title: Online personalized database resource

text:
# Question
Title: Online personalized database resource
I'm searching for the possibility of having my personal database of annotated games in the cloud, my games included. I already read this post: 1) http://chessmicrobase.com/ looks nice, although basic, I already added a game, but the problems are that I cannot I add variants and I'm not very sure for how much time this site will be reliable. 2) http://www.chessgames.com/ is slow and ugly (java based) and I cannot add my own games, premium membership included. But the main problem is that is very slow.

I'll be happy also with a simple cross-platform chess edit application, with the same features and the possibility to integrate chess engines, but my main interest is in the online.

# Answer
Chess Microbase is the only thing I found.

* You can have 3 databases for free which is probably enough in most cases.
* You can also share the link to the game.
* Supports importing and exporting with PGN.
* Has support for annotations.
* I am using it for couple of years now (I think). It seems reliable and seem to get new features. Of course, take backups.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: database, online, annotation
---


title: Pgn crash course

text:
# Question
Title: Pgn crash course
Where I can find a fast smart *pgn file* format help ? You can find here the complete headache details of the format.

# Answer
> 3 votes
For a short good introduction (variations and `NAG`s included): http://www.enpassant.dk/chess/palview/manual/pgn.htm, the *PGN Basics* section.

---
Tags: pgn
---


# Question
Title: What makes a contemporary chess problem decent?
One can set up some pieces and concoct a situation that has, say, a mate in 3 (yes, I know it is not straightforward, but if you sit for a few hours you can do it).

Such problem would probably not be accepted for a competition because the modern standards are already too high. There has to be a relatively original idea and/or theme, but I do not know what qualifies as mediocre these days, and what qualifies as novel.

# Answer
> 6 votes
One might simply look at the judging metrics at the World Chess Composition Tournament (WCCT) to derive such an answer.

This is from their Rules Annex and details how points are allocated to a composition entry. I've stressed key words that probably represent a figure of merit.

> Points : Description
>
> 4.0 : An outstanding problem: an accurate and intensive **rendering** of the set theme, without **blemishes** in any of the main lines, and showing **originality** and **flair.** Perfect **construction** and **economy.**
>
> 3.5 : As above, but some small constructional weaknesses, and perhaps not ideally economical.
>
> 3.0 : Either: a very good problem showing the theme clearly but perhaps not intensively or very originally Or: a task rendering of the theme which does not reach the highest artistic standard. In either case, good construction and economy.
>
> 2.5 : As above, but constructional weakness and/or less than ideal economy because of the intensive or task setting.
>
> 2.0 : A good problem, very likely worth an honourable mention or commendation in a reasonably strong tourney, but not a very intensive rendering of the theme, and perhaps not very original. Adequate to good construction and economy.
>
> 1.5 : As above, but with some artistic weakness or constructional blemish.
>
> 1.0 : A very ordinary piece of work, typical of many average columns but hardly up to award standard. Adequate construction and economy.
>
> 0.5 : As above, but with serious constructional defects.
>
> 0.0 : **Unsound**, **unthematic** or fully **anticipated**.

# Answer
> 4 votes
Quote from our Autralian friends http://www.ozproblems.com/problem-world/chess-problem :

> Problems are aesthetic works designed to show an interesting theme – the composition’s main idea. How exactly are themes artistic? It varies, but important factors include subtlety, elegance, economy, paradox, and unity of play. The latter concept of unity is especially noteworthy; most good problems have multiple variations that are related to each other in some way, to create a harmonious impression.

The metrics provided at the World Chess Composition Tournament (WCCT) concern a *formal* tourney where the problems must all present the same theme that is imposed to all participants. This is why the **Rules** emphasize the "accurate and intensive rendering of the set theme". However, in  *informal* tourneys (generally composing tourneys organized by chess problem magazines), no theme is imposed.

---
Tags: checkmate, problems, composing
---


# Question
Title: Caro-Kann variation 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5
I would like to play the Modern Variation of the Caro-Kann. What is the best way to deal with Ng5? Best strategy and known tactics (e.g. the Ne6 sacrifice). Maybe you can recommend a book dedicated to this variation?

```
[FEN ""]
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5

```

# Answer
> 8 votes
## EDIT ( December, 30 2013 ):

1. **Removed unnecessary book from the list**
2. **Added explanation of basic ideas in response to the comment made by member *Jonathan Garber***

> I would like to play the Modern Variation of the Caro-Kann. What is the best way to deal with Ng5? Best strategy and known tactics (e.g. the Ne6 sacrifice).

You did not specify which side you wish to play, but I have assumed it is Black side you are interested in, judging by the sentence "What is the best way to deal with Ng5?".

The only dangers that I see are the move `Bc4` and `Bd3` coupled with `Ng5`, since there is always the possibility of the sacrifice on `e6`.

When playing `Bc4`, White hopes for something like this:

```
[FEN ""]
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bc4 e6 7.Qe2 h6? 8.Nxf7!

```

This is the place where you play `7. ...Nb6` and White can reply with `8.Bd3` or `8.Bb3`.

After `8.Bb3` you play `8. ...h6` and then strike with `9. ...c5`. The remaining variations are not that theoretical, and you need to remember some key moves to secure equal chances.

The trap in the above diagram was the only critical position requiring from you to play precise and theoretical move.

The `Bd3` continuation is different. Here White has more opportunities for *positional sacrifices*, since he gets the *compensation* in view of space advantage, pressure on the Black king stuck in the center and the lead in the development. This is the place where you **must know theory** and always take care in first 10 or 13 moves.

```
[FEN ""]
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3

```

If you play `6. ...h6?!` here White can respond with `7.Ne6!` and will just calmly develop, sacrificing the knight since he gets very good *compensation* in view of the initiative, development lead and Black's cramped, uncoordinated position.

Another dangerous variation with White's same idea is this:

```
[FEN ""]
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3 e6 7. N1f3 h6?! 8.Nxe6!

```

Instead of `7. ...h6?!`, Black plays `7. ...Bd6` and from here on, you really **must know theory**, as I have mentioned before, since things get really messy. Note that it is harder to play this variation with Black, than with White, but the resulting position is **unclear and sharp**, so you both have equal chances.

> Maybe you can recommend a book dedicated to this variation?

As someone who used to played this defense as Black in tournament games, I can recommend you some books that helped me to learn to play this opening variation with good success:

1. *Joe Gallagher-Starting Out The Caro-Kann*
2. *Anatoly Karpov and A.Beliavsky-The Caro-Kann in Black and White*
3. *Shandorff Lars-Grandmaster Repertoire 7-The Caro-Kann*

Start reading them in order I have presented above.

The first one will help you to grasp basic ideas and concepts of the variation you seek, but will also help you with other variations as well-which is important since **generally** in *Caro-Kann* **it is White who can steer the game**, not Black. **You will find the answers you seek in this book.** I have just given you the small summary of ideas in the above section.

Once you learn the basics you can move on to the second book, written by a grandmaster who practically **reinvented** the whole variation for Black. It is *Karpov* who first used that variation in the *candidate matches*. That is why he had to do everything **almost** from scratch, and that is why I believe that this book will be the most useful to you. You will learn from one of the best players in chess history and who can better explain to you the ideas for Black than the one who invented them? This book will show you the annotated games where White or Black played well, and their opponent bad. It is important for you to know what is good for White and what is good for Black in the variation you wish to master.

After you learn the opening moves, and grasp the middle game that arises from it, you will start to improve rapidly, since the opening is very solid and hard to "crack" on the lower levels of skill. Naturally you will want to play for a win. In order to do so, you will need the sharpest and most precise continuations and that is what third book should help you with.

A SMALL ADVICE:

Get a good book on endgames, you **will** need it.

Hopefully this will help you.

Best regards.

---
Tags: opening, caro-kann
---


# Question
Title: Is it possible to play the Najdorf Defense if white played 1. d4?
After white plays `1. d4`, is it still possible for black to play the Najdorf Defense?

Is it possible, for Black to play in a way in order to reach a Najdorf setup? If so, how should Black continue?

# Answer
If White starts with `1.d4` it is possible to reach a Najdorf position, for example:

```
[FEN ""]
1.d4 d6 2.e4 c5 3.Nf3 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6

```

However, White has other moves on move 2, which still give them an advantage: `2. c4` and `2.Nf3`, also White could play `3. c3`. So Najdorf is not that easy to get. Moreover, some people play `1.d4` to avoid Sicilian and especially Najdorf; they will certainly not follow the above line.
> 4 votes

# Answer
If the following five moves by both sides happen in a game, then you have the position that's called the Najdorf Defence:

```
[FEN ""]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6

```

However, white is by no means forced to play those moves. He can also play, say, 2.d4, 2.f4, 2.c3, 3.Bb5+, or 4.Qxd4, or 5.f3, or a lot of other moves.

So black can't always get a Najdorf after 1.e4.
> 3 votes

# Answer
You can try

```
[FEN ""]
1.d4 c5 2.e4 cxd4 3.Nf3 d6 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6

```

In general, it is not easy to transpose to an "e4" opening when white begins with d2-d4. It is easy for white to avoid the Sicilian system in the example shown above, e.g. with 2.d5 instead of 2.e4. Having said this, some players choose 1.d4 just for fun and would actually prefer to transpose to an "e4" opening if the chance is given. For instance, they would choose 2.e4 in this situation

```
[FEN ""]
1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5

```

Thus transposing into the French system. Perhaps because they are scared of the other systems they might face, e.g. 2.c4 f5. So against a player who is not comfortable with the d4-systems, it makes a lot of sense to transpose to your favorite e4-system. Happy hunting!
> 2 votes

---
Tags: opening, learning, najdorf
---


title: Setting up a game between two computers

text:
# Question
Title: Setting up a game between two computers
I was hoping that this would be a simple exercise but I have spent the last two days looking into this and can not find an answer (easy or otherwise). What I want to do is have my iMac play my Ubuntu laptop in chess over a LAN.

I know I can do this by manually entering the moves but my hope was to automate the process. And eventually play many games alternating parameter such and length of time per move etc.

Has any one done this or any ideas on how to achieve this?

# Answer
Get Arena!

Setup Arena on your iMac and Ubuntu computer. Register a computer account for each computer on a server of your choice. Of course, both computers need to login on the same server. Let one computer request a match and let the other computer accept the match.

That's it.

Arena is pretty cool. It wouldn't surprise me if you could create a script to automate a bunch of stuff you would want to do.
> 5 votes

# Answer
There are many free programs as well as commercial ones which can do this. Winboard (Xboard on Linux) is one free program where you can make two chess engines play each other. Shredder is comercial one where you can set to play chess engines against each other.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: engines
---


title: What is happening in this problem?

text:
# Question
Title: What is happening in this problem?
I recently solved a problem chess.com and it is below. What I don't understand is that why black moved its rook to h8 (1...Rh8). I think that black's position would have been better if it was something like 1...Rf7. Is 1...Rh8 really the best move for black? If yes, why? If not, what is the best possible move, though black is about to lose?

```
[FEN "8/p6r/5R2/5N1k/5K1p/7P/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

1.Ra6 Rh8 2.Ng7#

```

# Answer
> 16 votes
After 1.Ra6, Black is in Zugzwang - the purpose of Ra6 is to prevent Black's a-pawn from moving. Now Black must move his rook. If he moves it off the h file, then White plays Rh6#. However, after 1... Rh8, White mates anyway with Ng7.

