'd then try to find good squares for your knights. He will undoubtedly go for Nd5 so you'd probably have to exchange that off.

I tried to check this position in opening references, but Black has basically *never* fianchettoed the QB in response to White's system here. We should conclude from this that it's a bad idea. It seems that your QB is strong here -- although you have to watch out for tactics with his knight moving -- , however your other pieces are all uncoordinated.

The most common way to create and support a centre as Black against White's system is ...c6 and ...d5 . I'm guessing that you played ..b6 and ..dxc4 where it would have been much more solid to play ...c6 which is a standard variation against the Reti. It is slightly passive because your bishop is behind its pawns but this is not a serious problem so long as you develop your other pieces smoothly (similar to a reverse Colle System).
> 3 votes

# Answer
c5 looks good to me. I don't see how it restricts your mobility. At this stage in the game your bishop doesn't need to occupy any squares on White's queen side, and could benefit from having a retreat square on c7. As you mentioned, c5 restricts White by challenging control of d4. Overall I think it must increase your mobility because you will have more space. Even if you are playing an opening with a restrained pawn structure, you still want to expand if your opponent plays passively. I think that's the best you have here, along with completing your development.

I don't think there is any way to know that this idea is the best during a game or even after. If there are tactical considerations, you can calculate your way through it, but ideas are unlimited. Grandmasters are always rewriting theory by finding new ideas in old positions.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: opening, strategy
---


# Question
Title: How can I play Colle System against Kingside Fianchetto?
I enjoy the Colle System as white, because it often leads to a strong kingside attack for white without exposing my own King to significant danger.

However, when my opponent castles behind a fianchetto on the kingside, I often struggle to understand how to attack it, as it significantly blunts the attack of my Bishop at `d3`, and advancing kingside pawns would likely open my own King up dangerously.

Can anyone point me to a good example of how to attack a fianchettoed king from the Colle system?

# Answer
> 6 votes
If it conforms to your style of play, one possibility is to switch to a stonewall setup, which generally leads to a king-side pawn storm where the g6 pawn acts as a very convenient lever for opening up your opponent's king. It must be said, though, that an early king-side fianchetto followed by `...c5` to undermine the white center is probably one of the best and most aggressive ways to meet the Colle system, so if you're not prepared to vary your approach, you shouldn't be surprised if black achieves easy equality immediately out of the opening.

# Answer
> 2 votes
I'd recommend against a Grunfeld white play reversed Catalan lines Against a KID either the Torre or... Or.. Play the French vs KIA lines as white!!! Pretty solid lines

Stonewall against delayed c5! Sure! Chances are your playing a Sicilian fanatic who plays that set up against everything... And who at the very least is gonna hate you for A) playing an opening he's not familiar with and that will not give him any of his normal attacking lines.

in the End U will have to learn solid line for the Dutch and a Anti Benoni line. Should be doable with the standard opening moves d4 Nf3 & e3 etc... won't be a Colle.. but ya can't have your cake and eat it to...

Just don't go chasing openings .. stick with the Colle & master it and then add to it where you think necessary. Work on your middle and end game technique and study tactics...

---
Tags: opening, fianchetto, kingside, colle-system
---


title: Could black have taken the queen here?

text:
# Question
Title: Could black have taken the queen here?
Could black have taken the queen here?

Note the bishop and the knight

```
 [FEN "r5k1/1b3Qpp/5b2/p1p1N3/2P2P1P/8/P1N5/K4Rn1 w - - 0 1"]
 [Title "Can black take the queen?"]

```

# Answer
No, black could not have taken the queen. Taking the queen would put black's king into check, which is not legal. Black cannot take the knight either because black's king would still be in check.
> 5 votes

# Answer
This is a common confusion for beginners. The rule is that no player is ever allowed to expose their king to check. Never Ever.

The logic of this rule comes down to the fact that the game is turn based, and if the black king captures the white queen, black will lose his king first. The rules of chess don't allow it to go that far, but that doesn't change the principle that the first player to lose their king loses the game.

Chess variants are obviously an exception, with one popular variant being speed chess. If you are playing a game with a very short time control (e.g. 5 minutes per side) it is generally okay to capture the king. Most players consider this a reasonable way to deal with the limited time, where every second counts. If you don't realize your king is in check, stopping the game to sort it out pretty much ruins the game. An exception to this exception is online speed chess, where the computer is able to block illegal moves instantly.
> 5 votes

# Answer
Versions of this question are regularly asked here at chess.SE. Notice that the rules of the game leave no room for ambiguity.

Fide Laws of Chess, Article 3.9:

> The king is said to be 'in check' if it is attacked by one or more of the opponent's pieces, even if such pieces are constrained from moving to that square because they would then leave or place their own king in check. No piece can be moved that will either expose the king of the same colour to check or leave that king in check.

It is not legal for black to take the queen since it would expose the black king to check.
> 5 votes

---
Tags: rules
---


title: Is this a checkmate for White?

text:
# Question
Title: Is this a checkmate for White?
```

[FEN "8/3RkQ2/3B4/8/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

**Is there a way out for Black?**
My son and I finished this way (only the relevant parts of the position are shown in the diagram), but reading about stalemates now has us confused. We are new to the game and I would appreciate an explanation.

# Answer
This would be checkmate, because the king is in check and has no valid move to escape. But it's impossible to get into this position if you follow normal chess rules. The most you can do is a double-check (using a discovered attack), but your position shows a triple-check.

The stalemate rule is only applicable when the king is not in check, so it doesn't apply here.
> 11 votes

# Answer
This is not checkmate, since it's not possible to get in this position.
> 1 votes

# Answer
This is a trick question. Technically the chess board is invalid. Where is the white King? Still, this is a check mated position. This is the second check mated position
> 0 votes

# Answer
Here is explanation about Discovered Check: Discovered check happens when one piece moved and after moving that piece the attack of anther piece touches the king it is discovered check.

Discovered Check could be happend and result maximum 2 checks Suppose an empty Chess board and if my enemy's black king on E file on E8 square and my white rook is on E1 and white bishop is on E2 then if i move my white bishop to H5 square now note the situation My bishop is attacking from H5 square to my enemy king My rook's way is cleared now and rook now attacking from E1 square.

this is one illustration of Discovered check many other possibilities could happen in game.

You could play with me on Chess.com my username is hasanbadshah :)

remember two rooks can never create a discovered check. but queen+rook can create it would be like of rook move and check, which result cleared the queen's way which also threatening the enemy king so it is discovered. If any confusion u have feel free to post.
> -1 votes

---
Tags: rules, checkmate, stalemate
---


# Question
Title: Does anyone know what happened to nowinchess.com?
I used to go to the http://www.nowinchess.com/ website to see what are the new tournaments, and grab PGN files of past tournaments. It was simple, and excellent. Suddenly, two weeks ago another content appeared, not in English... Does anyone have any idea what happened?

# Answer
They are rebuildin the site. You could find the tournaments in nowinchess.com/wp/live.

Probably you should write a comment to ask them to translate the site. If you need help I can do it for you.
> 1 votes

# Answer
There wasn't any upload after middle of the year 2013. When I was there last September I already had the feeling that the service has stopped.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: websites
---


# Question
Title: Plans for White and Black in the Queen's Gambit Accepted
I often play this variation of the Queen's Gambit Accepted:

```
[fen ""]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 e6 5. Bxc4 a6 6. O-O c5 7. dxc5 Qxd1 8. Rxd1 Bxc5 9. a3 b5 10. Be2 Bb7 11. b4 Be7 12. Bb2 Nbd7 13. Nc3 O-O 14. Rac1

```

My question is, what are the plans for White & Black? I get a bit lost when I reach this position.

Also, any other tips on my opening would be most appreciated

# Answer
I'm not an expert on this line, but one idea from "Study chess with Matthew Sadler" stuck in my mind: To play against the b7-bishop with f3 and e4. So that might be an objective for white. For black this is probably harder to archive, because the Nc3 is ready to jump into d5.

But this Nc3 instead of Nd2 gives black a different target: The square c4. Say after 14…Rc8 15.Nd4 Ne5 makes some sense, to jump into c4 and possibly acquire the bishop pair. Though after 16.Nb3 this doesn't yet work tactically, because of 16…Nc4 17.Bxc4 Rxc4 18.Na5 Rc7 19.Nxb5 …

So maybe 14…Rc8 15.Nd4 Nb6 is better, because on b6 the knight will be more stable. Then 16. Nb3 and possibly Nfd5 with the idea to exchange the Nc3 and go Bb7-d5-c4.

This was a bit of a stream of consciousness, but I'll try to sum up:

* Playing f3 and e4 to blunt the bishop b7 is an idea.
* The squares c5,a5 and c4,a4 are targets for the pieces. Especially the knights can be very annoying if they reach such a square.
* There is always the idea of playing a4/a5 to try and liquidate the whole queenside, especially if there is still a rook on the a-file.
* This might look like a very calm position, but with so many pieces still on the board, you should definitely look out for tactical possibilities.
* If you don't find anything better to do, you can move your king closer to the centre: It is always possible, that some mass exchanges leave you in an endgame, where the king centralisation will be key.
> 4 votes

---
Tags: queens-gambit-accepted
---


title: UCI engine state notion

text:
# Question
Title: UCI engine state notion
Hi guys I have a problem with using stockfish engine which is using UCI protocol. I wanted to play black and the computer white. But so far I think that uci engine has no notion of state and it gives me the same best moves over. I wanted to know if there's a way to set UCI engine to play as black or white so when am playing as white and gives it move in FEN string notation. It will suggest a move to black.

I have the following log below:

```
...
option name Emergency Move Time type spin default 30 min 0 max 5000
option name Minimum Thinking Time type spin default 20 min 0 max 5000
option name Slow Mover type spin default 80 min 10 max 1000
option name UCI_Chess960 type check default false
...

uciok
setoption name Hash value 128
ucinewgame

position startpost moves Ng1f3
info depth 1 seldepth 1 score cp 82 nodes 27 nps 27000 time 1 multipv 1 pv e2e4
info depth 2 seldepth 2 score cp 9 nodes 155 nps 155000 time 1 multipv 1 pv d2d4
 d7d5
info depth 3 seldepth 3 score cp 56 nodes 278 nps 278000 time 1 multipv 1 pv d2d
4 d7d5 g1f3
info depth 4 seldepth 4 score cp 8 nodes 749 nps 749000 time 1 multipv 1 pv d2d4
 g8f6 g1f3 d7d6
...
stop

bestmove e2e4 ponder e7e5

Comment : I make a move e2e4 and computer makes a move e7e5

position startpos e7e5 (based on last computer move)

go infinite
wait (5sec)

bestmove e2e4 ponder e7e5

```

Why is it still e2e4 ponder e7e5, the same best move as the last one. How can I set it to give a best move for black player (me). What kind of commands do i need to set here? Desperately need your help on this guys. Thanks

# EDITED

Guys I really appreciate your healthy discussion over this. But I only understand a few concepts regarding UCI engine.

Here's what I have understood so far. -\> There is no FEN to PGN conversion because FEN is the positions of the chess pieces after a number of moves and its not possible to convert it to PGN because FEN doesn't contain the sequence necessary to be converted to PGN -\> PGN on the other hand contains the moves of the players in sequence so it can easily be converted to FEN

Right now my problem is that DGTs electronic board only gives FEN where I use it as an input to our application and am still researching on how I can get PGN from it. I know Fritz shows the PGN as well as other GUI's.
Any ideas on where to proceed from here?

# Answer
Use the "position fen" command.

For example, take a look at http://support.stockfishchess.org/kb/advanced-topics/uci-protocol. From the example in the link, you could easily change to black's move by

"position fen rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR b KQkq - 0 1"

Simply change "... w KQkq" to "... b KQkq". The letter tells the engine which color to move for the position.

To start an infinite analysis, use "go infinite".

Please note that "position startpos" assumes a valid move sequence. Failed to do so will result in undefined behavior - it could crash, do nothing or something else.

Edited:

1. FEN and PGN are two different things. FEN represents a particular position on the board. PGN is the whole game. You don't convert from one to the other. Talking about conversion is meaningless.
2. You don't do "position startpos FEN1 FEN2 FEN3 FEN4", please read the UCI specification again. You give the moves with the startpos command, not the position itself.
3. Stockfish doesn't care how you tell it to reach a particular position.
4. There is a comment that giving a startpos would be a better way to start a game. But why? Think again, and ask yourself, why?? Why would you think giving a command like "startpos e2e4 e7e5 .... ..... (20 more moves) .... .... " is better than simply giving out the FEN of the position? You typically use a chess GUI to interact with an engine, and the chess GUI must have its own chess-board validator. It's quite easy to generate a FEN string from a validator. However, generating a sequence of moves from the initial position would involve looping over all moves, the complexity of the operation is O(n) where n is the number of moves in the game. Furthermore, you'd have to reserve extra buffer to save the long string. The engine would then have to parse the long string, again this is a slow operation. The startpos is strictly unnecessary.

Edited Again for the poster

PGN can technically be converted into a sequence of FEN positions, but it's meaningless. Nobody does that. Your confusion is all based on the fact that you don't know how to interact with an engine. Don't worry, I'll guide you.

Before you can do anything, you'll need a board generator in your own code. You'll need it because you need something to tell Stockfish what to do, and the only way to do that is with a board generator. Every single chess GUI has it.

Make sure you can use your board generator to convert your position to a FEN or a sequence of moves from the initial position. Either way works, you don't need a PGN. I repeat, you DON'T NEED a PGN to interact with a chess engine. Forget about the PGN, period.

Now, it's easy. You make a move on your physical chess board. Your board generator updates the move and sends the update to Stockfish. The update could be a FEN string or a sequence of moves from the initial position. It doesn't really matter which way you go. I recommend the FEN approach because it'll be easier for you to debug your UCI session.
> 2 votes

# Answer
When you give the position, you always have to give all the game moves, if you start with 'startpos'. The command basically means: Start with the starting position and then execute all these moves and then start to think …

'position startpos e7e5' is probably just the starting position, because e7e5 isn't a legal move. After all in the starting position it's white to move. (To relinquish the move right you'd have to give a zero move which is 0000, I think.)

So it just isn't thinking about the position you think it is thinking about.

There surely is a way to just update the position held internally by the engine, but I'm too lazy to look it up now.

Edit: As you are a chess-stackexchange (and therefore maybe chess-) newcomer, I also want to add, that possibly you won't have much fun playing against stockfish. The top engines just crush every human player. If your goal is to play an open game with chances for both sides, there are probably better options …

Edit: So actually this is the situation:

* The DGT-board gives you a FEN.
* You'll give "position fen FEN" to stockfish.
* Stockfish gives you a bestmove.
* You'll give the move to the robot and it executes it on the board.
* Your human player makes a move.
* … and back to the first point.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: analysis, engines, stockfish, evaluation, uci
---


# Question
Title: In sicilian defence, why would white always exchange the c5 pawn. What harm would it do otherwise?
In 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4, why does white play and exchange the c5 pawn? If white does not do so, how can I take advantage of this?

As an example: 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 e6 3.Bb3 Nc6 4.Nf3

what is the best response from black?

# Answer
> 6 votes
White doesn't always play d4.

Apart from the line you mention, there is also the King's Indian Attack and the Closed Sicilian, where white plays g3 and Bg2, the Grand Prix Attack, where white plays f4 and the Rossolimo, where white plays Bb5 (after Nc6 or d6).

In all those lines d3 is usually played instead of d4.

But 3.d4 is the most common line: It removes the influence of blacks c5-pawn on the centre and installs a knight on a very central square. This leads to a space advantage for white, which can often result in quick attacking victories. Black on the other hand has longterm trumps in his two central pawns and open c-file. This setup leads to strategically and tactically very rich positions, which explains part of the popularity.

Not playing 3.d4 doesn't lead to a worse position for white. It only arguably makes it easier for black to reach an equal position. Even the line you give, which really is unusual, doesn't guaranty black an advantage. He will probably just continue to develop with Nf6, Be7, 0-0 and maybe at one point expand on the queenside or play d5.

---
Tags: sicilian-defense, 1.e4
---


title: N vs. B ending, pawns on both sides

text:
# Question
Title: N vs. B ending, pawns on both sides
I had this position today, with White to play:

```
    [FEN "8/1p3kpp/p1n1p3/3p4/3P4/1P2B3/P2K1PPP/8 w - - 0 25"]

```

What should White's plan be to try and win, and are there any particular pawn structures White should aim for? Does White actually have any advantage?

In the game I got to the following position:

```
[FEN "8/2B5/2n1pk2/p2p2p1/Pp1P2P1/1P2KP2/8/8 w - - 1 35"]

```

and there seems to be nothing (the computer doesn't find any way to make progress either).

I was hoping to use the fact that I have a tempo available (Bc7-b6) to force my king through the kingside after something like f4 gxf4; Kxf4 Kg6; g5 , and move my king around Kh5-h6, however Black always has ...e5! to break out once my bishop is on b6 and my king is not covering e5 or d3. The actual game followed my idea but it ended up in a wrong-colour rook pawn situation.

# Answer
> 4 votes
While this position is probably a dead draw, there is no way white could claim even the slightest advantage here.

Sure, there are pawns on both sides of the board, but the d4-pawn closes the juiciest diagonals for the bishop and is an eternal target for the black knight.

Even more important is the fact, that after black plays b5 the queenside is completely sealed. The white king cannot intrude and the bishop cannot attack anything. The same isn't true for the black knight … if white walks his king to the kingside he has to take possible counter play on the queenside into account.

Just playing g6 and putting the king on f7 should be enough to defend the kingside for black. But if ever black really starts to march on the kingside with king and pawns, this frees up the black knight not only for queenside counterplay but also for kingside defence. I don't see how that would ever result in a white breakthrough.

So to sum up: This just isn't a position where white can put any pressure on black. Of course in the game apparently black put a lot of pawns on black squares, turning them into targets for the white bishop, but even that wasn't enough to tip the scales.

# Answer
> 3 votes
> Does White actually have any advantage?

No, White has no advantage here whatsoever. With proper play, the game should end in a draw.

Why I am I so certain that White has nothing in this position? Well, let us analyze the position using the diagram I submitted below:

Red color represent squares that Black knight control, while pink color represents squares controlled by Black pawns. Green color represents squares on which Black king can penetrate into White camp.

By looking at the diagram, you can clearly see the barrier knight and pawns on the queenside create for the White king. You can see that Black has sealed the queenside and White can not create any counterplay there.

White can not penetrate through center of the board either, as we can clearly see on the diagram, since `d5` \+ `e6` pawns and knight block entry points.

This leaves kingside as the last hope, but Black king has a route ( marked with green color ) that can take to prevent White king to penetrate. White **can not** stop Black king to take this route.

Black bishop has no targets to attack, and is bound to the defense of the `d4` pawn. This pawn is a serious weakness in White camp and the biggest problem is that White **can not** get rid of it.

Black knight is very well posted, and restricts White pieces to the defense of the weak pawn. Black king is about to get active as well.

## CONCLUSION:

White must play `g4!` in order to prevent Black king from penetrating. After that move he has sufficient resources to defend with ease.

> What should White's plan be to try and win

White must wait for a mistake, after playing `g4!`.

> are there any particular pawn structures White should aim for?

White has better minor piece for the endgame, but that weak pawn hinders him to utilize his advantage. In endgames, bishop is always stronger than a knight, *if the side with the bishop has no weaknesses.*

White should strive to create imbalance by forcing Black somehow to play `...e5`. The passed pawn is nothing special as it is central one, and bishop is fast enough to catch it on time, so Black would not have much.

On the other hand, after `...e5`, white should aim to create a passed `h` pawn in order to play for the win. That pawn should reach `h6` so the bishop could defend it from afar, while keeping "an eye" on the Black passed pawn.

This would tie Black king/knight to the proximity of the White passed pawn, enabling White king to possibly penetrate on the queenside.

Of course, this is all hypothetical talking, Black would never allow such a thing to happen. Your question was about winning pawn structure, so my answer is to get the pawn structure where you have passed `h` pawn, and `d` pawn is exchanged. That is the pawn structure White should aim for.

*Your second diagram looks very promising, but at the moment I have no time to analyze it. I believe you could have won with slightly better play. He (or she?) made such terrible moves, that if pressured just for few more moves, he/she would crack ( I am 100% sure of this ). Maybe I will update this post with thorough analysis -\>let us hope that I will solve the problems at work.*

Best regards, feel free to leave a comment if you need help or you have anny follow up questions.

# Answer
> 1 votes
The following is from a post I wrote for the Chess Endgame Facebook page.

> We have seen how bishops and knights maneuver against each other when one of them has an extra pawn to promote. Next we will look at positions where the true strengths and weaknesses of each piece play the deciding factor.
>
> In general, the bishop is stronger in positions with pawns on both wings (especially passed pawns), due to its long range movement. The knight excels with pawns on only one wing. However, an exception can occur when pawns are on both wings, but the bishop's pawns are locked on the same square color as the bishop itself. In such a situation, the knight can take its time moving across the board, because the bishop will suffer from its limited access to only 32 squares.
>
> In these situations, the differences between the minor pieces are often more significant than possessing a protected passed pawn.

You already analyzed the position with a computer, so I hope these general strategy tips will be helpful.

---
Tags: endgame, minor-pieces
---


title: Ranking of Baadur Jobava

text:
# Question
Title: Ranking of Baadur Jobava
I wanted to know the ranking of Baadur Jobava after his disastrous tournament in Tata Steel. But the only updated ranking list I found got to 2700 Elo and Jobava seems to be below this mark now.

Does anyone know the actual ranking and the ELO ?

# Answer
> 4 votes
Today the newest Elo list was published:

http://en.chessbase.com/post/february-2015-ratings-the-fulfillment-of-promise

**48. Jobava, Baadur 2696**

---
Tags: tournament, elo, grandmaster
---


# Question
Title: What was the time control in tata steel tournament?
Does anyone know, what the exact time control was for the groups A and B in the tata steel tournament last month ?

I remember something with 100 minutes for 40 moves and 50 minutes for 20 moves and 15 minutes for the rest and 30 seconds increment from move 1. Is this correct ? And was the time control identical for group A and group B ?

# Answer
> 3 votes
http://www.tatasteelchess.com/tournament/information

Time control

The time control is: 100 minutes for 40 moves, followed by 50 minutes for 20 moves, then 15 minutes for the remaining moves with 30 seconds cumulative increment for each move starting from the first move.

So you remembered correctly.

And, yes, should be the same for A and B.

---
Tags: tournament, time-control
---


title: Queen with Knight capabilities

text:
# Question
Title: Queen with Knight capabilities
I find it interesting that the Queen can move with the same capabilities as the Rook and the Bishop, but cannot 'jump' or move like the Knight, I understand that this would overpower the queen but theoretically could make the game more interesting, quicker, or more strategic.

I want to know, what are the practical implications of giving the Queen this extra move-set?

Are there any obscure chess variations where this is allowed?

# Answer
> Are there any obscure chess variations where this is allowed?

There are. One name for the queen+knight hybrid piece is the Amazon. As noted in the Wikipedia entry on the Amazon piece I just linked to, the Amazon appears in the variant sometimes called Turkish Great Chess, a game played on a 10x10 board and featuring besides the Amazon (which is typically called a Giraffe in Turkish Great Chess) two other fairy chess pieces: a bishop+knight piece (Vizir) and a rook+knight piece (War Machine). (Those sorts of pieces appear under yet different names in the Capablanca Chess and Seirawan Chess variants as well.)

A second variant that is mentioned in the Amazon Wikipedia entry is The Maharaja and the Sepoys, which provides a severe test for the might of the Amazon: namely, it pits a lone Amazon (Maharaja) against a standard chess army on an 8x8 board. An Amazon is capable of checkmating a king by itself, and that is its objective, while the standard army is tasked with checkmating the very mobile Amazon.
> 6 votes

---
Tags: rules, chess-variants, history, unorthodox-pieces
---


# Question
Title: Describe White's performance in these two games
In these two games, can you describe the performance of White? Whether it was highly tactical, aggressive or positional...etc

```
 [fen ""]
1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. d4 Bf5 4. c4 e6 5. dxe6 fxe6 6. Nc3 Bb4 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8.
bxc3 c5 9. Bd3 Qa5 10. Ne2 cxd4 11. Bxf5 exf5 12. O-O dxc3 13. Rb1 O-O 14. Rxb7
Nc6 15. Rb5 Qa6 16. Qd3 Rad8 17. Qxc3 Qc8 18. Be3 a6 19. Rb6 Rf7 20. f3 Re8 21.
Nf4 Ne5 22. Rc1 Qxc4 23. Qxc4 Nxc4 24. Rxc4 Rxe3 25. Rxa6 Rd7 26. a4 Re1+ 27.
Kf2 Ra1 28. h4 Kf7 29. a5 Ng8 30. Rc8 Ne7 31. Rb8 Ra2+ 32. Kg3 Ng8 33. h5 Nf6
34. Rb5 g6 35. hxg6+ hxg6 36. Rbb6 Nh5+ 37. Nxh5 gxh5 38. Rf6+ Kg8 39. Rxf5
Rg7+ 40. Kf4 Rgxg2 41. Rxh5 Rgd2 42. Ke5 Rd7 43. Ke6 Rc7 44. f4 Rg2 45. Rg5+
Rxg5 46. fxg5 Kg7 47. Kd5 Rc1 48. Rb6 Kf7 49. a6 Kg7 50. a7 Ra1 51. Rb7+ Kg6
52. Kc6 Rc1+ 53. Kb6 Ra1 54. Kc7 Kxg5 55. Kb8 Kf4 56. a8=Q Rxa8+ 57. Kxa8 Ke5
58. Rh7 Kd5 59. Kb7 Kc4 60. Rd7 Kc5 61. Rd8 Kb5 62. Rc8 Kb4 63. Kb6 Ka3 64. Kb5
Kb3 65. Rc6 Ka3 66. Kc4 Kb2 67. Kb4 Ka1 68. Rc2 Kb1 69. Kb3 Ka1 70. Rc1# 1-0

```

