# Question
Title: Can't apply strategical knowledge in tournament games
I'm currently in a tournament and I'm losing terribly. The problem is that I never implement the strategic things I learned in books (reassess your chess, my system, etc...)

I just calculate some random moves and hope my opponent blunders which he never does. Because of that I drew a game against a much lower rated person than me.

Also, I often overlook 2-move tactics that win a pawn.

Should I create a checklist of things to look at for every move? What could this checklist contain?

When I'm playing on lichess.org (blitz), I suddenly know everything and apply all of those things. I suspect, that I'm irrationally afraid of certain moves and then try to counter those moves.

# Answer
> 4 votes
Thinking Techniques that I give my students:

1. What new threat(s) has my opponent's last move created? How can I answer it?(them?)
2. Is my King safe? Is my opponent threatening to checkmate me in the next few moves? Can I checkmate my opponent?
3. What threats can I set up? How?
4. Have I seen this position, or a similar one before?
5. If so: who stands better, and what is the best plan for continuing?
6. If not: what are the outstanding features and elements of this position, and what plan(s) and method(s) of achieving it are available?
7. What is my play? What specific position would I like to obtain? How can I achieve my goal? How can I improve my position?
8. How many good moves do I have? Which one is best? Can I capture material without penalty? Can I develop a piece? Can I employ any of the following tactical devices: pin, fork, skewer, discovered attack, double attack, trap a piece, double check, etc.?
9. Is it safe to move my piece to the square I'm thinking about? (Blunder check.)
10. Did I remember to start my opponent's clock and write down my move.

Notice that there is no mention of the positional elements. Beginners should be more concerned with the tactical side and how to develop plans. Strategic plans are formed based upon the position. By studying games which have similar positions and learning how the masters continued should help you with strategic plans. There is also plans which can be applied to completely different openings. A knight sacrifice on f5 can be used in both the closed Benoni system and the open Dragon Sicilian. By studying good annotated games, I mean the author saying in a simple language what (s)he is thinking, not pages of computer analysis, you will find great insight.

# Answer
> 3 votes
Well, you answered your own question. Do a problem each day from the reassess your chess workbook by Silman. Your results will significantly improve.

It's not enough to know the information. You have to be able to apply it.

1. Look for any checks, captures, and threats\*.
2. Apply an evaluation of the seven imbalances.
3. Decide which side of the board to play on.
4. Imagine a fantasy position.
5. Calculate the best move to achieve this fantasy position: it should not give him any counterplay.

\*Most threats are imagined. But if he has a mate in two on the next move and you don't have a stronger threat, you should do something about that.

Apply the four steps (including step 0) to positions and you will find the best positional move. It's probably too late to do this in the current tournament, but I sit for an hour and work through one problem from Silman's workbook a day. Alternatively, you can pick a grandmaster game and any random move, and try to guess it.

Don't fret if the move is incorrect. If you verify with an engine that your move is stronger or at least as strong (as I have occasionally), it's because of your successful formulation of a plan.

# Answer
> 2 votes
***Should I create a checklist of things to look at for every move? What could this checklist contain?***

There are literally hundreds of "thinking methods" in evaluating a position to come up with a reasonable move. *all* of them include basically the same several elements:

Material; Direct Threats; King safety; open lines; pawn structure/strong and weak squares; center and space; development and piece position.

So, we perform these assessments and based on those assessments we come up with candidates. Then we apply our own calculative powers and derive our game move and play it.

---
Tags: strategy
---


# Question
Title: Is there a method or tip to best memorize current enemy pieces' movements?
I have started to play Chess again after a few years. It is not difficult to reproduce an opening or sticking with a plan during the middlegame, but the most difficult to me is to keep track of enemy pieces threats on open rows/diagonals/columns.

As an example during one game I've lost track of an open diagonal that has a bishop of the other player and no piece (white or black), and forget to take care of not letting pieces stay on that diagonal unprotected while I was thinking on something else (like a plan to stick with).

**My question:** Is there a tip or a known method of pros like "memorizing/imagine colors" or create a "mental X mark" inside all those squares that makes part of a enemy movement possibility?

Sometimes I get caught by those pieces that are full aggressive (not protecting anyone)...

# Answer
> 3 votes
What you are talking about is called "board vision". Googling "chess board vision" will get you a ton of stuff.

One thing that may help. On looking at an enemy piece (or one of your own) do not ask "where is it?" but ask directly "what is it doing?". For example, that Bishop is controlling that diagonal, which is annoying because I would like to use some of those squares. The battle for control of an important square might involve pieces close to or far away from that square, but they should be linked in your mind as participants in the same struggle. Psychologists call this chunking. You can remember things about a group of pieces more easily than about the individual pieces.

# Answer
> 3 votes
I would think that with regular play, your "sight" of the board will improve. It's like anything else in that practice will lead to improvement. Also, playing a lot will enhance your sense of where things are on the board. For example, in a fianchettoed position, you'll automatically sense that the enemy bishop is on the long diagonal. At least I've found those things to be true for myself, and I would think that they'd apply universally.

# Answer
> 0 votes
***My question: Is there a tip or a known method of pros like "memorizing/imagine colors" or create a "mental X mark" inside all those squares that makes part of a enemy movement possibility?***

So, you are asking about visualization exercises. Link below:

CVT

Helpful exercises for 'knowing' the chessboard.

Also, you probably need tactical training too. There are many sites for that and every server has exercises to test yourself.

---
Tags: analysis, learning, board-vision
---


title: How do you checkmate with a queen?

text:
# Question
Title: How do you checkmate with a queen?
How do you checkmate with a King and Queen versus King?

Is there a method that is faster than other methods in terms of moves?

Is there a foolproof method if you are in time trouble?

# Answer
> 6 votes
**Grave Danger in King and Queen vs lone King**

It's important for the winning side to avoid this common pitfall in this basic endgame.

The winning side should avoid placing their queen on the **c2**, **c7**, **f2** or **f7** squares if the opponent's King is in the nearby corner, because this leads to stalemate.

Below, I include some other types of **stalemates** that are not as well known.

**Basic Idea**

The plan is to drive the king to one of the edge ranks or files.

After this is achieved, the **checkmating positions** are usually like this -

**Rectangle Method**

This method is the fastest and similar to the rectangle method involving checkmate with a rook. The trick is to confine the opponent's king in the smallest possible rectangle with the queen's first move (if not already confined or can be confined at a later move) and then bring the side's own king closer to the opponent's king.

In the position to the left below, White plays 1. Qc6 as the first move, making the rectangle smaller.

Once this has been achieved, White simply brings the King closer to the Black King to drive it into one of the edge ranks or files. The rook check trick discussed in the rectangle method for the rook applies here with the queen check.

```
  [FEN "8/8/8/4k3/8/8/8/K6Q w - - 0 1"]

  1. Qc6 Kf5 2. Kb2 Ke5 3. Kc3 Kf5 4. Kd4 Kf4 5. Qf6+ Kg4 6. Ke3 Kh5
  7. Qg7 Kh4 8. Kf4 Kh3 9. Qg3#

```

**Knight's Square Method**

*This method is mainly for beginners. Normally, experienced players will do better to use the rectangle method even in time trouble. However, it may at times help to use a combination of this and the rectangle method.*

If you're a in time trouble, this a very fast (in terms of how ***quickly*** you can make the moves on the board without thinking much) and foolproof (**stalemates are always to be watched out for**) way to checkmate the opponent's king.