Black can hold (after a fashion) if his Rook can control g7 and h6. After 1. Ra6, he will have to leave one of those squares undefended.

And to answer your question directly, Black has no good moves after Ra6. He's going to get mated on g7 or h6. So Rh8 is as good as any.

---
Tags: analysis, problems
---


# Question
Title: How should one continue development against an unorthodox move by an opponent?
Let's say you have been practicing a certain opening such as the Ruy Lopez and you have all the main lines down and suddenly your opponent makes some unorthodox move that you did not encounter while studying the Ruy Lopez, so you think to yourself, "Does my opponent have something up their sleeve?" or "My opponent does not know what they are doing". If you think the opponent has something up their sleeve like a trap, you might start to panic and blunder and make irrational moves yourself out of paranoia, but you might start to make irrational moves if you think your opponent doesn't know what they are doing when in fact they do.

So I guess the question boils down to this: How do you know when a move your opponent has made is a sound move (especially if you are a beginner) as opposed to a not so sound move? And once you have made the decision on whether the move was good or not, how do you proceed with development?

# Answer
There are reasons why the main variations of an opening are "established," and why certain moves are seldom played. If a move is "unusual," there is probably something wrong with it.

So figure out why it is wrong. Maybe it gets the other player behind in development, or exposes a queen, or weakens a pawn. Once you have figured out what is wrong with the move, it is relatively easy to play against it.

Example: In the Ruy Lopez, you (White) and your opponent might play `1. e4 e5. 2. Nf3 Nc6. 3. Bb5` So far so good. But now Black plays `3... Nd4`, a "strange" move that moves a knight twice in succession. It forks your N and B so the e pawn isn't really en prise. But now you play `4 NxN`, and when Black recaptures on d4, he's got doubled d pawns, and has wasted a move. You can castle, `5. O-O`, and have a significant lead in development.
> 14 votes

# Answer
## How should one play against unexpected opening variations?

In short: *calmly*. In general, but especially in an opening you've prepared, the best defense against an unexpected move is to figure out the answers to two natural questions:

1. What is the purpose of this deviation? A threat? A trap? Perhaps your opponent wants to transpose into a line that's more comfortable for him, or less comfortable for you. Whatever the case, try to see what your opponent hopes to gain.
2. Why isn't this a common variation? Why didn't you come across it in your studies? Especially in the opening, if you encounter something unexpected, it's probably because it isn't as strong as the main lines. Try to see why: maybe it's an easily-refuted threat, or a loss of time, or it weakens your opponent's long-term position.

When you've answered these questions, if you've identified a credible threat, you must of course meet it. But if you *can't* determine an obvious threat posed by the unusual move, the best course is usually to relax and continue to make good, solid opening moves. Trust your fundamentals: they're guidelines that exist for a reason. Keep developing your pieces to good squares and watch for anything else unexpected. If you identified a weakness in your opponent's unusual move, take advantage of it where you can.

For example, given your opening of choice, a little-used variation of the Ruy Lopez:

```
[FEN "r1b1kbnr/ppppqppp/2n5/1B2p3/4P3/5N2/PPPP1PPP/RNBQK2R"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Qe7

```

Here, Black chooses a very unlikely third move. It doesn't pose any immediate threats (1), and it hinders his development by blocking in the King's Bishop (2). There's nothing White can do at the moment to take advantage of this strange choice directly, so he should continue with simple, easy development. `4.O-O` leaves the BQ staring at nothing in particular. After the most common continuation, `4...Nd8 5.d4 c6 6.Ba4`, White has done nothing special at all, but he's ahead in development while Black struggles to organize his troops.

```
[FEN "R1B1KBNR/PPPPQPP/2N5/1B2P3/4P3/5N2/PPPP1PPP/RNBQK2R"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Qe7 4.O-O Nd8 5.d4 c6 6.Ba4

```
> 3 votes

---
Tags: opening, theory
---


# Question
Title: A chess problem question: Why is this the solution?
```
[FEN "5B2/3p1n2/R2p4/1P1NRBQ1/1KPkrb2/1p6/2Pp1Pn1/4r3 w - - 0 1"]

1. Nc7! Rxe5 (1... Nxg5) (1... d1=Q) 2.c3#

```

What would make you play Nc7? This results in checkmate in 2 if, as the computer does, Rxe5 is played. But why wouldn't the computer just play Nxg5, winning the queen and preventing checkmate? Or why not play to d1 and promote to a queen?

# Answer
> 12 votes
> What would make you play Nc7?

It is the **only** move with which White can give check mate **in two** moves.

> This results in checkmate in 2 if, as the computer does, Rxe5 is played, but why wouldn't the computer just play Nxg5, winning the queen and preventing checkmate?

On `1. ...Nxg5` White plays `2.Rd5` which check mates.

> Or d1 and promote to a queen?

On `1. ...d1Q` White plays `2.Rd5` which check mates.

## SUMMARY:

1.`Nc7` has been played to free the rook on `e5` to give check mate, by coming to `d5`.

This is why computer played `1. ...Rxe5`, since on every Black's move `2.Rd5` check mates, except for these:

`1. ...Ne3` but then White mates with `2.Rxe4`.

`1. ...Nxe5` where White mates with `2.Rxd6`.

`1. ...Bxe5` where White mates with `2.Qxd2`.

`1. ...dxe5` where White mates with `2.Bc5`.

`1. ...Kxe5` where White mates with `2.Bg7`.

Best regards.

---
Tags: analysis, problems
---


# Question
Title: How to setup ChessX to tell the name of the current opening?
I have ChessX 1.0 for Mac OSX. Is there a way for it to tell the name of the current opening position?

# Answer
> 1 votes
Easy, post a feature request on chessx.sourceforge.net, as ChessX only displays eco codes. But this can easily be changed, as the names are part of the eco file loaded at startup.

---
Tags: opening, software
---


# Question
Title: It is important to play e4 or d4 to 'control the center'. Myth or reality?
Well, there are two premises in the question itself: 1) That e4 or d4 'controls the center'. 2) That 'Controlling the center'is something important. It appears to me that 'controlling the center' is the least of the benefits of a move like e4 or d4. The fact is that it becomes mandatory to play e4 or d4 if you want to develop both bishops along their long diagonals(c1-h6 diagonal or a6-f1 diagonal). This seems to be the most important benefit of e4/d4 IMO and not 'controlling the center'. So while it may turn out that 1) e4 and 1) d4 give rise to good games for white I feel it may be more due to the rapid development which these moves allow rather than because these pawns 'control the center'. Indeed, sometimes, these pawns can be an obstacle for white's own pieces.(I am looking at things from white's perspective but the same argument can be similarly posed from the black player's perspective as well.). Do post your thoughts on this.

# Answer
Let me start from top to bottom:

> It is important to play e4 or d4 to 'control the center'. Myth or reality?

Myth.

> Well, there are two premises in the question itself: 1) That e4 or d4 'controls the center'.

When you play `1.e4/d4` you **do not** control the center, you **physically occupy it**.

To control the center, you will need **more than a single pawn move**-you need certain amount of developed pieces **coordinated to control certain central squares**.

`1.e4/d4` simply **fights for the center**, you can not control it with just one pawn move-wish if it was that easy :)

Most importantly-you **can not** control anything unless **your opponent allows you to**-you can only **fight for it**.

> Well, there are two premises in the question itself: ... 2) That 'Controlling the center'is something important.

It **is of utmost importance** in the opening, as it allows you to completely control the game development. Controlling the center allows you to orient your actions towards the wings **without worrying that your opponent can counter-strike in the center**-thus usually refuting your plan or at least getting the equal play.

Also, you can open or close the game **when you seem fit** which usually can decide the game to your favor-not to mention **the speed** which your pieces get when **centralized**, since they can reach **any part of the board in relatively equal amount of moves**, contrary to the pieces posted at the wing.If we have a knight on d4, he can reach both wings at relatively equal amount of moves, but if it is posted on h3 then he needs a lot of moves to reach queen side which sometimes proves fatal.

Also, controlling the center **hinders the activity and coordination** of the opponents pieces-which enables you to start preparing for an attack or at least to create some serious weaknesses in their position.

In short-controlling the center is of **paramount importance** from the start to the end of the game-just remember that controlling is **not the same** as occupying the center.

To be honest, I haven't seen the opening that **controls** the center-all the modern openings either:

1. Fight for it.
2. Divide the control-E.G. White controls d5 and e4 and Black controls d4 and e5, usually by blocking the center, or by exchanging central pawns.
3. One side "surrenders the center" giving the opponent space advantage, but in return gets huge pressure against that center from the sides or from the distance ( usually light pieces perform the pressure ).

> It appears to me that 'controlling the center' is the least of the benefits of a move like e4 or d4. The fact is that it becomes mandatory to play e4 or d4 if you want to develop both bishops along their long diagonals(c1-h6 diagonal or a6-f1 diagonal). This seems to be the most important benefit of e4/d4 IMO and not 'controlling the center'.

You are almost there-the point of `e4/d4` is to decide **how will you fight for the center** which will directly decide **what type of pace** will that fight take. Since `e4` gives free development of the pieces-but `e4` pawn has no initial support-the emphasis in this types of positions is on **speed**. You must develop your pieces and rely on them to fight for the center. This usually leads to the scenarios described above under 1 and 3, second option being only seen in some variations of *French defense* and *Caro-Kann*.

Since White has the advantage of the first move, he is naturally faster, so another benefit of the `e4` is the ability for him to play gambits-hoping to be the first one to get the initiative in the center-which he can not achieve **without** controlling the center.Just the fact that some of the gambits in that link are viable, solid openings can show you just how much the importance of the center control is.

In short-`e4` is played to give you fast development of your pieces-which is always used in fight for the center ( see *Alekhine's defense*, *Ruy Lopez* among many others ).

On the other hand, `d4` is a bit clumsy move **for developing pieces** ( the queen does not have any good square to be developed ), but **d4 pawn has support from the start**.

This reduces Blacks options and immediate counter-attack is impossible. This gives White great solidity in the center but **slows down** his game. Again, the goal is the same-**control the center** but this time the strategy that implements this idea changes:

Instead of fighting the opponents pieces/pawns, that fight for the center, with your own, you will first **occupy** the center with pawns-so you can get **space advantage**.Once you do that you will have **the time** to finish development. Black, on the other hand, has a limited choice here. He can **not** counter attack at `d4` **at once** ( `11. ... Nc6` is useless, opposing to `1. ...Nf6` in the *Alekhine's defense* ), so he **usually** opts for **pressuring White center** with his **light pieces** from **distance**, and then engineers a **flank counter attack**. The positions are usually closed, since White blocks center most of the time, but sometimes **division of control** occurs ( some variations of the *Nimzo-Indian defense* are a good example ) which results in semi-open games.

To summarize:

Both moves are played with **one thing in mind**-to **fight** for the center. The only difference is in the way they implement the fight-with `e4` you get speedy development but **unstable** center which results in a "fast paced" games, yet with `d4` you get **stable center** which slows down the game.

In both cases Black and White fight for the center and **the winner** of that fight **controls** the center-which results in **immediate advantage** for him.

Since chess is a balanced game, if both sides play properly then nobody wins the fight, only one of the 3 scenarios listed above can occur.