```

[fen ""]
1. Nf3 Nf6 2. d4 e6 3. Bf4 Nc6 4. e3 Nh5 5. Bg5 Be7 6. Bxe7 Qxe7 7. c4 Qb4+ 8.
Nc3 Qxb2 9. Nb5 O-O 10. Qb1 Qxb1+ 11. Rxb1 d6 12. Nxc7 Rb8 13. Nb5 d5 14. cxd5
exd5 15. Bd3 Bg4 16. Ne5 Nf6 17. Nxg4 Nxg4 18. Nd6 b6 19. Rc1 Na5 20. Ke2 Rfd8
21. Nb5 Rb7 22. Rc2 g6 23. Rhc1 Kg7 24. Rc7 Rxc7 25. Rxc7 Nxh2 26. Nxa7 Ra8 27.
f3 Nc4 28. Kf2 Nb2 29. Be2 Nc4 30. Bxc4 dxc4 31. Kg1 Nxf3+ 32. gxf3 h6 33. a4
c3 34. Nb5 c2 35. Rxc2 Rxa4 36. Rc7 Kf6 37. Nd6 Ra1+ 38. Kf2 h5 39. Nxf7 b5 40.
Ne5 g5 41. Rc6+ Ke7 42. Rb6 h4 43. Rxb5 Ra2+ 44. Kg1 h3 45. Rb6 Re2 46. d5 Rd2
47. e4 Kf8 48. d6 Kg8 49. Rb8+ Kg7 50. d7 Kf6 51. Re8 h2+ 52. Kh1 Rd1+ 53. Kxh2
Rd2+ 54. Kh3 Rd1 55. d8=Q+ Rxd8 56. Rxd8 Kxe5 57. Kg4 Kf6 58. Rd5 Kf7 59. Kxg5
Ke6 60. f4 Kf7 61. Re5 Kg7 62. Rf5 Kh8 63. Kg6 Kg8 64. e5 Kh8 65. Rf8# 1-0

```

# Answer
Well, certainly not highly tactical or aggressive. Both games strike me as rather slow and systematic. You can call that solid, if you like, though the openings seemed to be a bit shaky.

It seemed to me that you saw the tactical details a lot better than your opponents, which made the games rather onesided. But that is not so much a stylistic difference, but a difference in strength. Of course, more evenly matched games usually give a better impression of a player's style, so next time maybe choose games games where you actually meet some resistance (possibly even lose! ;-)).

Some GMs say that amateurs don't have a style of play. They say a true chess style only develops when you reach master strength. I think that is chauvinistic bullshit. The weaker you are, the stronger personal preferences feature in your choice of moves. To me that is part of the beauty of chess, you can be creative even if you don't know much more than the rules.
> 4 votes

---
Tags: opening, strategy, tactics, attack
---


# Question
Title: Longest DTC in the endgame KQPKQ depending on the place of the white pawn
I remember some statistics by Guy Haworth from the endgame KQPKQ (queen + pawn vs queen).

One of the statistics was the maximum DTC depending on the place of the white pawn (due to symmetry, it can be assumed that the pawn is on the queenside), but I cannot find it anymore.

Does anyone know where the statistics are?

I watched a Karsten-Mueller-DVD about this endgame and he stated that the bishop pawn gives the best winning chances. Perhaps, the statistics can approve this claim.

# Answer
Here is a partial answer.

The paper *Chess Endgames: Data and Strategy* by Tamplin and Haworth reports, among other things, the maximum depth-to-conversion (DTC) and depth-to-zeroing (DTZ) among winning KQPKQ positions. Table 1b in the appendix indicates a maximum DTC of 114 among winning white-to-move positions, and Table 2a indicates a maximum DTZ of 71 for the same.

That article unfortunately does not include separate maximum DTC or DTZ metrics for the 4 respective queenside pawn options, but I can at least confirm that the maximum DTZ of 71 involves a rook pawn, and this maximal example was already given in Thompson's pioneering 1986 tablebase paper *Retrograde Analysis of Certain Endgames*. On p.138, the following position and maximal play line are indicated:

```
[Event "Thompson 1986"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "KQPKQ"]
[Black "Maximum DTZ"]
[Result "1-0"]
[FEN "8/q7/P6k/Q7/8/8/8/6K1 w - - 0 1"]

1.Kg2 Qg7+ 2.Kh1 Qf6 3.Qd2+ Kg7 4.Qd7+ Kg6 5.Qd3+ Kg7 6.Qg3+ Kf8 7.Qb8+
Kf7 8.Qc7+ Kg6 9.Qc4 Qf3+ 10.Kh2 Qe3 11.Qf1 Qe5+ 12.Kh1 Qh8+ 13.Kg2 Qa8+
14.Kg1 Qa7+ 15.Kh1 Qd7 16.Qf2 Kh5 17.Qe2+ Kg6 18.Qe4+ Kh5 19.Qc4 Qa7 20.
Qe2+ Kg5 21.Kg2 Qd4 22.Qf2 Qe4+ 23.Qf3 Qd4 24.Qe2 Kg6 25.Qb5 Qe3 26.Kf1
Qe4 27.Kf2 Qd4+ 28.Kf3 Kh6 29.Qc6+ Kg7 30.Qc7+ Kg6 31.Qg3+ Kh5 32.Qh3+ Kg5
33.Qe6 Qd1+ 34.Qe2 Qd5+ 35.Kf2 Qf5+ 36.Kg1 Qb1+ 37.Kg2 Qg6 38.Qc4 Kh5+ 39.
Kf2 Qf6+ 40.Ke3 Qe5+ 41.Kd3 Kg5 42.Kc2 Qe3 43.Kb2 Kg6 44.Qb5 Kh6 45.Kc2
Qe6 46.Kc3 Qd6 47.Kc4 Kg7 48.Qg5+ Kh8 49.Qh5+ Kg7 50.Qg4+ Kf7 51.Qf5+ Kg7
52.Qc8 Qf4+ 53.Kb5 Qf6 54.Qc6 Qb2+ 55.Kc5 Qf2+ 56.Kd6 Kg6 57.Kd5+ Kh7 58.
Qc7+ Kh8 59.Qc3+ Kh7 60.Kc6 Qf5 61.Kb6 Qe6+ 62.Kb7 Qe4+ 63.Kb8 Qb1+ 64.Kc7
Qa2 65.Qc6 Kh8 66.Kb8 Qb3+ 67.Qb7 Qg3+ 68.Ka8 Qh3 69.Qc6 Qg4 70.Qc3+ Kh7
71.a7 1-0

```
> 3 votes

---
Tags: theory, endgame, tablebases
---


# Question
Title: Web Interface for training by dragging and dropping pieces
Is there any web chess interface that lets me handle chess pieces as I like?

* I mean it will allow me to drag and drop pieces wherever I want them to be on the chessboard and add as many pieces as I like on it.
* I don't want an engine.
* I need simply an interface on the web, or some simple html files that I can use on my laptop.

# Answer
> 2 votes
You may want to try http://www.apronus.com/chess/wbeditor.php.

It has (among other nice features) two boards: on the left one, you can do everything you like, and the right one allows only legal moves. After you are done with the analysis, you can easily get the pgn code. Pretty simple and useful site. It is free and no registration is required. Enjoy!

# Answer
> 6 votes
There's also the lichess board editor. It supports all the features you want, and will also let you get a computer analysis or play the position against the engine.

# Answer
> 3 votes
The chess.com analysis board is probably what you are after, you don't even need to have legal moves.

http://www.chess.com/analysis-board-editor

---
Tags: software, training, websites, chessboards
---


title: Is there a list of unsound openings?

text:
# Question
Title: Is there a list of unsound openings?
Not so long ago I was looking for a comprehensive list of openings (and received an excellent answer with a huge list). Hearing a lot about unsound openings, I am curious whether I can have a comprehensive list (I have read this answer, but it is just a few gambits) of unsound openings.

# Answer
This is not an answer, just an explanation why it is difficult to generate a list of unsound openings.

There is the famous quote *"Any opening is good enough to be played if its reputation is bad enough"* \- Tartakower. This tongue-in-cheek quote implies that there are many good ideas in openings which are considered refuted or unsound. More specifically, *"If an opening cannot be refuted by concrete variations, it is playable, even when it appears on the verge of catastrophe"* \- Averbakh. So, for an opening to be considered unsound, it has to fail to some specific tactic.

Lets highlight this with a game. The game below is a mismatch between Karpov (elo 2725) against Miles (elo approx. 2575). Miles plays the eccentric St George variation, 1. e4 a6 and wins! Miles chose this opening because he knew Karpov had an encyclopedic knowledge of all the mainstream openings.