With this method, you can literally finish playing the move before the opponent's hand even reaches the clock (assuming you're not playing online).

Consider this position where the Black King is on **e5**.

The King can be checked by a White knight from each of the 8 squares **d3**, **c4**, **c6**, **d7**, **f7**, **g6**, **g4** and **f3**. In the Knight's Square Method, the idea is to move the queen to one of these squares (preferably one away from your king to avoid collisions in time trouble!) and then simply "copy" the opposite king's move. Thus, in the position below, White first moves the queen to a "knight-square" **1. Qc6!**

After that, the White Queen can "***copy***" the Black King's moves and remain in the **knight's square**, except, **I REPEAT!!**, **except when the king moves to the corner** (**a1**, **a8**, **h1**, or **h8**). For example, king moves right one square, queen moves right one square; king moves diagonally up one square, queen moves diagonally up one square. Once the Black King is driven to one of edge ranks or files, White brings the King to deliver the checkmate. This is demonstrated below.

```
  [FEN "8/8/8/8/3k4/8/8/K6Q w - - 0 1"]

  1. Qc6 Ke5 (1... Kd3 2. Qc5 Kd2 3. Qc4 Ke3 4. Qd5 Kf4 5. Qe6 Kf3 6. Qe5 Kg4
  7. Qf6 Kg3 8. Qf5 Kg2 9. Qf4 Kg1 10. Qf3 Kh2 11. Qg4 Kh1 12. Kb2 Kh2 13. Kc2 Kh1
  14. Kd2 Kh2 15. Ke2 Kh1 16. Kf2 Kh2 17. Qg2#) 2. Qd7 Kf6 (2... Kf4 3. Qe6 Kf3
  4. Qe5 Kf2 5. Qe4 Kf1 6. Qe3 Kg2 7. Qf4 Kg1 8. Qf3 Kh2 9. Qg4 Kh1 10. Kb2 Kh2
  11. Kc2 Kh1 12. Kd2 Kh2 13. Ke2 Kh1 14. Kf2 Kh2 15. Qg2#) 3. Qe8 Kg5 (3... Kg7
  4. Qe6 Kf8 5. Qd7 Kg8 6. Kb2 Kf8 7. Kc3 Kg8 8. Kd4 Kf8 9. Ke5 Kg8 10. Kf6 Kf8
  11. Qf7#) 4. Qf7 Kg4 5. Qf6 Kg3 6. Qf5 Kg2 7. Qf4 Kg1 8. Qf3 Kh2 9. Qg4 Kh1 10.
  Kb2 Kh2 11. Kc2 Kh1 12. Kd2 Kh2 13. Ke2 Kh1 14. Kf2 Kh2 15. Qg2#

```

Sometimes, one's own King can get in the way of the Queen in this method, as shown below.

```
     [FEN "8/8/8/2k5/4K3/5Q2/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

     1. Qb3 Kd6 2. Qc4 Ke7 3. Qd5 Kf6

```

In such cases, the King can simply be moved away and the same method continues.

```
     [FEN "8/8/5k2/3Q4/4K3/8/8/8 w - - 0 4"]

     1. Kf4 Kg6 2. Qe5 Kh6 3. Qf5 Kg7 4. Qe6 Kh7 5. Qf6 Kg8 6. Qe7 Kh8
     7. Kg5 Kg8 8. Kg6 Kh8 9. Qg7# *

```

As mentioned before, the one **pitfall** to be avoided in this method is the stalemate that can occur when mistakenly occupying the knight's square when the king is in the corner.

```
     [FEN "8/8/8/4Q3/8/8/6k1/K7 w - - 0 9"]

     1. Qf4 Kh1 2. Qg3 $4 (2. Qg4 $1)

```

# Answer
> 2 votes
Lol, this question is not as silly as it sounds as once I was in time trouble and ended up stalemating my opponent by accident! Most players resign when their opponent is up a queen so such blunders can happen if you occasionally come across a player who is stubborn enough to play till the end. Anyway, after that incident I went back to studying the Queen and King vs. King endgame to avoid such embarrassments in the future!

So, this is how you do it:

1) Remember that stalemates are more easy with Q & K so it is important to check for a possible stalemate before every move.

2) Use your queen to slowly try to corner the opponent king until he is confined to one of the edge row or columns of the board.

```
[FEN "8/8/8/k2K4/8/1Q6/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

3) Bring the king in to the position shown in the diagram below:

```
[FEN "8/2K5/8/k7/8/1Q6/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

Remember that the king has to be in this position to deliver the checkmate.

4) Slowly nudge the opponent king towards the corner.

```
[FEN "8/k1K5/8/1Q6/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

5) When the opponent king is in this position, deliver the checkmate!

```
[FEN "8/k1K5/8/Q7/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

For eg.:

```
[FEN "8/8/8/3k4/8/7K/8/5Q2 w - - 0 1"]

1. Qf4 Ke6 2. Kg4 Kd5 3. Kf5 Kc5 4. Qd2 Kc4 5. Ke5 Kb3 6. Qc1 Kb4 7. Qc2    Kb5 8. Qc3 Kb6 9. Qc4 Kb7 10. Qc5 Kb8 11. Qc6 Ka7 12. Qb5 Ka8 13. Kd6 Ka7 14. Kc7 Ka8 15. Qa5# *

```

I don't know about the 'faster than other methods' bit, but it works!

# Answer
> 1 votes
The simplest answer is to restrict the enemy king's movements by "walling off", not attacking, with the queen, move by move, driving it to the edge and then bringing up the king to help administer the mate. You must remember to always leave the king at least one free square once it's in a corner to avoid stalemate. This is basically the same method used with the rook and king, although the king and rook must be used together in that case to drive the king to the edge and finally into a corner for the mate. All this may sound confusing in the abstract, but if you try it I'm sure it will become clear quickly enough. I don't think trying to memorize a "formula" beyond what I've just suggested will be of any more benefit.

---
Tags: endgame, checkmate, queens, kings, elementary-mates
---


# Question
Title: How to view contents of database in ChessBase
ChessBase has never had a very intuitive interface, but it seems to just get worse and worse. I just got the latest version and I can't even figure out how to view the games in a database. I did find the "next game" and "previous game" buttons on the menu. How do I just view the games in the database in a list, so I can select one to view?

(That I even have to ask this question, seems idiotic. All the more so that I am a software developer.)

# Answer
> 1 votes
Ok, I'll handhold you, but I have CB 13. I doubt it is much different.

When the program loads, you get a tree at the left side. Select Database Path/Bases. this should load a file list of the databases you have. Find the one with the largest number of "Games". For me, it is Big database 2002, but I think I loaded that from a previous version. Otherwise, you can click the "Board" icon at the top and open a new board. At the top of the Board is an icon labeled "Online". That will open a subwindow of games from the online database.