> So while it may turn out that 1) e4 and 1) d4 give rise to good games for white I feel it may be more due to the rapid development which these moves allow rather than because these pawns 'control the center'.

Indeed. Just a small adjustment of your observation-quoting you:

So while it may turn out that 1) e4 and 1) d4 give rise to good games for white I feel it may be more due to the **ability to beneficially deploy pieces to fight for the control of the center** which these moves allow rather than because these pawns 'control the center'.

> Indeed, sometimes, these pawns can be an obstacle for white's own pieces.(I am looking at things from white's perspective but the same argument can be similarly posed from the black player's perspective as well.).

Exactly. The whole point of those moves is to enable other pieces to fight for the center. Which move you choose from those 2 is a matter of preference.

One thing for the end:

You can also fight for the center with light pieces only, making pawn thrusts later-after the position gets clarified and one such example is the *Reti opening* ( look at *Reti's* games to see what I exactly mean ).

Check out this section on Wikipedia( Control of the center ) and I think that this article also sheds some valuable light.

If you have further questions leave a comment-I will gladly help.

> Do post your thoughts on this.

You **really** should avoid discussions-here we strive for a single answer.

Best regards.
> 7 votes

# Answer
Controlling the center is very important, for to move pieces from one side of the board to the other, the pieces need to go through the center. While this may seem to have little effect in the beginning of the game, the impact in the middlegame is immense.
> 5 votes

---
Tags: opening, strategy, pawn-structure, center
---


# Question
Title: What is the correct resignation procedure?
I've only played in one tournament before and resigned most of my games when they seemed hopelessly lost. When I do resign, I:

1. Make my move.
2. Record it.
3. Say *"I resign"* and offer to shake my opponent's hand.

I just want to confirm that this is the correct procedure. (I know the handshake is not necessary) Also, would it be legal to skip the first step, i.e. offer resignation without first making a move?

# Answer
> 7 votes
You can resign at any point, as long as the game is still ongoing. You can resign during your opponent's move, for instance. In fact I'd say it's unusual to make a move before resigning -- most people resign because they don't see a good move anymore.

If it's already ended some other way, you can't resign any more. Some people don't want to win on time in a clearly lost position, for instance, but then they should resign before a flag fall is noticed. And if you resigned but later find out that you actually checkmated your opponent earlier in the game (but didn't notice at the time), then you actually won because checkmate ends the game immediately. Yes that happens, mostly in youth tournaments. (Edit: that's FIDE rules. This sort of thing may well be different under USCF rules, I don't know).

There is nothing about the exact procedure in the rules, probably because resigning ends the game and usually makes the opponent happy regardless, so there's never been a need to regulate it. A good way is to stop the clock, say you resign, and shake hands. Write down the result on your score sheet. The important thing is to make sure that the opponent understands your intention.

Official tournaments usually need a signature somewhere (on the score sheet, or on separate little result forms). Make sure the result is recorded correctly on it, that both players sign, and that the arbiter gets the signed form.

# Answer
> 1 votes
I resign by

1. Waiting until the opponent makes a move.
2. Stretching my hand forward and nodding a bit and shaking hands with the opponent.
3. Stopping the clock and signing my score sheet.

This can be compared to offering a draw:

1. Making my move and then saying "I offer draw" directly after pressing the clock.
2. The draw can be refused by either saying "No thanks" or simply making the next move.
3. The draw can be accepted by stretching the hand forward, shaking hands, stopping the clock and signing the score sheet.

Look out! If the opponent "resigns" by entering a check with their own king or opening up their own king for a check, do Not grab the king! In blitz, this is considered an illegal move and will cost you the game. In classical chess, this is considered an illegal move and there will be a time penalty (or extra time for the opponent, I am not sure). If this happens (or any other illegal move happens) then stop the clock and call the arbiter. Happy hunting!

# Answer
> 1 votes
When you want to resign, just resign. In informal play, some people just knock down their king.

"I resign" is a move. And recorded as such on the scoresheets of tournaments. That is to say that you don't need to make a move before resigning.

It's a bit gauche to resign during your opponent's move, but very few opponents will mind.

You offer your hand when resigning.

---
Tags: rules, tournament
---


title: How to write out analysis of a game?

text:
# Question
Title: How to write out analysis of a game?
I have read that one exercise to improve one's analysis/thinking skills is to set up a position, then write out and evaluate all the variations that could take place. Or write out analysis of one's own games (see for example this post).

How do you actually write this out? Or better - how do good players usually write out their analysis?

I once tried it, but my paper soon became a jumbled mess. Particularly as you start to get branching lines and so forth it becomes hard to write and keep track of it all. Especially if you start writing out a line, but want to go back to a previous line. Is there some "special" method to write out analysis?

# Answer
> 4 votes
Computer Database programs (like the popular + free SCID) do the job pretty well **provided** you do not turn the engine on, nor have any other indicators (opening tree, endgame table bases etc.) **enabled** to distract you from focusing on writing down all the lines.

I sometimes first do this in **notepad** as entering moves into a database allows you to see the pieces move, so it is cheating because you're not training your brain to visualize. Once I'm confident of a line and its evaluation, I transfer it over to the database program.

Most DB software comes with nice bells and whistles for comments, variations, arrows/square highlighting as shown in the following example using SCID:

You can save each position into a file and collect oodles of these in a database for future review. Nice, clean and as organized as you can make it!

What's nice is that once you are done, a strong player (preferred) can help critique this and you can add some more notes on where your analysis was inaccurate or just plain wrong.

As an added tip, make sure you start off with tactical positions (examples would be regular puzzles with a lot of forcing lines to calculate out) and then move towards rich analytical positions where there is no clear winning advantage in sight. NM Heisman's suggestion of the Stoyko exercises is definitely worth reading to get an idea of how to do this.

**Update:**

For non-software based ways of organizing analysis, you can try mind-mapping but if that's too messy, why not derive inspiration from the popular MCO/NCO tabular-style of representing opening theory, for example:

# Answer
> 3 votes
Your question is strongly related to how to analyse your chess games so I will start from there.

What are you looking for when you are studying one of your games (maybe a loss)? That's the first thing that you should be asking to yourself.

Someone could respond that he is looking for better moves or ideas that he missed during the game, but this it is only part of the answer. Do you really think that knowing that in this x position you should have played y instead of z is useful? Do you really think that after determining that you will have improved? Of course not.

What you are looking for is **why** you played z in the first place.

What was your thought process? What replies from you opponent did you fear that prompt you to choose your move (yes in the end we always choose the move that feels more pleasant to us).

You should be looking for *patterns* that make you do a bad move.

I give you some examples of mistakes that I do that I noticed from my games:

-If I get an advantage and I have the chance to gain material (often a pawn), I tend to go for it and lose the control of my position as a whole (as if the gain of material was the logical consequence of my superior play).

-I tend to play forcing move in my games. If you think about it, forcing moves is everything that the chess players calculate when looking at a position, but if a forcing move gives you nothing you should play something that keeps the tension.

-I tend to play a move also when I think it is not right just because I am too lazy to calculate more.

And a lot of other patterns.

Actually it is not even necessary that when you spot these patterns you annotate them in your games. It is just enough to take note of these common trends somewhere and make a plan to avoid them in the future (you will start to sense these critical positions that make you go wrong better).

But if you want to annotate your games nevertheless, then at least look for these patterns (they differ from player to player) and write them down next to the critical moves. Write everything that you were thinking in those moments.

In the end, you will notice that you always make the same kind of mistakes (everyone does) and there comes the difficult part: try to make a plan to eliminate them.

Most people stopped before even starting to analyse their games, others stop here because it takes too much effort. Masters did all these things without even realising it because they like chess so much that it was not a chore at all.

# Answer
> 2 votes
I write down a scratch version on paper during the analysis. If I actually do my work well (some days it's hard to decide on any variations at all), then the paper will end up as a mess with lots of lines, arrows, strike throughs, question marks, etc.

Usually once I reach a conclusion, only a few of those lines turn out to be relevant. Those I copy to a final version (in Scid, as others have noted). Doing all the analysis in Scid makes it too easy to turn on an engine, or record all of the moves I try during analysis, most of which will turn out to be irrelevant.

# Answer
> 1 votes
According to the previous suggestion, here is an example on how I do automatic analysis with Crafty (it is not the strongest but I find it useful to check blunders) under Windows :

```
@echo off
for %%i in (w?.pgn) do (
echo annotate %%i w 4-99 0.4 15 1 | crafty >NUL
if %ERRORLEVEL% EQU 0 (
    if EXIST %%i.can (
        type %%i.can >>analyze.pgn
        del %%i %%i.can
    ) else (
        echo %%i.can missing...
    )
) else (
    echo An error has occurred... %ERRORLEVEL%
)
 )
 for %%i in (b?.pgn) do (
echo annotate %%i b 4-99 0.4 15 1 | crafty >NUL
if %ERRORLEVEL% EQU 0 (
    if EXIST %%i.can (
        type %%i.can >>analyze.pgn
        del %%i %%i.can
    ) else (
        echo %%i.can missing...
    )
) else (
    echo An error has occurred... %ERRORLEVEL%
)
 )

```

That script assumes you save your game as White in w?.pgn files (one file for each single game) and b?.pgn as Black, and Crafty analyses only your side. Crafty uses 15 seconds for each move and writes out the analysis only if its score evaluation differs at least 0.4 points from your move evaluation. Only one variation is written. The output is saved into analyze.pgn. This script might be easily adapted for UNIX/Linux and/or with different parameters.

# Answer
> 0 votes
In this day and age, players rely on computer software to help build this sort of analysis. I don't think writing it on paper necessarily helps, but this is a matter of personal preference. Software organizes different branches, you can back it up nicely, and the dog can't get into the cloud to eat it. :) But I see another question here - how to improve thinking skills? There is a book I recommend for this: Imagination in Chess by Paata Gaprindashvili (How to think Creatively and Avoid Foolish Mistakes). Link

# Answer
> 0 votes
Analyzing your own games is important in order to improve your skills. The analysis can be documented on a piece of paper or on your computer using a chess software. Today, computer software (Chessbase) is a professional player's best friend when it comes to documenting and analyzing games. Having said this, it is possible to scribble down the analysis with a pen and paper. In general, the goal of the analysis of a single chess game is to identify its key (critical) positions and make a correct analysis of these positions. Thus, the first step is to identify the critical positions. The second step is to delve into each critical position and annotate the key variations and ideas. If possible, to try to remember ones own line of thought and compare this to e.g. a chess engine's variations and evaluations. By anchoring your analysis to critical positions, it will be possible to structure the annotations in a readable format.

Actually, a lot of (strong) players are not very good at annotating their own games and making careful notes during the analysis. Usually, I would annotate one of my games in case the analysis will be published online or in a chess magazine. Otherwise, it is not worth the effort. I will go through my game with a chess engine (Rybka) and check the positions I thought were critical during the game. Then, I will compare the chess engine variations and evaluations with my own that I had during the game. Then, I will make mental notes without writing any annotations in the game file. I guess that the "best" approach to documenting analysis is individual. The end goal is to understand exactly what happened in the game and what should be improved for the future.