```
[White "Karpov"]
[Black "Miles"]
[FEN ""]

1. e4 a6 2. d4 b5 3. Nf3 Bb7 4. Bd3 Nf6 5. Qe2 e6 6. a4 c5 7. dxc5 Bxc5 8. Nbd2 b4 9. e5 Nd5 10. Ne4 Be7 11. O-O Nc6 12. Bd2 Qc7 13. c4 bxc3 14. Nxc3 Nxc3 15. Bxc3 Nb4 16. Bxb4 Bxb4 17. Rac1 Qb6 18. Be4 O-O 19. Ng5 h6 20. Bh7+ Kh8 21. Bb1 Be7 22. Ne4 Rac8 23. Qd3 Rxc1 24. Rxc1 Qxb2 25. Re1 Qxe5 26. Qxd7 Bb4 27. Re3 Qd5 28. Qxd5 Bxd5 29. Nc3 Rc8 30. Ne2 g5 31. h4 Kg7 32. hxg5 hxg5 33. Bd3 a5 34. Rg3 Kf6 35. Rg4 Bd6 36. Kf1 Be5 37. Ke1 Rh8 38. f4 gxf4 39. Nxf4 Bc6 40. Ne2 Rh1+ 41. Kd2 Rh2 42. g3 Bf3 43. Rg8 Rg2 44. Ke1 Bxe2 45. Bxe2 Rxg3 46. Ra8 Bc7 0-1

```

To answer your question, you would need to figure out which openings have a concrete tactical refutation, rather than ones that are offbeat.
> 5 votes

---
Tags: opening, statistics
---


title: Good books to learn Sveshnikov Sicilian

text:
# Question
Title: Good books to learn Sveshnikov Sicilian
I'm a club player around 2100 FIDE rating trying to learn the Sicilian Sveshnikov, with the black pieces, for long time controls (2 hours/game). What books do I need to read in order to learn this opening properly?

Themes I would like to see in the books:

* How to deal with most common variations
* Possible transpositions
* Ideas in middle game
* Pawn structure and how to approach it
* Traps to be aware of
* Common endgames

# Answer
> 5 votes
I think one of the best books on the subject has been written by Rogozenko.

`The Sveshnikov Reloaded` explains the ideas very well with plenty of textual analysis and not only pages of long variations with only Informant type evaluation symbols. I have the book at home (even though I mainly play Najdorf and accelerated Dragon Sicilians), and I remember that one of things that pleases me most in this book is Rogozenko's clear explanations of the subtleties of move order tricks.

The first edition is a bit outdated and might run into refutations, especially in the tactical lines (such as the bishop sacrifice line). But if I am not mistaken there is a "recent" (2012?) second edition.

It is the Quality Chess edition. According to me, one of the best editing houses around.

# Answer
> 1 votes
1. Sveshnikov Reloaded - Dorian Rogenzenko
2. The Complete Sveshnikov Sicilian - Yuri Yakovich
3. The Sveshnikov Sicilian - Mikhail Krasenkov
4. The Easiest Sicilian - Atanas Kolev and Trajko Nedev.

My personal favourites are 4. and 2.

---
Tags: opening, sicilian-defense, books
---


title: Chess puzzle that is hard to understand

text:
# Question
Title: Chess puzzle that is hard to understand
Today I was solving a chess problem as following picture :

```
[fen "r1bqr1k1/1p3nbp/2pp2p1/2n2P2/p1PN1P2/2N1B1PP/PPQ3B1/R3R1K1 b - - 0 1"]

```

The solution given was `1...Rxe3`, but I did not get the actual benefit of this solution. Can anyone explain this?

# Answer
> 3 votes
The point is that after `1...Rxe3` Black will be winning material, as the sole defender of the white knight has been removed, and a pin tactic is coming. Specifically, after `2.Rxe3` (anything other than this recapture means Black has just won a piece for nothing) and `2...Bxd4`, White has no way to stop the follow-up `3...Bxe3+` since the rook is pinned to the king, and so Black has netted an extra piece anyway.

```
[FEN "r1bqr1k1/1p3nbp/2pp2p1/2n2P2/p1PN1P2/2N1B1PP/PPQ3B1/R3R1K1 b - - 0 1"]