If that does not help, hit the help files.

You can also go to This Week In Chess and get weekly games from most major tournaments without annotations. I do this every month or so. It is roughly 4000 games a week.

Good luck. Help files are your friends.

~Professional Software Engineer

# Answer
> 0 votes
Might seem obvious, but you really should hit the help files in ChessBase for these kinds of questions. They are pretty thorough, and extensively hyperlinked.

Personally, I find it intuitive, and I too am a software engineer.

---
Tags: chessbase
---


title: Tit for tat sacrifice

text:
# Question
Title: Tit for tat sacrifice
I have noted in a number of games from Master players that sacrifices are rapidly played till both sides are reduced to just about equal in material and virtually the same pieces, at least in value. Is this a deliberate act by both players? It seems to be strategical by clearing the board of the garbage and getting to the heart of the matter, victory.

# Answer
> I have noted in a number of games from Master players that sacrifices are rapidly played till both sides are reduced to just about equal in material and virtually the same pieces, at least in value.

I don't think that happens often at all. What does happen is that players *exchange* pieces -- say white captures a piece, in return black takes a piece back, often the piece that just captured. That is perfectly normal, but it's not a sacrifice. A sacrifice is when you let something of yourself be captured and then you *don't* capture anything back.

It's natural for a game between two strong players to end up with more or less the same material; they're good enough to avoid moves that simply lose material outright.

> Is this a deliberate act by both players?

Well, they would of course rather just capture pieces without having their own pieces captured in return, but the opponent doesn't want to go along with that.

It's normal to react to a piece that is threatened by *defending* it -- so that the capturing piece can be captured back.

Generally *every* move a master makes is a deliberate act, or they wouldn't be any good at the game. A decision to exchange a set of pieces is not to be taken lightly, apparently the master decided it was the best move to make in the given position.

> It seems to be strategical by clearing the board of the garbage and getting to the heart of the matter, victory.

I don't know what this means.
> 2 votes

# Answer
It sounds like you are referring to even trades which would reduce the game to an ending. This would more likely tend to lead to a draw than a victory. If one side makes a true sacrifice, that should lead to an advantage of some sort and ultimately a victory for that side if the sacrifice had been accurately calculated.
> 1 votes

# Answer
Maybe you are thinking of something like this, which is the most wonderful series of combinations and counter combinations. Well-played games should end in balance.

```
[Event "UK - USSR radiomatch"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1946.??.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "2"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[White "William Albert Fairhurst"]
[Black "Salomon Flohr"]
[ECO "D74"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "58"]
[FEN ""]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.Nf3 O-O 7.O-O
Nc6 8.e4 Nb6 9.d5 Nb8 10.Nc3 c6 11.Be3 cxd5 12.exd5 N8d7
13.Qb3 Nf6 14.Rfd1 Ne8 15.Nb5 Bd7 16.Nxa7 Na4 17.Nc6 bxc6
18.dxc6 Nd6 19.cxd7 Nxb2 20.Rxd6 exd6 21.Nd4 Rb8 22.Nc6 Rxb3
23.Nxd8 Rxe3 24.Nc6 Rc3 25.d8=Q Rxd8 26.Nxd8 Bf6 27.Nb7 Rc2
28.Nxd6 Nd3 29.Rf1 Rxa2 1/2-1/2

```

Notice at the end that Nxf7 is answered by Rxf2.
> 1 votes

# Answer
There are a few potential answers to this:

1. Pseudo sacrifices
2. Positional sacrifices
3. Speculative sacrifices for activity

A pseudo sacrifice is one where a player deliberately gives up material, knowing they will recover the material in the next few moves. One example is given as follows: **1. e4 d6 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. Nc3 Nxe4 (OK this has lots of potential outcomes but the point is after 4. Nxe4 d5 will fork the bishop and knight, recovering one of the pieces)**

A positional sacrifice is one where a player chooses to go down on material, maybe without even a promise of the material being returned - one classic example is the Karpov game against Guyla Sax http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1068373 \- this game illustrated the power of a bishop compared to a rook on an open board. Karpov was in no rush to recover the material, knowing his opponent's king being in the open was enough compensation. Similar ideas include giving up a piece to open lines.

The speculative sacrifice for activity was often employed by players like Tal who would happily give up a minor piece in exchange for open lines, easier development or just to create complexity. I would say the first two sacrifices are easier to understand and apply in practice but it's good to get a feel for this latter type, as it can save many lost positions.

http://www.thequietmove.com/durham/ 17..Nxc4 is a nice example of another Pseudo Sacrifice.

To develop a keen eye for these, tactical training and awareness of positional themes (e.g. Loose pieces drop off LPDO) are very helpful.
> 0 votes

# Answer
**I have noted in a number of games from Master players that sacrifices are rapidly played till both sides are reduced to just about equal in material and virtually the same pieces, at least in value. *Is this a deliberate act by both players?***

In these kinds of games, the counter-sacrifice may be necessary because that player does not want to hand over an overwhelming initiative to the opponent. The fight for the initiative, which is of high importance in professional chess, cannot be overstated when playing at high levels.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: endgame
---


title: Pawn promotion strategy

text:
# Question
Title: Pawn promotion strategy
Why is it so important to KEEP a pawn from promoting if you have a piece situated so that when the pawn promotes your next move can be to capture it? Is this a matter of tempo? Frankly, once the pawn has reached the seventh rank why go through so much effort just to protect it? I guess I am new at this.

# Answer
> 6 votes
Usually, there's a piece behind that pawn that supports its promotion. Then you're eager to stop the promotion otherwise you'll have to give up your piece for the promoted queen.

If the pawn isn't supported, then the reason for blockade might be prevention of some tactics that could be related to a sacrifice of that pawn.

Aron Nimzowitsch once said:

> The passed Pawn is a criminal, who should be kept under lock and key.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Firstly, if you can keep the pawn from promoting without losing any minor pieces, why not try to? Pawns that are close to being promoted (usually passed pawns) are often defended (e.g by a rook on the same file), and this means that if they are allowed to be promoted, it usually results in the piece used to capture the promoted pawn being captured itself by the defender of the pawn. This is clearly not good. In addition to this, all pawns with the high potential to queen in the future (I.e passed pawns) could become a threat if they are not dealt with later on in the game. Even if they do not appear to be a threat because, as you said, they can be captured if they are promoted, in the future the piece(s) that are defending against this pawn promoting can never be moved from their position (rank for rooks, diagonals for bishops) lest the pawn is allowed to queen. In addition to this, your opponent can put even more reinforcements on the passed pawn if you do it try to defend it, improving its chances of being promoted, which is obviously not good!

# Answer
> 2 votes
Just controlling the queening square might not be sufficient if your opponent can devise some back rank tactic using the pawn for support. Then when a piece of his, say a rook or the queen, enters the last rank onto a square supported by the pawn, capturing that piece will result in recapture by the pawn with promotion. And if his piece isn't captured, it can then support the pawn promotion on the next move by now contesting the queening square that you controlled.