---
Tags: learning, analysis
---


title: Help needed with a chess dilemma

text:
# Question
Title: Help needed with a chess dilemma
How can I get a checkmate in three moves?

```
[FEN "8/2R5/1B1k4/2R5/3N4/1K6/3p4/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

# Answer
> 7 votes
```

[FEN "8/2R5/1B1k4/2R5/3N4/1K6/3p4/8 w - - 0 1"]

1.Kc4 d1=Q 2.Rd5#

```

So two moves, not three.

The first thing to note is that the Black King cannot move. The second thing to note is that (most) non-forcing moves by White will allow Black to Queen the pawn - with check. This fails the challenge.

Experimentation will show that moving the Rook on c7 (for example R7c6+) allows the King to escape to d7 or e7. The other frcing move is Rd7+ but of course that isn't helpful. Since the c7 Rook is protected by the Bishop, we can try moving the other Rook. We have to find forcing moves, so the first one I see is R5c6+. But this lets the King escape to d5 or e5. Another forcing move is Rd5+ but the Black King would eat it. But it's *so close* to checkmate. There's no forcing move with the Bishop. The Knight has 2 forcing moves, but neither seems to help.

So we move the White King to c4 to support the Rook we intend to put on d5. This has the additional benefit of not costing us a tempo if Black queens the pawn. That realization is fundamental here. The White Knight blocks the Queen from capturing the Rook on d5.

---
Tags: problems
---


title: Step-by-step guide to prepare yourself

text:
# Question
Title: Step-by-step guide to prepare yourself
Let's say that I have got three years to prepare myself before my first tournament. Here's my status. I need to come up with a plan. Can you help me prepare one?

1. I am a chess enthusiast. I am **unaware** of my rating (FIDE/USCF). I play at about 1700 on FreeChess.org.
2. I have three years at hand to play my first serious tournament. In other words, I can refrain from playing online/real tournament for three years.
3. I have 30 minutes every day.
4. I have access to a Linux computer.
5. I am interested in knowing your thoughts on how I can best utilize the **450 hours** (half an hour each day for 300 days a year in 3 years) over the next three years to prepare myself well for chess.
6. **My biggest concern is wasting the (scarce) time I have got in playing mindless games on the Internet**. I have realized that the time can be used more productively while getting better at chess.
7. My modest expectation is an increased understanding of the game and feel for its positions.

Questions such as approach to using engines on Linux computer, analyzing games, preparing theory and lines haunt me. I have heard that tournament play helps, but I have also read that since chess is rich in theory, preparing the theory also helps.

**What are the various approaches to coming up with an optimal plan for the 450 hours (over 3 years) that I have got?**

# Answer
> 7 votes
> 1.I am a chess enthusiast. I am unaware of my rating (FIDE/USCF). I play at about 1700 on FreeChess.org.

Enthusiasm and strong discipline are the only thing required-forget FIDE ELO.

> 2.I have three years at hand to play my first serious tournament. In other words, I can refrain from playing online/real tournament for three years.

Online play can be **very useful**-do not discard it. Use it to quickly test new things you learn. Blitz games can help you a lot in this if you find an opponent of **equal strength**.

> 3.I have 30 minutes every day.

Half an hour a day is way too little, but if you seek to increase your strength to a noticeable level, I think that this can be done. You will need iron discipline and **good resources**-they must be short, **crystal clear** examples.

> 4.I have access to a Linux computer.

Good. Internet + decent chess engine can help a lot.

> 5.I am interested in knowing your thoughts on how I can best utilize the 450 hours (half an hour each day for 300 days a year in 3 years) over the next three years to prepare myself well for chess.

Keep reading, I will explain everything in **great detail**-so pay attention!

> 6.My biggest concern is wasting the (scarce) time I have got in playing mindless games on the Internet. I have realized that the time can be used more productively while getting better at chess.

See the answer to second question.

> 7.My modest expectation is an increased understanding of the game and feel for its positions.

This can be done with proper resources, and I will try to recommend some bellow-see third answer.

> 8.Questions such as approach to using engines on Linux computer, analyzing games, preparing theory and lines haunt me. I have heard that tournament play helps, but I have also read that since chess is rich in theory, preparing the theory also helps.What are the various approaches to coming up with an optimal plan for the 450 hours (over 3 years) that I have got?

First off, forget about theory learning-you just do not have enough time to learn openings to a such high level. So my goal is to recommend books that are small and describe openings that are solid and not so sharp. Semi-open openings can give you enough solidity to survive and enough counter-play to have a chance to win.

Against `1.e4` I would recommend *French Defense*, and against everything else *King's Indian defense*. The reason for this is that **nobody can use transpositions to get you out of your opening.** This is important-it will reduce your time required for learning the openings for Black. As White, play the *King's Indian Attack*, since this is the *King's Indian defense* played with reversed colors. Again, you save your time by practically learning to play **only two openings.** I recommend *Starting Out* series, since they explain these openings and their **basic** middle game very well.

Then, you will need to learn to play middle game well. You can use *Andrew Soltis-Pawn Structure Chess(1995)* for that, **but read only these chapters:**

1. *The e5 chain* so you can master the *French defense-Advance variation*
2. *The King's Indian complex*-useful for you because you play both King's Indian attack and defense.

With *Starting Out* series, and with these two chapters, you should be able to hold your own against any player/engine. Your only problem shall be theory, but with the chapters from *Soltis'* book you could find good moves on your own since you should be able to understand the middle game quite well.

OK, I have covered your opening repertoire and middle game plans, now is the time for tactics/positional play.

Again, for positional principles consult *Soltis'* book, as for tactics you should utilize Internet to solve puzzles-ChessTempo.com can help.

As for endgame, you will have to get a good book for the beginners, but I just can not recommend one now, if I find a good one I will edit the answer and inform you via comment.

Now, let us create a timetable for you, so you can use your scarce time the best you can:

1. Get and read books for the openings-you can not progress further if you get smashed in 20 moves. Start with *French defense* and then move on to *Kings Indian defense*. Leave *Kings Indian Attack* for the end.
2. Once you feel confident that you have learned one opening **variation** ask someone to play with you 3 blitz games ( **five minutes both** ) so you can memorize the opening variation-you will be surprised how effective this is. Five-minutes-each blitz game means that you can play 3 games per day. After 12 games of blitz, you should memorize the variation. To increase your learning efficiency play *King's Indian Attack* with White **all the time**, and shuffle between *French defense* and *Kings Indian defense* ( of course, tell your friend to play `1.e4` or `1.d4/c4...`, based on which defense as Black you wish to train ). This way you will learn the openings-**forget about the outcome of the game**, for now we just want to focus on you not losing in first 20+ moves.
3. Read the '*Soltis'* book now, since you can survive the opening. Those 2 chapters will help you to find a plan in the middle game **with speed and easiness**. Once you read them and feel confident in your knowledge, ask a friend to do the same as before-play a five-minute-each blitz game, only this time **result does matter** since you know how to play middle game. This is the good moment for you to also experiment with the games online since we want you to get as much experience in playing these openings and middle games as you can get.
4. At some point you will feel like you have your opening and middle game "together" but you lack tactical strength to win or save the game. This will be the time to rest from openings and just solve puzzles. You can do that online or by getting newspapers or something. Again, once you are confident in your tactical improvement ask a friend to play again, or play online.
5. For endgame try to find any beginners book on basic principles and basic endings. You will not need complex study of this, just some basic knowledge. Once you read the book and feel like you have learned something play again against a friend/online.
6. From that moment on, you just keep playing and refer to the books when you need to remember some variation or a plan.

Now, the tournament play strategy:

Tournament is consisted of players **of various strength**. Once you go there, **forget about winning every game!** Just forget it! You will need **every ounce of mental strength** to deal with other things ( unexpected defeat/unfair referee 's decision/rude behavior of the spectators or your opponent ). Also, by not **forcing the win** you will not **squander drawn games** trying to prove a win that does not exist. Half a point is truly BIG if you keep not losing. If you can win do it of course, but tend to play safe-drawing a game is OK. Remember, you are there **to have fun since this is your first tournament**, and if you win a game that is great, if you lose it is OK too, move on and do not grief-another game will bring new adventure/experience. If you reach around 50% of total points at the end of the tournament consider your result **a great success**.

To summarize:

This will be your first tournament-try to finish it with a positive result and good experiences to remember. To achieve that **do not** force a win but **just play the game** and enjoy it.

Prepare your opening repertoire so you can hold your own against anybody-you can do that by practicing the way described above.

Prepare your middle games, so you can **save the time on your clock** by finding moves/plans quickly.

Train tactics so you can **save the time on your clock** and increase your chances to win or save the game.

Learn basic endings so you do not ruin a good game you played previously.

If you have any questions leave a comment and I will reply.

Good luck on your first tournament!

Best regards.

---
Tags: engines, preparation
---


title: Randomness in Chess?

text:
# Question
Title: Randomness in Chess?
I have had periods in my life when I became quite engaged in Chess. I am also a card player - particularly Bridge and Two Handed Pinochle (old game, not very popular these days). Oftentimes I get bored/frustrated with Chess because there is apparently no "luck factor" - no randomness. So I prefer a good game of two handed Pinochle to chess: It requires great skill, but also has a significant luck factor, whose impact is of course diminished the more you play against a particular opponent and the laws of probability become manifest, so that the more skillful player emerges.

I understand that's what Chess fans love about the game - it's a contest of pure skill - but I often feel that the luck of the random factor detracts from my interest - diminishes the excitement - it's all about learning everything that was done before and trying to master it and then improve in little ways that you can, although most of what you come up with will already be "old hat", unless you're a chess genius.

So, am I missing something? Is there a random factor in chess (I don't mean getting lucky that your opponent has a headache and can't play as well as he should) or am I just too lazy and superficial to appreciate the game (that may indeed be true...).

# Answer
> 7 votes
Randomness is important in things like card games, because if everyone knew what the cards were, they could always figure out the most optimal play and it wouldn't be much fun.

Chess is incredibly hard to play well. There are many possibilities and it is often very hard to judge which one is the best. Learning everything that's gone before hardly helps, because games reach new unique positions quite quickly, and then you're on your own again.

So you get new positions, and you're often reduced to just picking one moves out of several possibilities by, basically, guessing.

To me that's close enough to the effects of randomness in other games. I believe there is luck in chess too, like making a good decision for the wrong reasons.

# Answer
> 7 votes