1...Rxe3 2.Rxe3 Bxd4 *

```

---
Tags: learning, puzzles, bishops
---


# Question
Title: "Chess is art" who was the first one to use this quote?
Who was the very first one to ever use the quote "Chess is art"? Like who was the first one?

# Answer
I don't think anybody has made such a claim. "Chess is *an* art" is another matter.

Vaclav Havel (former Czech prime minister) is supposed to have said that when he visited the Carlsbad tournament.

Karpov is supposed to have said "Chess is everything - art, science, and sport."

If anyone should know it would be Marcel Duchamp the artist who gave up art for chess. Although since he put forward a urinal as a work of art I would hope that he would put chess on a more elevated plane.

Perhaps the most quoted saying about the nature of chess is Tarrasch's

> Chess, like love, like music, has the power to make men happy

which does it for me.
> 1 votes

# Answer
Apparently this is a quote attributed to Alexander Alekhine: "To me, chess is not a game; it is art." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lubomir-kavalek/chess-art-under-alekhines\_b\_3195822.html

This is probably a translation from Russian (or maybe French?), so there also exists Brian Towers preferred version: "Chess for me is not a game, but an art. Yes, and I take upon myself all those responsibilities which an art imposes on its adherents. – Alexander Alekhine."
> 1 votes

---
Tags: history, psychology, quotations
---


# Question
Title: Confusion about the tie-break in the Grenke Chess Classics 2015
I am confused about the result of the Grenke Chess Classics 2015.

At the one hand, Magnus Carlsen won 3 games and Arkadij Naiditsch only 2, so due to the tiebreaker-rule, Carlsen should have won the tournament.

But then I noticed that 5 tie break games were added.

What is true and who won the tournament ?

# Answer
> 2 votes
Carlsen won the tie-break (and the tournament).

Quite dramatically, after trading wins in the rapid and draws in the blitz games, with a win in the armageddon game.

The tie-break rules were only used to sort out the places apart from the first place.

http://www.grenkechessclassic.de/en/grenke-chess-classic-2015/rules-regulations

http://en.chessbase.com/post/grenke-final-carlsen-wins-in-armageddon

---
Tags: tournament, carlsen
---


# Question
Title: Best pseudo-chess game for kids to learn the basic?
My kids are 5 and 3 years old. I would like to teach them chess by playing alternative mini-game. Where can I find those mini-game instruction?

# Answer
> 6 votes
If your just looking for instructions, here is the wiki on mini chess. Make sure you checkout the external links.

To take Andrew's comment a bit further, I will give my own experience with my 3.5 year old. This is what he knows now with limited time. He can name all the pieces and he can set the board up, but that is about it. If I ask him to move the bishop, he will swipe it across the board, but that is OK. He does not have the concept that it is a game for two people and I am black or white (every piece is his :) ) Your 5 year old probably will get a better grasp on mini chess, but 3 may be too young for it.

# Answer
> 6 votes
GM Maurice Ashley invented Pawn Mower. It is great fun for learning how pieces move AND how to visualize the future board position after a few moves.

# Answer
> 1 votes
There is an android game on Google play called Capture the Queen. The idea is that you are on a 4X4 board with several pieces vs a lone queen. Using legal chess moves, can you capture the queen before she captures all you pieces.

I taught my kids (around 6-7 years old at the time) using this type of exercise. It teaches them the pieces and their moves without the complexity of a full game. You can control the placement and the size of the board to match the skills of your child. As they grow more mature, introduce them to the full game.

Another trick is to allow them to 'flip the board'. So when they reach a point they can't find a move, they call flip the board and you and they switch sides. Now it is your turn and you can show them the move they needed to make. But now, they play your side. Eventually, my kids got smart and learned to play into a crappy position and then 'flip the board'. It became a challenge to dig my self out of the hole they had gotten into.

Also look at http://smile.amazon.com/Think-Fun-3400-ThinkFun-Solitaire/dp/B0032UKQFO/ref=sr\_1\_61?ie=UTF8&qid=1423605790&sr=8-61&keywords=chess

# Answer
> 1 votes
I would recommend using some very stripped down versions of the chess which are superb for learning, as they are simple to set up, establish the rules but teach chess aspects quickly and in a FUN way (the most important!) :)

They help to understand each piece, taken by turn:

a) Pawn vs pawn, where the first person who cannot move loses. This is an idea from Richard James Chess for Kids book - recommended.

E.g. place a pawn for each side on its starting square, facing each other. The Pawn Wars of Andrew Soltis has extended versions of this.

b) Bishop VS 3 black pawns (usually on a,b,c file) .

One person takes the bishop and tries to stop all the pawns. Black wins if one pawn reaches the other side.

c) Try same with Rook vs 4 / 5 pawns... teaches seventh rank and attacking power of rook from side and behind.

d) Queen vs 8 pawns...nice to play

e) King maze. Set up a position where white has a king which has just single route to c8 (say) giving black plenty of pieces. Then these are "Frozen" and the pupil should find a way through for the king. Can vary this in several routes - find the fastest route.

Repeat similar with a piece on h8 and a Knight on a1 and has to take in as few moves as possible, perhaps with more of his own side pieces to obstruct and make it tricky.

f) Another good rook one is Rooks starting squares for both players. Then pawns placed radnomly but they cannot move. First to eat up all the pawns wins. If you can play with rooks you can do well at chess ;)

g) one person has two bishops the other has two rooks. First to take a piece wins. (Should be drawn, but be careful!)

This website lists and explains several mini-games, a great resource: http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/mini-chess-games

---
Tags: learning, rules
---


# Question
Title: What are the minimum required pieces for checkmate in 3d chess?
Assuming the rules of millennium 3d chess, what are the minimum required pieces for checkmate?

I realize this is an extremely difficult question, but in regular (2-dimensional) chess, we have rules of thumb for when two players should draw during the endgame.

A few examples of these kinds of scenarios (in 3d chess) would be much appreciated.

# Answer
The following are minimum involving various pieces:

King + Queen
King + Rook + Any Piece
King + 2 Bishop
King + 2 Knight

This is only the theoretical minimum to actually mate. Whether or not it is possible to force a mate in this situation is a different question. You can see these mates by placing both kings in a corner, one on board 1, and the other on board 3.
> 3 votes

# Answer
Here is the following pieces you can do checkmate with:

King + Queen King + Rook King + 2 Bishops King + 2 Knights King + Knight + Bishop
> -3 votes

---
Tags: chess-variants, checkmate, stalemate
---


# Question
Title: Is the Sicilian Defense a good opening for beginners?
Just discovered the chess section of this website. This is my first question here. I am a beginner chess player(rated about 1300 on the chess websites) and play mainly for recreation. For a long time, my opening repertoire was restricted to 1) e4 .. e5 .

However, while playing black I get tired with the fact that white is always calling the shots, and also bored of playing the same lines. I've tried the french but find it a bit predictable for the white player and with less variety.

I would like to try the sicilian. I know that this is often preferred by grandmasters. However, the grandmasters typically gain the advantage only in the end game. However, the style of grandmaster play is quite different from the style of beginner/amateur play. Grandmasters would often go into the end game with no advantages of material. By contrast, in beginner/amateur play often the better player gains advantage in the middle game itself and by the time he reaches the end game he is already ahead in material by a rook or a bishop. Keeping in mind this difference is the sicilian a good opening for a beginner? Or is it more for the more advanced players and end game specialists? Also, how to play it correctly? I've tried playing it a few times but am yet to understand the underlying principle. Which is the better second move - 2) .. e6 or 2) .. d6 ? Why is the rook pawn sometimes advanced prematurely ( 4) .. a6 or 3) .. a6) ? ... etc., etc.

# Answer
> 11 votes
The Sicilian is playable at all levels. 1.e4 e5 openings are easier to understand, so you will often see 1...e5 recommended for beginning and intermediate players (and I second that recommendation), but there's nothing wrong with 1...c5, and you should feel free to try it out and see if you like it.

To say how to play it correctly would take hundreds of pages. To answer your two specific questions:

1. After 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3, 2...e6 and 2...d6 are both perfectly good moves played at the highest levels.
2. The move ...a6 in the Sicilian has a few points, but the most important are that 1) it can keep a White knight away from b5, and 2) it can support ...b5 and start a queenside attack.

# Answer
> 10 votes
1...e5 is most "principled" response to 1.e4, and thus most often recommended for beginners.

At the beginner level, the opening you choose doesn't really make a difference. Quite frankly, the player who makes the ugliest blunders will be the one who loses the game.

As you gain more experience, then the choice between 1...e5 or 1...c5 becomes more significant.

1...e5 is a more "technical" opening. It can lead to a wide variety of scattered/random looking positions where development becomes paramount. Or conversely it can lead to stale "grinding" positions where maneuvering becomes focus. This opening isn't really based on themes, it's based more on logic and precision. I feel like a robot when I play this opening.

1...c5 is more "thematic". You'll come across familiar structures more often, and development is more systematic and natural to find (you won't have to find the PRECISE move to save your position as often, compared to the 1..e5 opening). This Sicilian is based more on knowing the ideas and themes of the opening.

Nevertheless the Sicilian gets a " highly theoretical" reputation, but in my opinion only because so many players play this opening that they have analyzed it into great depths and created all this theory. The reality is any opening can become highly theoretical if analysed enough. The Sicilian is definitely more thematic/consistent. The 1...e5 is more logical/variety.

# Answer
> 3 votes
No, you should learn simpler games like the Open Games first. Kasparov has said the Sicilian should only be played by GMs. You will learn a lot more about chess playing the Open Games or the French Defense to start with.

The thing is White usually gets to call the shots in all openings. This can be got round by learning more theory eg in the Sicilian but it will count against you if you improve because your results will be based on theory in specific openings rather than overall understanding. I would recommend the Scandinavian 1. e4 d5 where White can put you on the back foot but only by learning theory and Black retains a solid setup.

# Answer
> -1 votes
Sicilian will make you a tough player and will save you from early losses, as e pawn is responsible for saving the f7 pawn, and e pawn advance is delayed most often in sicilian, so there is no immediate threat from white's light colored bishop attacking f7. All openings are playable at all levels. Stick to one opening and you will slowly learn all pitfalls.

---
Tags: opening, sicilian-defense
---


title: Rules for ending a chess game

text:
# Question
Title: Rules for ending a chess game
I have seen many games that do not end by checkmate but still say 0-1 or 1-0. The following picture also shows that the game did not end but White won. Can anyone please explain this.

# Answer
It means one of the players resigned or lost on time. In the game above, White threatens mate on g6 if the black Queen can be deflected from its defense. So White threatens `Qxe8` followed by `Qxg6#`. If Black plays `37... Qf7`, White responds with `Qxd7` which threatens the Black Queen and a potential mate on g7. It's a mess that at best ends up with Black being down a ton of material.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: endgame, rules
---


# Question
Title: Why is b4 the only move suggested by every chess engine?
The only move suggested here by every chess engine is `17. b4`

Can anyone please advise why is it so important?

```
[fen "r3k2r/ppp2pp1/7p/3pP3/3P2b1/5N2/RP1KBPPP/7R w - - 0 1"]

```

# Answer
Black is down material but still has some strength. The most obvious one is that he has a pawn majority on the queenside, meaning potentially passed pawn if he manages to push his majority. So Black's plan will be to put both rooks behind the pawns and go for ...a5-a4, ...b5-b4 etc...

In a very simple way White can fight against Black play (it's prophylaxie) by pushing b4 preventing ...a5 and ...c5. Moreover if we manage to push b4-b5, the pawn on a7 will now be a weakness so we can attack it (doubling rooks on a-file).
> 9 votes

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


# Question
Title: Configuring TheWeekinChess downloads with Megadatabase 2014
This quite a technical question, anybody who knows about the program Chessbase (12) and how it works please feel free to answer.

Recently I downloaded many PGN files from the website The Week in Chess,

I copied all of the games (over 100,000) into my current **unedited** version of **Chessbase Megadatabase 2014**, the games were installed **successfully**.

The problem is that when I do the *'Opening Report'* and the player *'Dossier'*, I find that my TheWeekinChess download games are **ignored**, I know this because all of the TheWeekinChess downloads are games from 2014 and none of these are shown in the Opening Reports (main lines) and player Dossiers (top players).

For example, I input the moves `1.e4 c5` (Sicilian), click *Opening Report* and it works but the latest games are all played in 2013 even though there are games from the year 2014 in the database.

I search for a player in the Player Encyclopedia, for example: Magnus Carlsen, I click dossier and it works perfectly fine; but then again the games go no further than 2013.

Could anyone show me a way to solve this problem?

# Answer
> 1 votes
The Mega Database 2014 is in chessbase format and contains not only the games but several pre-requisite to all options proposed by Chessbase 12. So by using pgn files, you will find the games in your database but they are not optimize for the others options.

---
Tags: chessbase
---


# Question
Title: Is the French Defence good against 1.e4 for tactical play?
I usually play `1...e6` (French Defence) against `1.e4`.

I love to play tactical games. Is the French opening good for me? My primary aim in a chess game is to develop an attack against the opponent's king as soon as possible ... Is the French Defence OK for that?

# Answer
> 7 votes
French defense is often thought of as solid positional defense. However, French defense can be used as tactical weapon and many GMs use it that way. See two games by Alexander Morozevich below. Therefore, you should be able to play attacking chess using the French. If the French is working out for you, play it!

Polgar-Morozevich:

```
[FEN ""]
[Event "Wijk aan Zee Corus"]
[Site "Wijk aan Zee NED"]
[Date "2000.01.18"]
[EventDate "2000.01.15"]
[Round "3"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Judit Polgar"]
[Black "Alexander Morozevich"]
[ECO "C11"]
[WhiteElo "2658"]
[BlackElo "2748"]
[PlyCount "72"]

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 dxe4 5. Nxe4 Be7 6. Bxf6
gxf6 7. Nf3 a6 8. g3 b5 9. Bg2 Bb7 10. Qe2 Nd7 11. O-O O-O
12. Rad1 Bd5 13. Rfe1 Kh8 14. Nfd2 c6 15. c4 bxc4 16. Nxc4 a5
17. Nc3 Re8 18. Ne3 f5 19. Nc4 Qb8 20. Na4 Qb4 21. b3 Bf6
22. Qc2 Rg8 23. Qc1 Rg4 24. Ne5 Nxe5 25. dxe5 Be7 26. Rd3 Rag8
27. Red1 f4 28. Qc3 fxg3 29. hxg3 h5 30. Bxd5 cxd5 31. Rf3 Kg7
32. Qc7 h4 33. Kg2 hxg3 34. fxg3 Qe4 35. Qc3 Qe2+ 36. Kh3 Rg5
0-1

```

Adams-Morozevich:

```
[FEN ""]
[Event "Sparkassen Cat XXI"]
[Site "Dortmund GER"]
[Date "2001.07.21"]
[EventDate "2001.07.12"]
[Round "9"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Michael Adams"]
[Black "Alexander Morozevich"]
[ECO "C03"]
[WhiteElo "2744"]
[BlackElo "2749"]
[PlyCount "54"]

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Be7 4. e5 c5 5. dxc5 Nc6 6. Ngf3 Bxc5
7. Nb3 Bb6 8. Bd3 f6 9. Qe2 fxe5 10. Nxe5 Nf6 11. O-O Nxe5
12. Qxe5 O-O 13. Bg5 Bc7 14. Qd4 h6 15. Bh4 e5 16. Qc5 Be6
17. Rad1 Rc8 18. Qe3 e4 19. Bxe4 Bxh2+ 20. Kh1 Qd6 21. Bxf6
Bf4 22. Qf3 Rxf6 23. Bxd5 Be5 24. Bxb7 Qe7 25. Qe4 Rf5
26. Rfe1 Rf4 27. Qe3 Rh4+ 0-1

```

# Answer
> 0 votes
Yes it's pretty good for attacking play and tactics if White isn't careful. Master the positional ideas first and then interweave the tactics. Although most of the tactics will be in White's favour there is the thematic ...Rxf3 exchange sac eg in the Tarrasch.

---
Tags: opening, french-defense, attack
---


# Question
Title: Can the King be put in Check by a piece that cannot move?
I am playing a game at the moment and I want to know if the King can take a piece that is being protected by another piece... that cannot move.

Why can't the other, protecting, piece move? Because it would put the other King in check.

In other words: Can the Black King take the White Rook?

# Answer
> 2 votes
No, the black king cannot capture the rook in the position. The simple explanation is that the white knight will capture your king before your rook captures your opponents king. Personally, chess should not have rules such as check and checkmate. The aim of the game should be to capture the king, not checkmate the king. I speculate that these rules of checking and checkmate was formed by etiquette anyways since even in Xiang qi where the object is to capture the "king," you still say check, and I learn that it was a convention of etiquette. .

---
Tags: rules
---


# Question
Title: Why do Grandmasters play different openings but engines not?
Why do they change openings if engines only like one?

# Answer
**Engines**

Engines usually have opening databases. Every variant in each opening has a pre-calculated score and according to the opponent's move, engines will choose highest scored move. So, sometimes you may feel they play as same as previous games.

But, that's not all, many good engines will choose a random move among a group of best candidate moves because their programmers don't like biased engines.

**Grandmasters**

On the other hand, grandmasters, they know lots of openings and they're incredibly skilled on some of them. Sometimes they persist on a specific opening to learning more. Sometimes they play different openings against opponents to make them surprised or confused.

Head-to-head matches between two grandmasters usually lead to a little number of openings. Because the white player tries to choose an opening based on his power and opponent's weakness.
> 4 votes

# Answer
**Engines play on the board. Grandmasters play their opponent.**

Grandmasters usually not only play to their strengths, but their opponent's weaknesses. They will mix it up based on what they believe their opponent is least prepared to deal with.

Engines could theoretically do this too, but its hard enough to play by the rules of chess alone, much less try to include human psychology of the opponent.
> 2 votes

# Answer
Grandmaster play different openings because of preperation against an opponent or because they just feel like playing different positions. Also, if a grandmaster plays many openings, it is much harder to prepare for him/her. Engines usually are programed to play one of several opening moves. Also, you asked "why do they change openings if engines only like one?" Engines are not the absolute authority for openings, thought they are good, because a lot of openings have plans and positional aspects that are too far for computers to understand. Instead, engines often help a person understand an opening, but much evaluations from computers are taken with a grain of salt.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: opening
---


title: Feedback on my game?

text:
# Question
Title: Feedback on my game?
```

[FEN ""]
[Title "Bskg vs NN"]
[Result "1-0"]