---
Tags: strategy, pawn-promotion
---


# Question
Title: Are all KQvK positions winnable if it's not stalemate and Black can't capture on current move?
Are *all* KQvK positions winnable if the position isn't in itself a stalemate and Black cannot capture on the current move?

# Answer
Yes, all KQvK positions are won under these conditions (no stalemate, no capture). The same holds for KRvK.

The only possibilities for such basic endgames not to be won under your conditions would be:

1. a piece has too few square available and can be captured by the black king (not immediately but in the next move)
2. white on the move cannot avoid stalemate (or material loss)

An example for the first case (black to move):

```
[FEN "7N/8/8/4k3/8/8/6K1/7B b - - 0 1"]

```

the second case (white to move) looks like this (to avoid stalemate, white's king has to go to the d file when after Kb7, black wins the bishop or knight):

```
[FEN "kB6/2K5/N7/8/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

However with the KQvK and KRvK, the queen/rook always have enough space to avoid these problems.
> 3 votes

# Answer
The simple answer to your question is yes. In fact the same is true of a king and rook versus king, the most basic mating material. That's why having an extra pawn in an ending is so valuable, since even if all the other pawns were swapped off, the lone remaining pawn could potentially be promoted to a queen (or even a rook) for a subsequent checkmate.
> 1 votes

# Answer
Here are the replayers for user1583209's answer's positions:

```
[Event "KBNvK Position 1"]
[Site "https://chess.stackexchange.com/a/16130/12032"]
[Date "2016.12.19"]
[Round "?"]
[White "White"]
[Black "Black"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "7N/8/8/4k3/8/8/6K1/7B b - - 0 1"]
[StartFlipped "0"]
[PlyCount "5"]
[SourceDate "2016.12.19"]

1... Kf6 2. Kg3 Kg7 3. Be4 (3. Ng6 Kxg6) 3... Kxh8 1/2-1/2

```

and

```
[Event "KBNvK Position 2"]
[Site "https://chess.stackexchange.com/a/16130/12032"]
[Date "2016.12.19"]
[Round "?"]
[White "White"]
[Black "Black"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "kB6/2K5/N7/8/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "4"]
[SourceDate "2016.12.19"]