If it's randomness you're after, why not try Chess960, aka Fischer Random Chess? The starting position of the pieces is random, which can lead to very exciting games dominated by tactics. There's still no "luck", but at least memorizing openings is less of a factor.

# Answer
> 1 votes
I'm an old chess champion. I won 3rd place in a city championship has no age limit, when I was 10 years old.

I can definitely say that chess has luck possibility/factor/variable in it. All my experiences with chess showed me chess is not only a logic war. Yes it's a war like all others have psychological side. Therefore it brings your matter. Let me give you an example. The fundamental of the issue is that "When you play chess and if you remember what I just wrote here, would it effect your feelings/logic chain of your strategy, *thus destiny of the game?*"

It's a deep topic to discuss here.

"You sit at the board and suddenly your heart leaps. Your hand trembles to pick up the piece and move it. But what chess teaches you is that you must sit there calmly and think about whether it's really a good idea and whether there are other, better ideas." *-Stanley Kubrick*

"Few things are as psychologically brutal as chess." *-Kasparov*

Hope it helps

# Answer
> 0 votes
Others have pointed out sources of luck in chess very well. However, if we know little or nothing about opponent we are playing against, there is an additional "luck factor".

For example, you are about to play me (and you know nothing about me) with the black pieces. You are equally good at all the openings; however, I am extremely good at Sicilian and very bad at everything else. After I played `1. e4`, I am lucky if you play the Sicilian, and unlucky if you play anything else.

I think we all have our favorite pet lines that we hope our opponent plays, and there lines that we just never got around to study properly that we hope our opponent does not play.

The above can also be applied to other stages of the game, for example one might be great at rook endings, and terrible at knight endings. Hence, they would be lucky if the opponent chooses to simply to a rook ending rather than a knight ending(assuming the opponent is equally good at both types of endings), even if both endings are objectively equal.

In sum, we have strengths and weaknesses, and it is often sheer luck that our opponent let's us play to our strengths.

---
Tags: learning, theory
---


title: Best black opening move for E4

text:
# Question
Title: Best black opening move for E4
Can some one tell me which is the best opening move when white plays e4, read somewhere, to counter e4 **Sicilian Defence** is one of the best?

# Answer
> 2 votes
Your question is **unanswerable**, please consider rephrasing it.

The reason for me saying this is that every opening that has `=` evaluation in `ECO` is **good response** to `1.e4`. You could look for statistics on openings but it is **useless**-in my opinion statistics are stupid since they reveal to you nothing about the game. It is just a result of mathematical division-you can only use them to see which defense to `1.e4` **is the easiest to play with** for **most of the people**.

Compare the *French defense* and *Sicilian defense*:

Currently *Sicilian defense* "scores better" than *French defense* according to statistics, but that conclusion is "valid" if you sum up the efficiency of all the variations in both openings.

If you **remove** the dubious ***Rubinstein variation*** of the *French defense* from the calculation than **it scores nearly as good** as the **entire** *Sicilian defense*.

My point is that you have **many good** opening moves against `1.e4`, you just have to pick one you like.

Browse through openings against `1.e4`and pick one that **suites your style**.

This depends entirely up to you-if you like slow games **with small amount of variations to learn** then pick some semi-open defense ( *Caro-Kan*, *French-defense* and so on ) or if you have time to learn and wish open battle riddled with sharp tactical play then pick *Sicilian defense* or *Modern defense* or whatever.

Remember: **Each opening that is evaluated as valid**, meaning it gives **equal chances to both of you for winning** is a good candidate.

**You need to choose one that suits your style and just go with it.**

If you have further question leave a comment.

Best regards.

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


title: ChessDB databases import

text:
# Question
Title: ChessDB databases import
I've just installed the ChessDB software hosted at SourceForge. While discovering the software I see that the databases that come with the software are empty and I would like to know how to import new databases of openings or endgames,...etc. Any help greatly appreciated !!

# Answer
He (author) explains how to go about getting this here. The sourceforge game databases are available here

**Update:** To go about downloading the database from the second sourceforge link provided above, the author provides instructions here (can do it directly form ChessDB's *Tools* menu).
> 1 votes

---
Tags: opening, analysis, software, endgame, open-source
---


# Question
Title: What is the correct pawn promotion procedure?
This may be a frivolous question, as I believe that most chess players are good sportsmen, but I was wondering: what is the technically correct procedure for promoting a pawn to a queen? Do you ask your opponent to put the queen on the promotion square, or do you take it from his pile of captured pieces yourself (provided of course that queens have been exchanged)? If you have to ask your opponent, what happens if he takes his time (as in the case where you may be in time trouble, for example?). If you have to take it yourself, are there rules around where you are allowed to keep captured pieces (the absurd situation being that your opponent hides the captured queen when the promotion becomes evident).

Similarly, I vaguely remember that there was some professional game that got delayed because they couldn't find a second queen after one of the players promoted while still having his original queen on the board. This puzzled me a bit: in my school days, we would either use an upside-down rook or even a pawn rested on its side to mark it as a queen - is this for some reason unacceptable in tournament play?

# Answer
The procedure is (FIDE rules): move the pawn to its promotion square, then replace it with the piece you want. You can take it from the captured pieces yourself, your opponent does nothing. If the piece isn't readily available, you can stop the clock and ask the arbiter to bring one. Your choice of piece is only finalized when it touches the promotion square. See the Laws of Chess

An upside down rook is a rook. A pawn on its side is a pawn, and thus an illegal move.

The FIDE rules will be changed a bit in the upcoming July 2014 Laws of Chess, see e.g. this ChessCafe "Arbiter's Notebook" column by Geurt Gijssen, who is involved in the rules changes. From July, it will also be legal to remove the pawn from the board without moving it to the promotion square (followed by putting the piece on the promotion square), and it will also be legal to place the piece first and then remove the pawn. Those used to be illegal moves.

And also from July, if you move the pawn to the promotion square and then press the clock, you've made an illegal move (that's already the case now), and as usual the pawn counts as touched and you will have to promote it in the legal way, *but you will be forced to promote to queen*. Apparently people were using this illegal move and the delay it will bring as extra thinking time to decide which piece to promote to.

As you can see there are some fiddly details that may be different with USCF rules, but I don't know those.
> 27 votes

# Answer
FIDE rules 6.12.b:

> A player may stop the clocks only in order to seek the arbiter’s assistance, for example when promotion has taken place and the piece required is not available.

This should solve all issues regarding to having promotion pieces available.

Sometimes players take the queen from the opponent's pile of captured pieces many moves before a possible promotion just as a psychological trick to signal his opponent that he has won the game already and should be able to promote soon.

An upside down rook looks like a rook and quacks like a rook, thus it is a rook in official games. There is no reason not to use a queen, and for example the opponent wouldn't know whether you accidentally put the rook upside down or meant to promote a queen. Of course, if a queen cannot be found anywhere, the arbiter may decide to allow exceptions.

And as to deliberately hiding your captured pieces from the opponent, there's always Rule 12.1:

> The players shall take no action that will bring the game of chess into disrepute.
> 8 votes

---
Tags: rules, tournament, pawn-promotion
---


# Question
Title: How can I find the gained points per game?
In another post it was written that for games played during the 2013 World Championship match, Carlsen gained 3.7 points if he wins, Anand gained 6.3 points if he wins, and that in a draw Carlsen lost 1.3 points that Anand gained. How were these numbers arrived at?

# Answer
> 4 votes
By "points" you probably mean rating "points". Rating is a measure of player's strength, not a prize for their performance. To me, talking about "gaining rating points" sounds a bit wrong. A player's rating increases if he wins and decreases if he loses. In the case of a draw, player's rating moves closer to his opponent's rating (or does not change if the rating difference is small).

Here's how the Elo system works:

The result of a game is 1 for a win, 0.5 for a draw, and 0 for a loss. The expected score of a player A against player B is a function of their rating difference. For FIDE ratings, see the tables in Section 8 here. After a tournament or a match, the rating is then updated using the formula

(new rating) = (old rating) + K * (result - expected result),

where in the FIDE system K=30 for players with few games, K=10 for players whose rating has been above 2400, and K=15 for other players.

If player A's expected score is E, then player B's expected score is 1-E. Thus, when two players play against each other e.g. in a match and their K-factor is equal, one can easily see player A's rating increases by the same amount player B's rating decreases.

For more information, see e.g. the Wikipedia article.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Two links for convenience:

---
Tags: rating, statistics, elo
---


title: How to make a plan in an endgame?

text:
# Question
Title: How to make a plan in an endgame?
I need help on how to improve my thinking about endgames and how to produce a plan, what should I focus on and what should I not?

# Answer
Planning in the endgame (this is what I seek on endgames)

Here is a breakdown of the different imbalances and what you should aim for:

1. Material (owning pieces of greater value than the opponent's);
2. Space (the annexation of territory on a chess board);
3. Superior Minor Piece (the interplay between Bishops and Knights);
4. Pawn Structure (a broad subject that encompasses doubled pawns, isolated pawns, etc.);
5. Control of a key file or square (files and diagonals act as pathways for your pieces, while squares act as outposts);
6. Lead in development (more force in a specific area of the board);
7. Initiative (dictating the tempo of a game).

If we are to use these things properly we must be able to break down our thinking in a way that allows us to dissect any particular position.

Here are the stages of my thinking technique that enables us to accomplish this:

1. Figure out the positive and negative imbalances for both sides;
2. Figure out the side of the board you wish to play on. You can only play where a favorable imbalance or the possibility of creating a favorable imbalance exists;
3. Don't calculate! Instead, dream up various fantasy positions, i.e., the positions you would most like to achieve;
4. Once you find a fantasy position that makes you happy, you must figure out if you can reach it. If you find that your choice was not possible to achieve, you must create another dream position easier to achieve;
5. Only now you will look at the moves you wish to calculate (called candidate moves). The candidate moves are all the moves that lead to our dream position.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: strategy, endgame
---


# Question
Title: Is the following Knight sac in the Sicilian Najdorf justified?
```
 [FEN ""]
 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Nbd7 8. Qf3 h6 9. Bxf6    Nxf6 10. O-O-O Qb6 11.e5 Nd7 12. Bc4 dxe5 13. Nxe6

```

# Answer
I ran this through Stockfish at 15 minutes per move. What I have found is that the sacrifice is sound and wins. But for a 'won' game, it is about the hardest road I have ever seen. The evaluation of the position is *less than a pawn advantage* for White up through move 25 or so.

The sacrifice leads to opportunities for White, but both sides are walking the razor's edge.