1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e3 Nc6 { A mistake, blocks counterplay based on c7-c5 } 4.Bxc4 { Seems passive and the light squared bishop is locked in. However, e7-e5 is difficult with the knight on c6 in view of d4-d5 } 4...e6 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.O-O O-O 8.e4 { Is this move good? It was the only plan I found } 8...e5 9.dxe5 { I thought I would have an advantage in the following endgame due to my central pawn, but I now like d5 better as it seems more ambitious } 9...Nxe5 10.Nxe5 Bxe5 11.Qxd8 Rxd8 12.Bg5 { I think the simplification was a bad idea for white, black's d-rook and dark square bishop are very strong. } 12...b6 13.Bd5 Rb8 14.Rfd1 { Trying to take the initiative with tactical threats and taking the open file } 14...Rf8 15.h3 h6 { Isn't Ba6 better? } 16.Be3 Bb7 { nxd5 was a bit scary and Ba6 would be good, but after the move that was played I think white is better again. The rook is bad on b7 and white gains time } 17.Bxb7 Rxb7 18.Bd4 { bxd4 activates white's rooks and Re8 is strongly met by f4 } 18...Re8 19.Bxe5 Rxe5 20.f4 Rc5 21.e5 { The knight must move to a terrible square } 21...Nh5 { Here the knight will be lost } 22.Rd4 Rb8 23.g4 Nxf4 24.Rxf4 Rxe5 25.Rd1 c6 26.Rd7 a5 27.Rfxf7 Rg5 28.Ne4 Rg6 29.Kg2 h5 30.Kf3 hxg4 31.hxg4 Kh7 32.Ng3 Rg8 33.Nf5 Kh8 34.Ne7
1-0

```

I had white.

# Answer
A good game between equally matched players.

`3. e4` is more common and is one of the points of the gambit - you gain more space. You're going to use an extra move to get it to `e4` on move 8. Might as well do it on move 3.

`9. dxe5` allows a series of trades that sucks the life out of the game. I think `9. d5` is slightly stronger and is what I expected you to play.

`14...Rf8` made my face hurt. Instead, consider `Ba6` or `Be6`. The latter allows an isolated e pawn but it connects the rooks and removes White's best piece.

`15...h6` I'd have `Nxd5` to kill that good Bishop. That would be add sense to the `Rf8` move.

After `16. Bb7`, followed by `... c5`, Black's Rook is not so badly placed and is closer to making a battery.

`21... Nh5` A Knight on the rim is dim.

`26. Rd7` is a strong move. Note this would not have been possible had Black not wasted a move with `22... Rb8` but instead simply pushed the `c` pawn per a previous comment. That is, consider `18... Bxd4 19. Rd4 c5 20. Rd2 Re8`. White may be better, but there's no obvious win here.

The game didn't do a lot for me as the trades removed most of the tension. Had Black not blundered the Knight it was looking drawish though I did prefer White's more active Rooks.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: queens-gambit-accepted
---


# Question
Title: Which time control was set in the following game?
\[Event "Russia vs China"\] \[Site "Sochi RUS"\] \[Date "2009.08.17"\] \[EventDate "2009.08.15"\] \[Round "3"\] \[Result "1-0"\] \[White "Ding Liren"\] \[Black "Nikita Vitiugov"\] \[ECO "D45"\] \[WhiteElo "2530"\] \[BlackElo "2681"\] \[PlyCount "81"\]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 c6 5. e3 Nbd7 6. Qc2 Bd6 7. g4 h6 8. h3 a6 9. c5 Be7 10. Rg1 b6 11. cxb6 Qxb6 12. g5 hxg5 13. Nxg5 Rg8 14. Na4 Qa7 15. Qxc6 Bb7 16. Qc2 Rc8 17. Nc3 e5 18. Bd2 exd4 19. exd4 Qxd4 20. Be3 Qb4 21. O-O-O Nc5 22. f3 Bc6 23. Bd4 a5 24. Rg2 a4 25. Re2 Rc7 26. Be5 Rd7 27. Rd4 Qb6 28. h4 a3 29. b3 Rb7 30. Bh3 Rh8 31. b4 Ncd7 32. Na4 Qb5 33. Bd6 Ng8 34. Nc3 Qb6 35. Qf5 Kd8 36. Nxf7+ Kc8 37. Bc5 Nh6 38. Bxb6 Nxf5 39. Bxf5 Bf6 40. Nxd5 Kb8 41. Nxf6 1-0

Which time control was set in this game ?

# Answer
> 2 votes
I've looked all over the web and cannot find the specific time control used, but according to many sources I found via Google, this game was the 3rd round of the classical portion of the annual Russia vs China match, so definitely NOT a rapid/blitz game. I believe in recent years the classical time control for that event has been 40 moves in 90 minutes (relatively quick for that level).

---
Tags: time-control
---


title: Mac computer chess

text:
# Question
Title: Mac computer chess
I\`m a novice of chess, but have been enjoying playing the program that came on my mac book pro. It seems to me that there have been some moves the computer will not allow me to make. For instance, mac had me in check with a knight but I had a direct diagonal on the knight with a pawn. The computer would not allow me to take the knight. Another instance was I had had the mac king in check with my queen (diagonal) and the king took my queen but, in the reverse my king could not take macs queen. More recently I had a diagonal kill with my king on macs rook. The computer would not allow my king to make the move and take the rook. A one space move. Directly next to each other diagonally. Are there situations where pawns can't take knights or Kings can't take queens or rooks?

# Answer
> 2 votes
> Are there situations where pawns can't take knights or Kings can't take queens or rooks?

Yes, all the situations described in your post could happen, consistent with the rules of chess. For instance, in each of the following two positions the white pawn cannot capture the knight because it is *pinned* to the white king. That is, the capture would open the king to check, and so is not a legal move.

```
[fen "8/5k2/6b1/3n4/4P3/3K4/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

Or

```
[fen "4r3/5k2/8/3n4/4P3/8/4K3/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

But there's nothing special about the pieces involved being pawns or knights; the relevant point is simply that the capture would expose the king to check, and such a move is never legal.

Similarly, a king isn't allowed to capture any opposing piece that is defended by one of its compatriots, again for no other reason than that such a move would expose the king to check. Thus the white king may not capture the rook in the following position, as doing so would place the king into check from the knight.

```
[fen "8/5k2/4n3/8/3r4/2K5/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

---
Tags: rules, human-versus-machine
---


# Question
Title: What is/are the bests poems about chess?
I know only a couple. Fictions refers to movies or novels but not poems. Do you know any of them?

# Answer
> 3 votes
Here's a poem by Jorge Luis Borges:

**AJEDREZ**

I

En su grave rincón, los jugadores rigen las lentas piezas. El tablero los demora hasta el alba en su severo ámbito en que se odian dos colores.

Adentro irradian mágicos rigores las formas: torre homérica, ligero caballo, armada reina, rey postrero, oblicuo alfil y peones agresores.

Cuando los jugadores se hayan ido, cuando el tiempo los haya consumido, ciertamente no habrá cesado el rito.

En el Oriente se encendió esta guerra cuyo anfiteatro es hoy toda la tierra. Como el otro, este juego es infinito.

II

Tenue rey, sesgo alfil, encarnizada reina, torre directa y peón ladino sobre lo negro y blanco del camino buscan y libran su batalla armada.

No saben que la mano señalada del jugador gobierna su destino, no saben que un rigor adamantino sujeta su albedrío y su jornada.

También el jugador es prisionero (la sentencia es de Omar) de otro tablero de negras noches y de blancos días.

Dios mueve al jugador, y éste, la pieza. ¿Qué Dios detrás de Dios la trama empieza de polvo y tiempo y sueño y agonías?

---

English translation:

I

In their solemn corner, the players move The slow pieces. The board detains them Until the dawn in its severe world In which two colors hate each other.

Within the forms irradiates magic Strictness: Homeric rook, swift Knight, armed queen, crucial king, Oblique bishop and aggressive pawns.

Once the players have finally left, Once time has devoured them, Surely the ritual will not have ended.

In the orient like this very war flared up Whose amphitheater today is the earth entire. Like the other, the game is infinite.

II

Weakling king, slanting bishop, relentless Queen, direct rook and cunning pawn Seek and wage their armed battle Across the black and white of the field.

They know not that the player’s selected
Hand governs their destiny, They know not that a rigor adamantine Subjects their will and rules their day.

The player also is a prisoner (The saying is Omar’s) of another board Of black nights and of white days.

God moves the player, and he, the piece. Which god behind God begets the plot Of dust and time and dream and agonies?

# Answer
> 3 votes
I like this one -

```
I'd be a happier man if I could play the Caro-Kann
But it seems to me when I play pawn to QB3
White gets a knight on K5, and then as sure as I'm alive
My Rook file's opened and my Queen exposed to dangers unforseen
By Nimzowitch and all that lot who think the Caro rather hot
Then if I reach the middle game my play is lifeless cold and tame
White's game is logical and bright, while nothing I can do is right.
I grow so tired of "Check", "Check"
"Check", that I become a nervous wreck
And get into a hopeless pin, allowing White an easy win.
Tell Nimzowitch it's all a plant. The opening's really Caro-Can't

- Huxley St. John-Brooks.

```

# Answer
> 2 votes
Say this one-

> 'Tis all a Chequer-board of Nights and Days Where Destiny with Men for Pieces plays: Hither and thither moves, and mates, and slays, And one by one back in the Closet lays. -- Omar Khayyam

---
Tags: fiction
---


title: How to write a swiss pairing software

text:
# Question
Title: How to write a swiss pairing software
I'm thinking about to develop an online service to provide free software for helping chess tournaments organizers with pairing systems like swiss, round robin, team-swiss, team-round robin.

Could you, please, send me some learning materials how those pairing systems work?

# Answer
> 3 votes
You should start with the section of the FIDE web site which describes the Swiss Rules. This has sections giving detailed descriptions of the different systems for making the pairings along with much other useful information.

It is also worth looking at the FIDE Tournament Rules which includes tables for round robin tournaments and descriptions of tie break methods which it is good to also have in a pairing program.

---
Tags: learning, software
---


# Question
Title: Most important aspects of computer for scanning through databases in Chessbase?
A quite technological question so this is for the tech-people out there!

What are the most important parts of a computer for Chessbase Database searching? For example, opening reports and reference, as on my current laptop it is fast but scanning through popular variations can be time-consuming which is not practical for overnight preparation.

# Answer
> 1 votes
There are really 4 components to your computer's speed and the speed that a program will achieve. These are:

1) Disk speed. For big database searches this is probably the most important. The faster the disk the better so you probably want to store your data on an SSD if possible.

2) The amount of memory. If large amounts of data are involved and the program is well written to take advantage of as much memory as you have then this is very important. For large commercial databases run by big businesses the default solution to poor performance is to add more memory but here I am talking about relational databases like Oracle, DB2, SQL Server etc. Still important for a chess database program if it is well written.

3) Number of cores or processors in the CPU. If the program is written to support multi-threading (and if it is any good then it should) then the more cores the faster it will run.

4) Raw CPU speed. This is probably the least important but still important particularly for poorly written single-threaded programs.

---
Tags: database, chessbase, hardware
---