1. Kd7 (1. Kc6) 1... Kb7 2. Nc5+ (2. Bd6 Kxa6) 2... Kxb8 1/2-1/2

```
> 0 votes

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


# Question
Title: Using the diagonal in perpetual queen checks?
There exists a heuristic that recommends checking from the diagonals (using a queen) in order to get a perpetual. This, I expect, is a rule that is meant for the worse player in queen and pawn endgames. My question is, why does checking from diagonals ensures, or at least raises the probability, for a draw?

# Answer
> 1 votes
As you said, this is a very general guideline, but looking back it has served me well in practical play.

Note that by "checking from the diagonals", the pattern I have seen is that the queen maintains a stable circuit on a diagonal but the checks themselves are usually horizontal or vertical.

I think it's because the checks from a diagonal allow the queen to keep the king in a box with only minimal pawn support (a single nearby pawn for *either* side will usually do it). Checks from a file or rank each allow the king to run across the board in one direction unless there's a pawn directly blocking his path.

# Answer
> 0 votes
I first heard this from chess24.com's GM Jan Gustaffson during one of his commentary sessions. The explanation he gave was that it is harder for the opponent to block diagonal checks with the queen. In queen and pawn endgames it can be much harder to continue with checks once the opponent's queen has managed to come back and help.

# Answer
> 0 votes
This personally makes no sense to me. Gustafsson might have been referring to a specific situation with other pieces involved, but if you experiment with a lone queen versus the king on an open board, you'll see for yourself that it makes no difference. Perhaps in a situation such as with the white king on b1 and his pawn on b2, and the black queen checking from d1, then after the white king went to a2, the black queen could continue checking diagonally from a4 to d1 and back to a4 consecutively, with the white king rotating between a2 and b1, until the position had been repeated 3 times, but that's a specific situation.

---
Tags: endgame, queen-endgame, perpetual
---


title: Chess endings progress story

text:
# Question
Title: Chess endings progress story
There are lots of questions asked here about best books about endings or which types of endings are important at the beginning. I have another question - how do you benefit from learning endings?

E.g. You've read Silman/Dvoretsky/Averbach/Pandolfini books and how did it benefit you? You just achieve (trying to achieve) positions from the books in your games, or is it just easier to create plans in endgames and you just 'see' what should be played?

# Answer
> 4 votes
I think there are several ways you benefit from endgame study.

**Your middlegame can benefit**: For a beginner player it is often easier to process an emptier board with few pieces. The limited move options and plans then can help to focus on main concepts or ideas.

For instance if you learn to mate K+R vs K, you will learn how the pieces move, which squares are "attacked" (unavailable to the enemy king) and that in order to win you need to checkmate (take away all possible moves from the king and attack it). Also you will learn about zugzwang. All of this can be useful in the middlegame as well.

As another example you will learn that isolated and other weak pawn structures are things you don't want to have in an endgame, so you will want to avoid them in the middlegame (unless you get another advantage in exchange).

Also the importance of piece activity is usually pronounced in endgames which could make you pay more attention to it in the opening/middlegame.

**It can make you win equal positions (or hold lost positions)** ...if you are much better in endgames than your opponent.

**It can help you decide whether and how to change from middle to endgame** If you know that an endgame position is won/lost/draw, you might or might not want to go for a line in the middlegame that leads to that endgame.

# Answer
> 0 votes
If you go on a journey, you must know your destination. If you haven't been able to checkmate the opposing king earlier in the game, which is the most likely scenario, then you'll have to reach a favorable ending to do so. That means having some kind of sufficient material advantage at the end to accomplish that, which can be as little as a pawn. If you can promote the pawn to a queen (even a rook suffices), then you'll have sufficient material to ultimately checkmate the enemy king. Any manual will show you how to potentially promote a pawn, such as with king and pawn versus lone king, as well as indicating minimum mating material needed, such as king and rook vs lone king, or king and 2 bishops vs lone king, or king, knight and bishop vs lone king for example.

---
Tags: learning, endgame
---


title: How did this game end in a draw?

text:
# Question
Title: How did this game end in a draw?
https://en.lichess.org/B6L5XNox

Never mind the sloppy play. I'm just curious why this ended in a draw:

(Does anyone know how to copy moves from lichess?)

Anyway, the final 5 moves:

58. Rc4+ Kb6
59. Qd8+ Kb5
60. Qd5+ Kb6
61. Rb4+ Kc7
62. Rc4+ Kb6

There was no 3-fold repetition and the King still has places to move.

# Answer
There was a three-times repetition. Note that only the position needs to be repeated, it is not necessary that the moves leading to the position are the same. The position occurred first after move 58, second after move 60 and third at the end of the game.
> 6 votes

# Answer
If a position is repeated three times, not necessarily consecutively, with the same party to move, that's one definition of a draw, which was true in this case.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: endgame, draw, claim-draw, threefold-repetition
---


# Question
Title: Good master games for learning how to win from a superior position
I have recently managed to build up my opening repertoire to something that will no longer cause me to fall into lost positions against decent players, so I can no longer blame my losses upon bad opening preparation.

I still need to improve in order to get to a level that I'm content with, and after doing some soul-searching, I am convinced that I still have one glaring weakness in my games that needs some serious work: I am bad at converting a positional advantage into a win!

I haven't learned how to think efficiently, and what to look for when I'm given a good position. I still think way too much in terms of concrete variations, and I have a hard time forming coherent long-term plans to improve my positions.

Therefore I am planning to start studying classical games from past masters, where they convert an edge into a clearly winning position with confidence and clarity. The masters I have in mind are first-and-foremost:

* Rubinstein
* Lasker
* Capablanca
* Botvinnik

Others, like Karpov or Kramnik (or any other great technical player, for that matter), are also interesting.

But there is one big problem: These players have all won a huge number of games, and obviously it will not be possible for me to go through them all. I want to study their good technical victories, not some random game that they won based on obvious blunders from their opponents, or where they just won by launching an early attack and crashing through before the opponent knew what happened.

What I'm looking for is a list of famous games to study from the players mentioned above, so I have somewhere to start.

# Answer
Rather than recommend a series of games, I am going to recommend the book *Excelling at Technical Chess: Learn to Identify and Exploit Small Advantages* by Jacob Aagaard.

Here is the blurb (emphasis is mine):

> In this book Jacob Aagaard studies the valuable skill of chess technique. He arms the reader with several endgame weapons that every strong technical player has in his toolbox. These include important skills such as **schematic thinking**, domination, preventing counterplay, building fortresses and utilizing zugzwang. These tools are illustrated in deeply analyzed games containing numerous different themes. A serious study of this book will ensure that the reader no longer need fear the word "technique"!
> 4 votes

# Answer
I would add Paul Morphy to the list as he mostly had to play against weak players so you can get a good understanding of what to do against weak moves. Bobby Fischer played over all of his games as well as Capablanca's and Steinitz. He did it by hiding the next move they played and trying to find it himself. If that's how Fischer learned to be a great player, I would argue that's a good way to study.
> 3 votes

# Answer
Just look for collections of their best games. Off the top of my head Capablanca's Best Games by Harry Golombek is one.

Test Your Positional Play by Bellin and Ponzetto also covers winning games after picking the correct positional plan. The move by move series covering games by a given player is also pretty good and covers a lot of players.
> 2 votes

# Answer
I think you would really like GM Boris Gelfand's book, Positional Decision Making in Chess. This book was the English Chess Federation's 2015 book of the year.

According to the promotional blurb:

Positional Decision Making in Chess offers a rare look into the mind of a top grandmaster. In his efforts to explain his way of thinking, Boris Gelfand focuses on such topics as the squeeze, space advantage, the transformation of pawn structures and the transformation of advantages. Based on examples from his own games and those of his hero, Akiba Rubinstein, Gelfand explains how he thinks during the game.

Hope this helps.
> 2 votes

# Answer
There are a number of books that stress strategical and positional play. Some examples from my relatively limited library include "Strategic Chess" by Edmar Mednis, "Positional Chess Handbook" by Israel Gelfer, "Positional Ideas in Chess" by John Love", "Winning Chess Strategies" by Yasser Seirawan, "Strategical Themes" by Tom Unger, "Dynamic Chess Strategy" by Mihai Suba, "Modern Chess Strategy" by Ludek Pachman, and "Judgement and Planning in Chess" by Max Euwe. I'm sure there are numerous others which can be found by a search under those key words. These generally will cover games in depth by the masters and would seem to be a more reasonable route to follow than trying to find collections of a specific master's games that focused exclusively on strategy. And even collections of games of individual masters such as those you mention will most likely mainly have games that were won by positional superiority that ultimately led to a tactical material advantage or checkmate rather than games that were won though an opponent's blunder or by an early quick mate, a generally relatively rare occurrence in master games.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: endgame, positional-play