```

[FEN "r1b1kb1r/1p1n1pp1/pq2p2p/4p3/2BN1P2/2N2Q2/PPP3PP/2KR3R w kq - 0 1"]

1.Nxe6 fxe6 2.Qh5+ Kd8 3.Qf7 Qe3+ 4.Kb1 Qxf4 5.Qxe6 Qf6 6.Qh3 Bc5 7.Rhf1
Qc6 8.Bd5 Qg6 9.Bxb7 Ra7 10.Be4 Qe8 11.Nd5 Rf8 12.Qh4+ g5 13.Qxh6 Rxf1 14.
Rxf1 Bb7 15.Qxg5+ Kc8 16.h4 Qd8 17.Qg3 Bxd5 18.Bxd5 Kb8 19.h5 Rc7 20.Rd1
Ka7 21.Be4 Qf6 22.Qg4 Nb6 23.Qf5 Qg7 24.a3 Be3 25.g4 Bf4 26.Rd6 Nc4 27.Rg6
Qd7 28.Qxd7 Rxd7 29.Bd3 Nd2+ 30.Ka2 e4 31.Be2 Kb8 32.g5 Nf3 33.Rg8+ Kc7
34.g6 Kd6 35.Rh8 Nh4 36.Bxa6 Be5 37.Re8 e3 38.b4 Nf5 39.Rf8 Ra7 40.Bd3 Nd4
41.h6 Nxc2 42.Kb1 Nxa3+ 43.Kc1 Re7 44.h7 Nc4 45.Rd8+ Kc7 46.Rg8 Nb6 47.
h8=Q Bxh8 48.Rxh8 e2 49.Bxe2 Kd6 50.Kd2 Rg7 51.Bd3 Nd5 52.Rd8+ Ke5 53.b5
Nb6 54.Rf8 Ke6 55.Ke3 Rb7 56.Kf4 Ra7 57.Kg5 Ke5 58.Kh6 Rd7 59.Rf5+ Kd4 60.
g7 Rd8 61.Rf8 Rd6+ 62.Bg6 Kc5 63.g8=Q Kxb5 64.Qb3+ Kc6 65.Qc3+ Kb7  66.Rf7+
Nd7 67.Qc5 Rd1 68.Re7 Rh1+ 69.Kg7 Rh7+ 70.Bxh7 Ka6 71.Bd3+ Kb7 72.Rxd7+
Kb8 73.Qf8#

```

The general method of White's win isn't a Tal-like knockout, but instead we find that Black cannot hold onto the Kingside pawns. They drop off allowing White connected outside passers. Black has plenty of resources however. In return, Black gets a passer on the e-file that will be a real threat. Black also eats two of the three pawns on the Queenside. I think this passer is one too many, and it's going to kill him.

After `2. Qh5+`, Black's King is stuck in the middle of the board. This will be a lodestone that will haunt Black for the rest of the game. Yet another example of what happens when the weak `f7` square is exploited. This is really the lesson of this sacrifice - "Weaken the `f7` square and you might just get some traction."

`3. Qf7` and the White Queen is in Black's business.

After move 5, we see White's side is orderly, his two minor pieces are developed, his King is secure, and his Rooks are ready to leap into action. Charitably speaking, one of Blacks minor pieces is developed. His Rooks are still in the box, and one Bishop is entombed. Black is trying to trade off the Queens. If he does, he wins. When one has a material advantage, it's generally best to trade off pieces. Of course, White is having none of it.

`6... Bc5` Black must develop. Now his Bishop matters and he can activate his Rook.

Up to move 9, White harasses the Black Queen developing a Rook with tempo, then picks up the loose b pawn. This allows Black Queen Rook to enter the game, but now Black as 2 isolated pawns to defend.

`10... Qe8` To this point, Black has managed to swap his King's and Queen's positions! White's Rooks control two open files and has a big grip on the center. The Rook on `d1` is a monster, holding the center, pointing at the exposed Black King while pinning the Knight in the process. Remember, if Black can't use the Knight, it does not really exist, and thus White is, after a fashion, not down any material.

`11... Rf8` challenges White's `f` Rook. The cost is terrible - the remaining pawns on the kingside. `12. Qh4+` is frightening, exposing Black's folly. At this point, it's worth pointing out how the computer is very particular with tempo. Instead of an immediate Rook trade White throws a check first - again hitting the misplaced King and cause Black to further weaken himself. Amusingly (for White) the Black Knight is still immobile. If he moves it to, say `b6`, Rf8 wins. I would be interested to see peoples' alternatives to `11... Rf8.`

`15. Qxg5+` White scoops up the other pawn, with tempo, adding insult to injury. The immediate `16. h4` is the signal Black's in for a long day.

`17... Bxd5` Black has finally completed his development though White has the open file and the majority of the center.

`20. Rd1` Back to the center, now pressuring the Queen.

`23. Qf5` White now offers the Queen trade which is declined. This is another point in the game where a variation could be helpful.

Through move 26, Black's defensive play is quite good. He's a tempo from picking up the pawn on `g4`. White's `27. Rg6` supports `g4` again with tempo. This move does three things: it threatened the Black Q, defends g4, and frees the White Q to run if Black were to play `Ne3`.

Through move 29, the Queens drop off, Black claims the `d` file, and White blocks it with his Bishop, simultaneously preventing a nasty Knight fork on d2. Such economy!

`30... e4` Black has threats, too. Black's play is a great lesson on how not to give up. White is one bad move from losing this game.

`31... Nf3` wins the g pawn? Nope, White checks with tempo allowing the jammed pawn to move out of danger. Again, seeing alternatives to `31...Kb8` would be interesting.

`35...Nh4` looks goofy as it allows the a-pawn to drop off. But it's lights-out if White is allowed to play h6. In that case, White wins the Black Bishop and threatens a discovered check with `g7`. Economy!

You might think Black should just resign. And maybe he should. Now let's look at the defensive resources that are available to him.

First, Black's `e3` hits White where he isn't. That pawn is scary. Only the Bishop is saving White. Black attacks it. If the Bishop is driven off the `a6`-`f1` diagonal, Black wins or draws.

`41. h6` computers are cool under fire.

`41... Nxc2` if `Bxc2`, White loses. Now the threat is `Nxb4+` where white's defending Bishop drops off, and it's mayhem that favors Black.

`42. Kb1` the Bishop needs help. White must now pay the Butcher's Bill.

`44. h7` White pours on the pressure, but Black's Bishop and Rook combo is very effective.

`44... Nc4` is hard to understand. Perhaps it is one of those moves that moves a bad evaluation out one move. Some thought here is needed.

`49... Kd6` is a great example of an inhuman computer move, where the machine is making choices about fractions of pawns. The alternative is `49... Rxe2 50. g7 Rg1 51. g8=Q Rxg8 52. Rxg8` and Black has lost the exchange for a pawn. I would like to know why Black played `48... e2` at all.

Finally, to answer the OP's question, is the sacrifice justified? That's a value judgement. If I played this as White, and won, it would easily be the hardest win in my 'career'. A win is good, but this game is a hard, risky win. If one is willing to walk the razor's edge and one is good at managing one's clock, a point's a point.

This could be one of those games where one side has to play MUCH better in order to hold. That is, maybe White has to play like a master to hold, but Black can play like an 'Expert' to draw. That is, whoever missteps first, loses, and White has more land-mines to avoid.

If anyone has alternate variations they'd like me to run, let me know.
> 8 votes

# Answer
Let's try to understand the position after Nxe6 (see below). The material balance after fxe6 will be as follows: pawns are equal, so black will be one light piece up. Next, let's look at King safety. The white king is perfectly safe on c1. The black king becomes exposed on the h5-e8 diagonal as well as on the d-file that is already controlled by the white Rd1. Now, let's consider piece activity and roles. All of white's pieces are active and have an important role, except for Rh1. While black has a sad story, where the Ra8, Bc8, Bf8 and Rh8 are more or less inactive.

```
[FEN ""]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Nbd7 8. Qf3 h6 9. Bxf6 Nxf6 10. O-O-O Qb6 11. e5 Nd7 12. Bc4 dxe5 13. Nxe6

```

Of course, Bc8 and Bf8 cover the squares in front of black's king, while the respective rooks will become strong once they are activated. This means that black's material advantage should not be underestimated. Yet, at this very moment, white will get a strong attack on the black king, precisely because black's pieces are not ready to meet the attack! Here is a possible continuation:

```
[FEN ""]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Nbd7 8. Qf3 h6 9. Bxf6 Nxf6 10. O-O-O Qb6 11. e5 Nd7 12. Bc4 dxe5 13. Nxe6 fxe6 14.Qh5+ Kd8 15.Qf7

```

In terms of plans, I think black will try to hide the king on a7, while white should check a lot and grab as much material as possible in the process. In summary, I think that the sacrifice on e6 has the typical motifs of a white knight sacrifice in the Sicilian Najdorf variation. The main criterium is that the black king should become exposed and attacked in an active manner. I think this criterium is clearly met in this case!
> 0 votes

---
Tags: sicilian-defense, sacrifice, najdorf
---


# Question
Title: Najdorf Variation: strategy after taking poisoned pawn?
After

```
[FEN ""]
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Qb6 8. Qd2 Qxb2 9. Rb1  Qa3 10. e5 dxe5 11. fxe5

```

what are black's main strategic goals? As this is supposed to be extremely sharp and complicated, what are the pitfalls to avoid?

```
[FEN "rnb1kb1r/1p3ppp/p3pn2/4P1B1/3N4/q1N5/P1PQ2PP/1R2KB1R b Kkq - 0 11"]

```

# Answer
> 16 votes
It would be strange it it were possible to give a short list of pitfalls for one of the most complicated variations in chess. I'll try to give some hints, I don't play it from either side but I'm an opening nut.

First, you've chosen to include `10.e5 dxe5 11.fxe5` but the interesting position is the one after `9...Qa3`, where black has chosen to accept the so-called Poisoned Pawn. The other really big main line is `10.f5`, and the strategy is similar (white tries to checkmate black).

Also first, the current big fashion for black is to play `7...h6 8.Bh4` before playing `8...Qb6`. So if you're looking for recent games, look for games with that included as well.

In the position after `9...Qa3`, white has a huge lead of development. Black has an extra pawn and the better pawn structure. *Fundamental Chess Openings* says "It is in fact very attractive for White to offer this pawn, and it is equally attractive for Black to take it. An ideal setting for a ferocious fight!"

White's strategy is to go all-out to checkmate black's king, as he's burned his bridges already. Black's strategy is to survive the onslaught and somehow return to a normal position (develop his pieces, return his queen to a more normal square) and if he manages that, he'll often be winning. Theoretically, chess is of course a draw, which means here that many of the long, long calculated out lines end up with white having just enough attack to give perpetual check, but not checkmate.

An example from FCO:

```
[FEN ""]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2
9.Rb1 Qa3 10.f5 Nc6 11.fxe6 fxe6 12.Nxc6 bxc6 { Now comes a second pawn sacrifice
to speed things up } 13.e5 dxe5 14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.Ne4 { This is the starting point of
variations, based on themes like } 15... Be7 16.Be2 h5 17.Rb3 Qa4 18.Nxf6!? Bxf6
19.c4

```

"It seems incredible that White should have sufficient compensation for the great material sacrifices he has made, but Black's position is extremely uncoordinated and his king has no safe place anywhere on the board. According to the present state of opening theory, attack and defence are equally balanced, but... everyone is holding their breath for future developments."

Here's Radjabov-Karjakin (1-0) from 2006 that helped make `10.e5` be the most popular line for a few years again (source: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1433642)

```
[FEN ""]
[Event "Cap D'Agde"]
[Site "Cap d'Agde FRA"]
[Date "2006.11.02"]
[EventDate "2006.10.30"]
[Round "3.2"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Teimour Radjabov"]
[Black "Sergey Karjakin"]
[ECO "B97"]
[WhiteElo "2729"]
[BlackElo "2672"]
[PlyCount "65"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6
7. f4 Qb6 8. Qd2 Qxb2 9. Rb1 Qa3 10. e5 dxe5 11. fxe5 Nfd7
12. Ne4 h6 13. Bh4 Qxa2 14. Rd1 Qb2 15. Qe3 Bc5 16. Be2 Nc6
17. c3 (17.Nxe6!! { White could have played this } Qb4+ {forced} 18.c3 Bxe3 19.Nc7+ Kf8 20.cxb4 Rb8 21.Bg3 {with the threat of e6}) Qa3 18. O-O O-O 19. Nf6+ Nxf6 20. Bxf6 Nxd4 21. Rxd4
Bxd4 22. Qxd4 gxf6 23. exf6 Qa5 24. h4 Kh7 25. Bd3+ Qf5
26. Re1 Rg8 27. Kh2 a5 28. g4 Qxd3 29. Qxd3+ Kh8 30. Re5 Rxg4
31. Rh5 Rg6 32. Qd8+ Kh7 33. Qe7 1-0

```

Here's a Stellwagen-Anand, 0-1 in 2009, in the `10.e5` variation. The early queen sacrifice is long-known theory, technically `17...Ra4!?` is the first new move of the game but it's unclear how much was preparation. `38...Kb8??` could have thrown away the game to `39.h6!`, later `46.h6??` is also a blunder.