---


# Question
Title: Not knowing what moves to make and feeling lost all the time
My tactics and calculation abilities are fairly decent since I practice chess puzzles a lot, but I seem to be lacking in other areas. I always feel uncomfortable in a lot of chess games even though I've honestly played a lot of them by now. As the title suggests I want to gain the confidence and knowledge on what moves to make. I would love to become more adaptable. I love seeing masters being able to play and knowing what to do in any given position and would like to work towards that sort of ability. What should I do?

# Answer
What you describe is a lack of strategic intuition. Fortunately that can be learnt. All of the following quotes come from *Studying chess made easy* by GM Soltis.

## You need to learn how to spot strategic patterns

> "I only see things quickly if I have seen the position before," GM Yasser Seirawan once said in explaining how he found strong moves so easily.

According to this, developing strategic intuition rests on pattern recognition. When learning tactics, you had:

1. *Theory*: e.g. the abstract idea of a pin
2. *Practice:* e.g. solving tactics puzzles

This brings me onto...

## Learning patterns is about theory and practice

The same thing that was said about tactics can be said for strategic patterns. For example, one pattern might be the exchange sacrifice. It has theory, you can find puzzles, and you can apply it to your games.

Remember that:

> Theory + Practice = Success

## Learning patterns is often subliminal

This begs the question, how do I learn these patterns? Well, this is a life-long process.

> Some researchers concluded that the typical grandmaster knows 10,000 patterns (!). Don't worry.
>
> You can become a pretty good player, perhaps even a master, with a much smaller number of positions in your mental 'pattern bank'.

GM Soltis suggests analysing master games, and gave this specific advice:

> Take note of each middlegame move that is awarded an exclamation point. Try to figure out why it's a good move. If you think you understand why, try explaining it in your own words, as if you were teaching a fellow student.
> 7 votes

# Answer
You lack basic opening knowledge, strategic thinking and likely endgame knowledge.

1) **Modern Chess Strategy** by Ludek Pachman is a good starter, and 2) **100 endgames you must Know** by de Villa

Openings are a matter of choice, but you need a good general book if you are just getting into chess study: 3) **Fundamental Chess Openings** by van der Sterren

Good Luck.
> 3 votes

# Answer
The usefulness of any advice given here will depend greatly on your rating, but for what it's worth, I'm around 1650-ish and one aspect of the game that has become increasingly important for me is pawn structures:

* The pawn structure determines the ideal squares for you pieces. Rooks like open ranks. Bishops are inhibited by your pawns on the same colour. Knights love squares where they can't be attacked by pawns on the side ranks, especially advanced squares.
* The pawn structure often determines the nature of the play, i.e. whether the game is closed and manoeuvring or open and tactically complex.
* Backward and isolated pawns are weak and good targets for attack. Similarly, *your* backward pawns are weak and perhaps you can do something about it?
* Advanced pawn chains can be powerful in controlling squares in the opponent's territory, but they also provide opportunities for piece placement (especially knights), and a well timed pawn push can annihilate a pawn chain easily.
* A pawn push at the right moment can greatly swing the initiative in your favour. Look at your pawns and try to find the best candidate for advancement, and consider the best placement of your pieces for this advancement.
* Many opening variations give rise to the same pawn structures, hence a good understanding of the positions that you often arrive at during opening play will greatly improve your level of comfort and ability to come up with sensible moves during the middle game. For example, the so-called Carlsbad structure often arise from a variety of openings, and is one common idea here is the powerful minority attack.
* Whether you should liquidate into an endgame is greatly determined by your pawn structure. If you have many weak or isolated pawns, you probably should prevent piece exchanges until you can either fix your weaknesses or create similar weaknesses to your opponent. Higher rated players can often evaluate whether an endgame is winning or not by simply looking at the pawns on the board.

There are a number of books about pawn structures available. The one I've been studying is The Power of Pawns by Jurg Hickl. Again, this book may not be appropriate if you are higher rated, but to me it provides reasonable guidance on how to approach the post-opening phase of the game.
> 3 votes

# Answer
What you want to achieve requires a lot of practice by playing, but I think there are things that could help you get there faster than just playing game after game. From what I can gather, my guess is that you are not yet an intermediate player (Elo range 1300 - 1800), but correct me if I'm wrong.

To me, it sounds like you are rather unfamiliar with the concept of a plan in chess. This concept is dealt with in detail in the book **Play like a Grandmaster** by Alexander Kotov, and is of essential importance when playing any game of chess. You must have a plan, always! Try to avoid making moves without having a clear purpose behind them as much as you can.

Coming up with plans is a skill that needs to be honed, and it is this that you should practice on whenever you play a game of chess. And it doesn't really matter much if the plan is bad; it will still have a higher success rate, in general, than a move played without a purpose.

We could also divide plans into two main categories:

* Concrete plans
* Strategic plans

Concrete plans: as the label suggests, these are plans using specific sequences of moves, such as threatening to take an enemy piece, combinations, mating attacks, etc. These are often good to start looking for, since they can become immediately apparent after looking at the different threats in a position. Furthermore, concrete plans can be used to execute long-term strategic plans. Worth noting is that tactics could be thought of as concrete plans.

Strategic plans: these are of a more long-term, and often positional, nature than the concrete plans mentioned earlier. They are typically not dependent on a specific sequence of moves to be executed, but could consist of using a combination of concrete plans to achieve some end-goal. Examples of typical strategic plans are the basic opening principles, gaining space in order to give one's own pieces freedom of movement while restricting the opponent's pices, pawn storms, trading one's "bad" pieces for the opponent's "good" pieces, setting up a blockade for defensive purposes, etc.

To become good at strategic plans, one must be familiar with positional play, which has to do with making sure that one's own pieces have lots of influence and can cooperate well, while trying to make the opponent's pieces discoordinated and useless. Therefore it is good to know in what situations certain pieces typically are good, and why. Going over games played by strong players is good when trying to learn this, and it's very good to have good comments explaining the ideas behind the moves being played. A very famous game collection is **Chess Master vs. Chess Amateur** by Euwe and Meiden, which could be a good set of games to study. One thing worth noting is that the beginner ought to begin studying the games of the masters of the past, since modern master games are often very intricate and advanced.
> 1 votes

# Answer
Chess is a very stagnant game . Even to improve the Game is like you need to innovate ways .

1. Change your Playing Style .

If you are playing d4 play e4 . If you play French against e4 try playing Sicilian or any other Sicilian Variation .

2. Stop doing excessive puzzles and concentrate on Piece Placement .
3. Follow Karpov / Botvinnik games if you like Tactical games of Kasparov/Fischer etc .

There are lot more other ways but the thing to do is you change your thinking system and try adapting some other styles .
> 1 votes

# Answer
After your opening development has been completed, look for tactics on each move, yours and your opponent's. Since tactics are so important, I wouldn't stop doing the problems. Since tactics won't always be available, you then try to improve your position by gaining space, preferably in the center if possible, while always looking for imbalances. If the center has become locked, these opportunities may be on a wing. If you can get a dominant position, opportunities for tactics to win material should start to become available. Of course if your opponent is as astute as you are, you may never gain an advantage, and if he doesn't either, a draw would be the likely result. Reading some books on chess strategy (e.g. "Modern Chess Strategy" by Ludek Pachman, "Winning Chess Strategies" by Yasser Seirawan and Jeremy Silman) might also be a good idea to gain some general knowledge about this subject.
> 0 votes

# Answer
There are many ways of being good at chess. Don't try for all of them. Find a guru. Could be a modern player or an old-timer, but somebody whose games you enjoy. Someone that makes you say "I wish I could play like that" (But don't choose Tal unless you think you really think you COULD play like that.) Collect their games, especially the ones with their own notes, and play them over and over. Study the openings that they play, especially how they steer the game toward the sort of positions they (and you) want to play.

This is not a complete magic method, nothing is, but it can form a framework for studying.
> 0 votes

# Answer
Pick up *Re-assess Your Chess 3e* by Jeremy Silman. He'll teach you the seven imbalances to look out for which will dictate your plan.

In short,

1. Evaluate the position using the seven imbalances.
2. Decide which side of the board to play on (queenside, center, or kingside).
3. Construct a fantasy (ideal) position for your pieces: Move your pieces to their ideal locations in your head, without considering the opponent's plan.
4. Calculate the moves required to reach this position.
    * If you find that it's not possible to reach this position because of some defense by the opponent, return to step 3.
    * If after several iterations you find there is no way to realize any fantasy position on that side of the board, return to step two.
> -3 votes

---
Tags: learning, strategy
---


# Question
Title: How to draw this rook and pawn vs. rook endgame?
According to endgame tablebases, this position is a draw:

```
[fen "3r4/6R1/1kp5/8/8/8/5K2/8 w - - 1 61"]

 1. Ke3 Kc5 2. Rg4 Kb5 3. Ke2 c5 4. Rg3 Kb4 5. Ke1 c4 6. Rg4 Kb3 7. Rg7 c3 8. Rb7+ Kc2 9. Rb4 Re8+ 10. Kf2 Kd2 11. Rd4+ Kc1 12. Rc4 c2 13. Rc7 Rb8 14. Ke2 Kb2 0-1

```

Nevertheless, I (as black) played on and marched the king and pawn down the board and won without much trouble. The endgame tablebase gives `3. Ke2` as the losing move.

> *Question*: How does one draw this endgame as white? (Is there a name for this position?)

I'm not finding the tablebase particularly educational. It works, but I'm not sure why.

# Answer
> 9 votes
In your diagram/game, black is allowed to set up a Lucena position and therefore wins. However, with correct way of harassing the black king, it is possible to prevent that from happening. After 2... Kc5, you can utilize what's called a frontal defense by playing 3. Rg1. In the lines shown below, black simply cannot proceed.

**Note, that this defense may or may not work depending on which line and how advanced the opponents pawn is - see reference below.**

```
3r4/6R1/2p5/2k5/8/4K3/8/8 w - - 0 2

1. Rg1 Kb4 2. Rb1+ Kc4 (2... Ka4 3. Ra1+ Kb3 4. Rc1 Rc8 5. Kd4 (5... Rd8+ 6. Kc5=) Kb4 6. Rb1+=) 3. Rc1+ Kb5 4. Rb1+=

```

If black moves his rook away from d-file in attempt to block your checks or harass your king, then you can bring your king in front of the pawn and set up a 3rd rank defense - Philidor position or a back rank defense (depending on how the game develops).

Also, this wiki page gives an excellent quick overview of R+P vs R endings.

# Answer
> 2 votes
```
[fen "3r4/6R1/1kp5/8/8/8/5K2/8 w - - 1 61"]