```
[FEN ""]
[Event "2008-2009 Bundesliga"]
[Site "Baden Baden GER"]
[Date "2009.03.28"]
[EventDate "2008.10.03"]
[Round "14"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Daniel Stellwagen"]
[Black "Viswanathan Anand"]
[ECO "B97"]
[WhiteElo "2605"]
[BlackElo "2783"]
[PlyCount "104"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6
7. f4 Qb6 8. Qd2 Qxb2 9. Rb1 Qa3 10. e5 dxe5 11. fxe5 Nfd7
12. Ne4 h6 13. Bb5 axb5 14. Nxb5 hxg5 15. Nxa3 Rxa3 16. O-O
Nc6 17. Rb5 Ra4 18. Nxg5 Ndxe5 19. Rxe5 Nxe5 20. Qc3 Nc6
21. Rxf7 Ra5 22. Rxg7 Bc5+ 23. Kh1 Rf8 24. Qd3 Rxa2 25. h4
Ra1+ 26. Kh2 Bd4 27. Qg6+ Kd8 28. Rf7 Rxf7 29. Qxf7 Bg1+
30. Kg3 e5 31. h5 Nd4 32. Qf6+ Kc7 33. Qxe5+ Kb6 34. Qd6+ Ka7
35. Qc5+ Kb8 36. Qd6+ Ka8 37. Qd8 Nf5+ 38. Kh3 Kb8 39. Ne6
Ra3+ 40. Kg4 Nh6+ 41. Kf4 Bh2+ 42. Ke4 Nf7 43. Qf8 Nd6+
44. Kd4 Ka7 45. Nc5 Ra5 46. h6 Bg1+ 47. Kd3 Bf5+ 48. Qxf5 Nxf5
49. h7 Ra3+ 50. Nb3 Bd4 51. Ke4 Bh8 52. Kxf5 Ra2 0-1

```

Edit: crap, I didn't realize the PGN viewer doesn't show comments. I only had a few, but they don't show, sorry.

# Answer
> 4 votes
If blacks knows this variation well, and white does not know it well, then black can grab the pawn and keep it to the end. As Fischer said, "a pawn is a pawn is a pawn".

The idea is to grab the pawn, survive the opening, then end up in the middle game with an extra pawn. Once Black manages to survive the opening and develop, then he will actually be better.

Since this involves sharp variations, it is only played by those who know it well. It is not played much any more at high level.

There are few books on this variation.

# Answer
> 1 votes
Let's try to understand the position after ...Qa3 (see below). First of all, the name itself (Poisoned Pawn) already indicates that black should be careful in this variation. Let's look at the material balance: black is one pawn up. Next, looking at the King safety, the black king is slightly less safe because the white pieces are more actively placed.

```
[FEN ""]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Qb6 8. Qd2 Qxb2 9. Rb1 Qa3

```

What should black look out for / aim for? Well, the Qa3 is not perfectly placed. The queen is better placed on c7. The queen might also become trapped. Black should focus on king safety and queen safety. Probably try to castle kingside, Bf8-e7, O-O. As well as Qa3-a5-c7. White should aim for launching an attack on the black king. The e4-e5 advance is one option, f4-f5 is another option, Bxf6 gxf6 is a third option.

White aims to keep all the pieces (avoid exchanges) and keep the black king unsafe. Black aims for king and queen safety and for exchanges of pieces that do not lead to static (pawn structure) weaknesses. I think that black should stay active and launch a counter-attack when needed. It is not unusual for Sicilian Najdorf positions to become very sharp and for the black king to stay in the center. The player with the black pieces should be ready for such positions and handle them as well as possible!

---
Tags: sicilian-defense, najdorf
---


# Question
Title: Why is white in trouble in the following endgame?
Playing white against my computer I ended up in the following position (with white to move). To me it looked about even, but no matter what I tried I kept losing the position, and indeed stockfish rates the position around -1. What exactly is bad about white's position here?

```
[FEN "5k2/pppb1pp1/5p2/3Pn3/4B3/2P2N2/P1P3PP/6K1 w - - 0 1"]

```

# Answer
What's bad for White in this position is that his structure is already slightly worse (isolated a-pawn), and that Black can worsen it further. White's advanced d-pawn is actually a liability that Black can readily attack by bringing her king forward. The pawn will prove difficult to defend, and at the very least Black can basically force White to accept being saddled with two isolated c-pawns as well by playing `...c6` at some point (when the alternative would be to lose a pawn straightaway on d5).

Is this enough to mean that White is necessarily lost? Probably not (though I certainly wouldn't fancy trying to hold it against a strong engine). But the point is that Black doesn't have similar structural weaknesses, and so she doesn't have the same natural targets to deal with (her doubled pawns aren't nearly the liability that White's are), while White will be forced to keep an eye guarding his queenside. To my mind, this is enough to explain Stockfish preferring Black.

Unfortunately we don't have inline annotations active for the site's PGN viewer, so I will let the verbal explanation already given suffice, and provide just a handful of variations illustrating the points given.

```
[fen "5k2/pppb1pp1/5p2/3Pn3/4B3/2P2N2/P1P3PP/6K1 w - - 0 1"]

1.Kf2
    ( 1.Nd2 Ke7 2.c4 f5 3.Bd3
        ( 3.Bf3 Kd6 4.Kf2 Ba4 5.c3 c6 6.dxc6 Bxc6 )
    3...c6 4.dxc6 Nxc6 )
1...Ke7 2.Ke3 Kd6 3.Kd4 c5+ $1 4.dxc6
    ( 4.Ke3 $2 Ng4+ 5.Kd2 f5 6.Bd3 Kxd5 )
4...Nxc6+ *

```
> 6 votes

---
Tags: analysis, endgame
---


# Question
Title: Queen's Gambit Accepted : how should White continue after 3.e3 Be6?
The Wikipedia article on Queen's Gambit Accepted simply notes that "... White has good compensation after 4.Ne2".

```

  [FEN ""]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3.e3 Be6 4. Ne2 (4.Qc2)

```

What about Qc2 to add further pressure to the c4 black pawn?

# Answer
> Queen's Gambit Accepted : how should White continue after 3.e3 Be6?

```
[FEN ""]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3.e3 Be6 4. Na3!?

```

seems good to me-Black would not be able to hold the `c4` pawn. I would take `c4` pawn with the knight and head for `e5`. The other knight can bolster him from `f3` and there will always be threats to `f7` or to Blacks light squared bishop with `Ng5`.

> The Wikipedia article on Queen's Gambit Accepted simply notes that "... White has good compensation after 4.Ne2".

```
[FEN ""]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3.e3 Be6 4. Ne2 b5? 5.a4! c6 ( 5...a6 6.axb5 ) ( 5...bxa4 6.Nf4 Bd5 7.Nc3 c6 8.e4! ) 6.axb5! cxb5 7.Nec3!! Bd7 ( 7...Qd7 8.Qf3 Nc6! 9.Nxb5! ( 9.d5?-+ Nb4 10.dxe6 Nc2+ 11.Ke2 Qd3#) Bf5 10.Nd2 Bd3 11.Nxc4+- ) 8.Qf3 Bc6 9.d5 Bd7 10.b3! Qc8 ( 10...b4 11.Bxc4!! bxc3? 12.d6!+- Bc6 13.Qxf7+ Kd7 14.Qe6+! Ke8 15. d7+! Qxd7 16.Qf7+ Kd8 17.Qxf8++-) 11.bxc4 b4 ( 11...bxc4 12.Na3 ) 12.Na4 Bxa4 13.Rxa4 a5

```

I bet that strong engine can find even better compensation for White than one I provided above, but I also think that my lines are sufficient as well.

> What about Qc2 to add further pressure to the c4 black pawn?

It should work, but you will **needlessly** complicate matters too much.

Hopefully this answer is what you were looking for.

If you have further questions leave a comment.

Best regards.
> 8 votes

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


title: How good is 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 Nf6?

text:
# Question
Title: How good is 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 Nf6?
When I play online blitz, playing black, I usually answer `1. e4 e5 2. Qh5` with `2... Nf6!? 3.Qxe5 Be7`.

```
[FEN ""]
1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 Nf6 3.Qxe5 Be7

```

White often collapses quickly due to lack of development and exposed queen.

How good is this gambit objectively? Is there an established main line?

# Answer
> 7 votes
Is it playable in Blitz? GM Nakamura played `2. Qh5` against GM Sasikiran in 2005 who responded with `2... Nc6`. Nakamura lost due to an error in the middle game.

Here's the Nakamura game. It follows the mainline `2... Nc6` but shows, to my surprise, White has a good game, contrary to everything I ever heard about moving the Queen too early.

```
[FEN ""]
1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 Nc6 3.Bc4 g6 4.Qf3 Nf6 5.Ne2 Bg7 6.Nbc3 d6 7.d3 Bg4 8.Qg3 Qd7 9.f3 Be6 10.Bg5 Nh5 11.Qh4 h6 12.Be3 Na5 13.Bb3 Nxb3 14.axb3 a6 15.d4 Qe7 16.Qf2 exd4 17.Bxd4 Nf6 18.O-O-O O-O-O 19.Nf4 Rhg8 20.Rhe1 Kb8 21.Kb1 g5 22.Nfe2 Rge8 23.g4 Qf8 24.Ng3 Nd7 25.Be3 Qh8 26.Nge2 Be5 27.h4 Qg7 28.Rh1 Nf6 29.Bd4 Nd7 30.Qe3 Qf6 31.hxg5 hxg5 32.Bxe5 Qxe5 33.Rh5 Rg8 34.Nd5 Rde8 35.Qc1 Qg7 36.Ne3 Nf6 37.Rh2 Rh8 38.Rg2 Nd7 39.Nd4 Rh3 40.c4 Qf6 41.Rf2 Reh8 42.b4 Qe5 43.c5 dxc5 44.bxc5 Nxc5 45.Qc3 f6 46.Rc2 Na4 47.Qb4 Bd7 48.Nb3 Rh1 49.Rxh1 Rxh1+ 50.Ka2 Nb6 51.Qf8+ Qe8 52.Qxe8+ Bxe8 53.Nc5 Nd7 54.Nxd7+ Bxd7 55.Kb3 Re1 56.Rc3 Be6+ 57.Kc2 Re2+ 58.Kc1 a5 59.Nc2 Rf2 60.Nd4 Bd7 61.Rc5 b6 62.Rd5 Kc8 63.e5 fxe5 64.Rxe5 c5 65.Nb3 Rf1+ 66.Kd2 a4 67.Nxc5 bxc5 68.Rxc5+ Kb7 69.Rxg5 Rxf3 70.Rd5 Be6 71.Rd3 Rf1 72.Rg3 Rf2+ 73.Kc3 Kb6 74.Kb4 Rf4+ 75.Ka3 Kb5 76.Re3 Bd5 77.Rd3 Bc4 78.Re3 Rd4 79.g5 Rd1 80.b3 axb3 81.Re8 Ra1+ 82.Kb2 Ra2+ 83.Kc3 Rc2+ 84.Kd4 b2 85.Rb8+ Ka4 86.g6 Bb5 87.g7 b1=Q 0-1

```

The opening has a few names. Most are not complementary. One less caustic name is the Wayward Queen Attack. It is classified technically as the `C20: KP, Patzer opening`. This opening is considered 'irregular' and does not have a more specific classification. The sub-variation we're interested in, even moreso.

There are no masters game in my database that include `2... Nf6`. There are many amateur games, but sometimes these are games by USCF C-players which does not help us here. Out of those games, however, Black is heavily favored. This does not mean the variation is fatal for White, per se. It could mean that White has to play better or be better prepared than Black.

This means that, for blitz, this continuation is *splendid* for either side.

Here's Stockfish's continuation after 15 minutes. Stockfish rates the position above as White being up 1/3 of a pawn. I am sure this is very much within the "error noise". I would not really trust it beyond 2 or 3 moves but it shows the gist.

```
[FEN "rnbqk2r/ppppbppp/5n2/4Q3/4P3/8/PPPP1PPP/RNB1KBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

1.Qf4 Nc6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Qe4 Nb6 4.Bb5 O-O 5.Nf3 d5 6.Qe2 Nb4 7.d4 Bg4 8.a3 a6 9.Ba4 Nxa4  10.axb4 Qd7 11.c3 f6 12.O-O fxe5 13.dxe5 Bxf3 14.gxf3 Nb6 15.f4 Qf5 16.Na3 *

```

Okay, what you see here is a pretty sharp continuation. Again, superb for a prepared blitz player.

Here's a game at 1 minute per side. If the result of this game differs from the result of a game with longer controls, perhaps we can deduce that one side has a subjectively easier game and thus an advantage.

```
[FEN "rnbqk2r/ppppbppp/5n2/4Q3/4P3/8/PPPP1PPP/RNB1KBNR w KQkq - 0 3"]

3.Qf4 O-O 4.Nc3 Bd6 5.Qh4 Nc6 6.d4 Nxd4 7.Bd3 Re8 8.Be3 Be5 9.O-O-O Nc6 10.Nce2 d6 11.f4 Ng4 12.Qxd8 Nxd8 13.Bd2 Bf6 14.Rf1 Be7 15.Nf3 Ne6 16.Nc3 Nc5 17.Bc4 c6 18.h3 Nh6 19.g4 b5 20.Nxb5 cxb5 21.Bxb5 Bb7 22.Bxe8 Rxe8 23.g5 Nxe4 24.gxh6 Ng3 25.Rhg1 Ne2+ 26.Kd1 Nxg1 27.Nxg1 Bf6 28.b3 Bg2 29.Rf2 Bc6 30.Rf1 gxh6 31.Ne2 Kh8 32.Ng3 Bg2 33.Re1 Rxe1+ 34.Bxe1 Bxh3 35.c4 Kg7 36.Nh5+ Kg6 37.Nxf6 Kxf6 38.Ke2 Bd7 39.Bb4 Ke6 40.Kf3 h5 41.Kg3 d5 42.cxd5+ Kxd5 43.Bc3 Bg4 44.Be5 a6 45.Kh4 Be2 46.Kg5 Ke4 47.a3 Bg4 48.b4 Bd1 49.Bd6 Kd4 50.Be7 Bg4 51.Bc5+ *

```

A typical alien-looking game, where each move is coldly logical. It's looking drawish with Black having less than a pawn advantage according to Stockfish. But the game is no 'trade the pieces' draw; I'd wager there are many ways to lose this.

Next will be a game at 10 minutes per move.

Edit - my machine crashed twice yesterday while grinding through the game at 10 minutes per move. It was about halfway through the last time I looked. It found 2 moves that could be improved by .3 pts or more. I'm not going to rerun it.

# Answer
> 2 votes
White has to play cautiously, with defensive moves like d3, Nf3, Be2, etc. He will likely end up in a cramped, somewhat symmetrical position, behind in development, but with a pawn plus.

An opening like this might have appealed to a master like Wilhelm Steinmetz who liked cramped positions with a pawn plus "A pawn is worth a little trouble."

He won most such games because his opponents tended to overreach.

---
Tags: opening, theory
---


title: Antichess pawn promotion

text:
# Question
Title: Antichess pawn promotion
The rules of antichess specified in Wikipedia state that the rules of regular chess should be followed except

```
 Capturing is compulsory.
 When more than one capture is available, the player may choose.
 The king has no royal power and accordingly:
     it may be captured like any other piece;
     there is no check or checkmate;
     there is no castling;
     a pawn may promote also to king.
 Stalemate is a win for the stalemated player.

```

It doesn't specifically call out who would choose what piece a pawn gets promoted to. It makes sense to me that since the game is antichess, when you promote a pawn it is a bad thing and your opponent would get to choose what piece it should be. Is this the correct way of playing or do you get to promote your own pawns?

# Answer
> 6 votes
Your summary of the rules left out an important one, namely, how else can you win a game besides being stalemated. The answer is that the player who runs out of men wins. (I suppose you could consider having no men to move a kind of stalemate.) And "antichess" is a new name for the chess variant traditionally known as Losing Chess or Giveaway Chess.

The answer to your question is that, when a pawn reaches the 8th rank, the owner of the pawn decides what to promote it to. I have looked at several books on chess variants, and haven't found a clear statement on that point. Apparently, it never occurred to the writers that anyone would think that the opponent gets to choose the promotion rank.

The rules for Losing Chess at The Chess Variant Pages (surely a more authoritative source than Wikipedia) do not say anything about the opponent choosing the promotion rank of a promoted pawn. Some of the endgame studies in John Beasley's article involve pawn promotion, and it's clear that the owner of the pawn is doing the choosing. Here's one from Hans Klüver (*Chess Amateur* 1923):

```
[FEN "8/P6/8/k7/P7/8/8/8 - - - 0 0 "]

```

Losing Chess. White to play and "win".

The solution:

> 1.a8N! Kxa4 2.Nb6 any 3.Na4 Kxa4

Of course if Black controlled the promotion he would choose a queen or rook.

---
Tags: chess-variants, pawn-promotion, losing-chess
---


# Question
Title: What is the lowest chess title you can get?
I am not a pro chess player or anything, but I want to get some kind of chess title. What is the lowest ranking I can get to earn a chess title?

# Answer
> 7 votes
According to this Wikipedia entry, the lowest FIDE title is Candidate Master (CM), which requires an ELO rating of at least 2200. Obviously national chess federations offer their own titles, often with lower requirements.

# Answer
> 4 votes
A solution: Move to a country with a low rated national team and join the team in the Olympiad.

CM and WCM titles are awarded for 50% performance in at least 7 games in the Chess Olympiad, regardless of the ranking of opponents (Fide Handbook). Because the pairings are made using the Swiss system and your team mates are (hopefully) performing poorly, you get constantly paired with relatively weak opponents and you do not have to perform even close to 2200 Elo level.

For example, in the Olympiad 2012 quite a few players got \>=50 % points with a performance \<2000. (Note that the list behind the link is cut at 63.6 %, so it is not the whole truth. Unfortunately, the list of CM titles awarded does not contain information of performance...)

# Answer
> 3 votes
The United States Chess Federation has a title system that goes down into class play. I have the category 1 title, which I gained by getting 5 tournament performances which would be impressive for an 1800 player (norms) and achieving a rating above 1800.

The category titles correspond to the classes 1-A, 2-B, 3-C, 4-D

Above category 1 are Candidate Master for 2000 rating and norms, National Master for a rating above 2200, and Life Master for norms and rating 2200 , Senior Life Master for norms and rating 2400.

---
Tags: online-chess, titles
---


# Question
Title: Chess problem - don't understand the solution
Black to move:

```
[fen "4rbk1/pp3pp1/1nq4p/8/1PP5/P3N1P1/Q2BrP1P/3R1RK1 b - - 0 1"]

```

I've tried to solve this chess problem - black to move, find the best move. I couldn't work it out so I checked the solution, which was R8xe3. I don't understand why this is the best move - could someone explain please?

# Answer
> 25 votes
`1...R8xe3` wins a piece (the knight on e3), because either recapture leads to worse things for White, since the d2 bishop is pinned to the white queen, and the f-pawn recapture opens the possibility of mate on g2:

```
[fen "4rbk1/pp3pp1/1nq4p/8/1PP5/P3N1P1/Q2BrP1P/3R1RK1 b - - 0 1"]

1...R8xe3 2.Bxe3 (2.fxe3 Qg2#) Rxa2

```

# Answer
> 4 votes
Ideally, what does Black wants to do? He wants to put the Queen on g2. But that square is protected by the Knight on e3. The knight must be removed. If the pawn is recaptured then it will be mate. If the bishop recapture, the Queen will get captured. So, black is up material.

# Answer
> 0 votes
In the previous example, it is more about removing the defender (the Knight on e3 defends g2). so: \- the recapture with the pawn does not work as it allows Qg2# \- additionally, the Bishop is pinned on d2 because of the a2-Queen So a combination of pins and removing the defender would say

Deflections on the other hand happen when a piece is driven away from an important square, for instance, here, the d8 Rook isdeflected from the defense of the Queen d5:

1. Re8+ ! Rxd8 2. Qxd5

more on deflections on my blog post: http://chesstrainerapp.blogspot.fr/2014/01/deflection.html

---
Tags: learning, tactics, problems
---


# Question
Title: How can I improve and get to know the game?
I'm just starting at chess and I would like to understand better the game itself , and if possible some tips on how to get better.

# Answer
Chess is a game of strategy and tactics. Each player commands an army of 16 chessmen --- pawns and other pieces (the king, queen, bishops, knights, and rooks).

A well-played chess game has three stages. In the opening, the players bring out their forces in preparation for combat. The middlegame begins as the players maneuver for position and carry out attacks and counterattacks. The final stage is the endgame when, with fewer pawns and pieces left on the board, it is safer for the kings to come out and join the final battle.

As play proceeds, each player will capture some of the opponent's men; often, the capturing pieces are immediately recaptured. As long as the piece a player gives up is generally equal to the piece he gets in return, we say the players are exchanging. If you unintentionally place a piece where it can be captured without getting a piece of equal value in return, we say that you put that piece en prise. (This is a French term that literally means "in take.") Sometimes a player may place a piece en prise in order to trick an opponent. If the opponent captures the offered man, it may leave him open to attack.

You're Ready to Go!

It's time for you to take a look at these ten tips to help you learn some simple ways to win more games:

1 Look at your opponent's move. 2 Make the best possible move. 3 Have a plan. 4 Know what the pieces are worth. 5 Develop quickly and well. 6 Control the center. 7 Keep your king safe. 8 Know when to trade pieces. 9 Think about the endgame. 10 Always be alert.

Don't rush. Take your time and be sure to study the examples carefully
> 3 votes

# Answer
For a beginner, certain areas are much more important than others:

* Learn the opening principles. You *might* look at some standard openings, but don't go too deep, just know the concepts
* Study the simple endgame mates (with a queen, with a rook, with two bishops)
* Learn how to promote a single pawn, learn how to defend against a single pawn (rule of the square...)
* Know the typical beginner opening traps. Don't *use* them, just don't fall for them
* Tactics, tactics, tactics: Forks, pins, discovered checks, mating patterns...
* Learn *basic* positional principles (fight for the center, open lines, doubled pawns, isolated pawns, don't castle into the attack, opposite-colored bishops are drawish, knights are better than bishops in closed positions and vice versa...)
> 1 votes

# Answer
Practice makes a man perfect.

Play more games and eventually you will see yourself improving from the mistakes you make.

Chess.com seems to be the best source to play online which I 've seen in recent times.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: learning
---