 1. Ke3 Kc5 2. Rg4 Kb5 3. Ke2 c5 4. Rg3 Kb4 5. Ke1 c4 6. Rg4 Kb3 7. Rg7 c3 8. Rb7+ Kc2 9. Rb4 Re8+ 10. Kf2 Kd2 11. Rd4+ Kc1 12. Rc4 c2 13. Rc7 Rb8 14. Ke2 Kb2 0-1

```

This is a situation where the king is cut off by one file from the pawn. The king has to make a timely jump to the second rank and prepare to exchange rooks. In the meantime, the king shall remain on the third or fourth rank.

When is the jump "timely"? In a king and pawn vs. king endgame, pawn on the fifth rank, the *key squares* the king needs to reach in order to promote the pawn are b3, c3, and d3 (in this case): no matter whose move it is. White will threaten to exchange rooks when it is clear the black king cannot reach these squares because the white king will be *shouldering*, i.e. in the way.

It is clear that 3. Ke2? was a losing move. The rook isn't even ready to be traded, so right away this move is premature. Instead assume that the rook was already on the back rank (Rg1 instead of Rg7). 3... c5 4. Rd1 Rxd1 5. Kxd1 Kb5 6. Kc1! And it's clear that the black king won't access b3, c3, or d3, because white wins the opposition: draw.

Now let's assume that white stuck with his plan of exchanging rooks: 4. Rg1. 4... Kb4 5. Rd1 Rxd1 6. Rxd1 Kb3 and the ending is won for black. Note the hasty 6... c4?? loses to 7. Kc2.

As for the rook, frontal checks with distant effectiveness must be performed (that is, checks with your rook on the back rank, far away from the enemy pawn). **The defending rook must not leave this back rank.**

While the rook isn't delivering checks, he should be threatening to capture the pawn: Rc1 is the correct position. The correct maneuver is to check the king, separating him and the pawn by a file (Rb1+, Rc1; but not Rb1+, Ra1+? too many checks) -OR- causing him to hide behind the pawn (Rb1+, Rc1 - here he cannot advance the pawn, so you move the king upward with Ke5 and threaten to capture on c6). In both cases you threaten to capture the pawn, so he must use tempi in defending the pawn by moving the rook -OR- moving the king, in which the latter leads to perpetual check. Draw.

White could have troubled you with 4. Rg1 (threatening Rb1+ - though due to his misplaced king, still loses after 4... Rd5! Now 5. Ke4 isn't possible) but instead he's escorting you to his back rank: Slowly, but surely with 4. Rg3? which does, to put it bluntly, absolutely nothing.

Of course, the Philidor position is still reachable because the pawn is so far from promotion i.e. it has not reached the fifth rank yet.

So how should have this game proceeded?

1. Rg1 preparing to restrain the pawn from sole advancement. Now 1... Kc5 doesn't make any sense because of 2. Rc1+, where 2... Kd6? is a clear draw, and 2... Kb5 3. Rb1+ Ka5 4. Rc1 sees no progress as well.

Black can try 1... c5, but this now allows 2. Ke3! Kb5 3. Rb1+ Ka4 4. Rc1 Rd5 5. Ke4!! Now the king, not ill-positioned as before, springs into action.

For further reading, please see Ending 59 of Jesus De La Villa's *100 Endgames You Must Know*.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Unfortunately it is a VERY bad idea to try to learn endgame play from table bases. Almost any book written by a human being could explain this so that you would understand it after half an hour. It would be a half hour well spent because this situation is so common.

You need first to understand K+P vs K, so that you know when it is safe to exchange Rooks. But you have to do that anyway.

Given that, the defender can always draw if his King can safely reach the queening square, in your case c1. The defenders Rook should stay on the third Rank, to avoid situations where the attacker plays his King to the 6th, threatening mate. This is no longer a threat once the pawn has moved to the 6th, so at that stage the defender can play his Rook down the board to give checks from behind. There are one or two cases where extra care is needed, which the book will explain, but the third-rank defense is the basic thing that can be remembered easily.

---
Tags: endgame, rook-endgame
---


title: False calculation of chess moves

text:
# Question
Title: False calculation of chess moves
At the start I must admit that I am not the brightest chess player, so this just might be a stupid question but: Calculated Chess moves have been determined to be infinite, as I am given to understand. But of what use is this knowledge to the game, or player when the guestimate (this can probably be calculated) is half or even far less than half would constitute legitimate moves or moves that make no sense at all (a move because it can be moved to "x" without reason. The question that should be quired is, "how many legitimate moves are there in chess that lead to a legitimate conclusion 'win, draw, or forfeit'?" Who knows that actual legitimate moves that can be made which evolves into a legitimate conclusion?

# Answer
> 0 votes
From Shannon's Programming a Computer for Playing Chess:

> From these remarks it appears that to improve the speed and strength of play the machine must:
>
> * Examine forceful variations out as far as possible and evaluate only at reasonable positions, where some quasi-stability has been established.
> * Select the variations to be explored by some process so that the machine does not waste its time in totally pointless variations.

The first can be done by evaluating all checks, captures, and threats - a true and tested method to avoiding blunders.

But notice "some process" in the second bullet point has to be set by you. There's an easy way to choose this, and it's also noted in Vukovic's *Art of Attack*:

> If the threat move is the same on two consecutive plies (with one ply in between them to account for the side to move), the threat move is a serious one and the search is extended.

Threat moves are moves that, if the other side were to (illegally) 'pass' on this move, they would be mated, material loss would occur, or some other favorable advantage would occur.

If I attacked your queen with my knight, and your queen moves to some spot but is still attacked by my knight, that is a *serious* threat move. Then we check the other possible squares that the queen can move to, and if any resulting position is unfavorable, then the position of my knight is superior and considerable for my next move.

So what else?

If a side makes a move and it leads to a mating attack in one variation without compromising your position in all variations (one of the variations is a serious threat), it is a good candidate for your next move.

We can also turn this around.

If we attack the king and the defending side has to compromise his position (by making his surrounding squares weak, for example), that is a considerable candidate move. Because it's more forcing, this is of a higher category.

Of the highest category is attacks on the enemy king with certainty of mate. Huge compromises like a queen sacrifice would have to occur to stave off this attack.

# Answer
> -1 votes
Granted that there might be an infinitesimal number of possible moves in a chess game, in reality only a few really make sense on any given turn, so the vast majority can be excluded. Nevertheless, the tree of the total number of reasonable moves in a game would probably still be beyond calculation, but I can't think of any good reason to know what that possible number might be anyway.

---
Tags: opening, evaluation, best-practice, mathematics
---


# Question
Title: What common patterns should I look for in chess?
When I started learning, I had lots of games where I lost lots of material through not being familiar with these sneaky attacks. I am talking about these:

There are many more (two minor pieces being attacked by a single pawn, discovered checks that result in attacking important pieces, etc)

I think it will be of great help to study them again and have them freshly in my mind (they often go unperceived, both when *spotting* them, and *stopping* them).

# Answer
What you here call 'patterns' are more commonly called chess tactics. See the Wikipedia article for Chess Tactics for a list with some visualization.

These are the simple patterns. There are more complicated patterns that arise rather less commonly, but these complicated patterns tend to simply be a composite of the 'basic tactics'.

A fine example of a more complicated pattern is the windmill: Wikipedia article for Windmill
> 9 votes

# Answer
As pointed out, the "patterns" you were looking at are largely covered more abstractly in the domain of tactics... My favorite guide when I was new to chess on that was Yasser Seirwan's book Winning Chess Tactics. Once you get the basic ideas, the only way to improve on those is practice. I find the tactics sites like chess.emrald.net to be the best resource for rapidly improving your game.

But there are also genuine "patterns" to learn, which are also important. The difference can be thought of as patterns tend to be less an abstract idea, but a specific implementation of several of these tactical ideas in a configuration of the pieces you will often see. Most common are the mating patterns... which I'd reference you to my favorite chess book The Art of Attack in Chess, one I think should be on any serious chess players book shelf. Here is an online example of mating patterns, if you are interested.
> 5 votes

# Answer
These are standard tactics. One is called a pin, where a relatively weak piece is tied up in front of stronger piece. It can't move without exposing the stronger piece. Another is called the skewer, where the stronger piece is in front, and can't move away without exposing the weaker piece. The third is called a fork, attacking two pieces in two different directions.

These are basic applications of a simple strategem: you win games by threatening two things at one time, and the opponent can defend only one of them. Basic players will have two pieces attacked at the same time. At the advanced level, it might be two smaller threats, maybe the advance of two different pawns can be supported into enemy territory by the same piece.
> 3 votes

# Answer
As others have mentioned, what you have shown are common tactics (the pin and the fork) which are used to win material, generally based on a double attack, only one component of which you can answer. There are other tactics as well, including the discovered attack, x-ray attack (skewer), deflection and overloading. Often tactics are conjoined in a combination. It would be advisable to familiarize yourself with these from either an electronic or printed source, of which there are many available. In addition to these tactical patterns, you should also familiarize yourself with the common checkmating patterns so you can recognize them when they arise. These would include the Scholar's Mate, Fool's mate, Legal's mate, Philidor's Legacy (smothered mate), Morphy's Mate, Dovetail Mate, Epaulette Mate, and quite a few others, all of which can be found in the same sources as the tactics. Then regular play helps you to see any of these when they are imminent so you can react in time.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: terminology, patterns
---


# Question
Title: Chess pairing program for double round robin
We have regular friendly matches in our chess club. So far we have used an older version of swiss manager for swiss and round robin; but today when we had to pair using double round robin format, I was so puzzled.

Is there a chess pairing system that can be used for double round robin system?

# Answer
Just use the "Berger" Pairings/Tables. If there are an odd number of players, then a "dummy" player is added. When creating the pairings each round, whoever is playing the "dummy" player is simply receiving a bye. Then you run it again with colors reversed. If your program has no major issues, you should be able to manually enter people into your program, and the program should allow for people to be paired again with reversed colors.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: software, swiss-pairing
---


# Question
Title: Significant and efficient advice for amateurs
I was once at a cafe on a Saturday; a novice joined our chess club meeting to have fun. After observing his opening moves, I concluded he randomly used pawns to attack the opponent (completely ignoring positioning, let alone developing, of pieces)

I offered to play a game with him. He told me about chess boxing (playing chess in between boxing rounds). After an enjoyable conversation, I then told him that chess IS like boxing: You must control the center, or be bullied around.

After enforcing this tip on him, I was extremely but delightfully surprised to find he was developing and positioning his pieces like a decent tournament player. *The only issue was his tactics; he would regularly hang pieces and not realize in the middle game why he moved a piece.* **The main idea is the simple advice of going over the following list:**

1. Asking what squares compromised the center (to which he answered correctly; e4, d4, e5, d5)
2. Asking whether pieces or pawns are stronger
3. Telling him every (opening) move must control one of those squares with the stronger resource

This list significantly improved his positioning, decision-making, and enjoyment for chess. My question is, what similarly short analogies have you told chess newcomers that connect real world situations with the nature of chess?

# Answer
When I instruct beginners at our club, I use sports analogies. For example, I say that when two football (soccer, basketball, etc.) teams of equal ability oppose each other, if one were to lose a player and no substitutes were available, then that team would be at a distinct disadvantage, since they'd have one less blocker, defender, receiver, etc. to contest the opponent and should most likely ultimately lose as a result. For that reason, they should try not to fall behind in material while conversely trying to gain a material advantage themselves using tactics, which I explain. I use similar analogies for the opening stage, telling them that if their players (pieces) are still sitting on the bench (first rank) while the opponent's players are already on the field (the board), they cannot contribute to the battle and will fall behind from the start. Another analogy pointing out the necessity for quick development in the opening would be to compare it to a race where they were starting out ten or more yards behind if they didn't get their pieces out as fast as their opponent, indicating that they would then have difficulty catching up. All of these comparisons seem to help them understand the nature of chess.
> 2 votes

# Answer
I don't like any of these answers as they are too wordy and assume a certain level of skill firsthand.

So, I would say:

1: Pay attention to what your opponent's move was. Many players get so focused on their own pieces they overlook what the opponent is doing, and suddenly they are dropping material. **Chess is like a dance so pay attention to what your partner (opponent) is doing.**

2: In association with #1, what does your opponent's move do? What are it's consequences? does it attack something? Does it leave something unprotected? Pay attention to that. **Chess is like a conversation with a long-time friend. Let the move speak to you and give you all the information it has and don't interrupt the story it is telling you.**

3: Do the basic "Captures, Checks, Threats" after *every* move. Just by looking at the board and mentally going over every capture, every check, and every clear threat, you will avoid losing material, and losing material is the single biggest problem for newbies. **Chess is like boxing - you have to be able to read and anticipate what "punches" your opponent plans to throw at you. There are no surprises in chess - everything is before you. You only have to develop the skills to look closer to find what truths the position is telling you.**
> 2 votes

# Answer
The first analogy to chess ever made seems cogent to me. I mean a **real army** preparing for a fight.

The real army can't afford a fight before being *placed on the strategically important positions*. This first stage is **development** and **opening** in chess.

In the **middlegame** the two armies should start a real war. The side that occupied more **important points** has an advantage in the fight.

To the values of pieces: It's clear that when you lose a casual soldier (pawn), it will be better then missing a knight etc.
> 1 votes

# Answer
## Maximize mobility.

Put every piece where it has the most places it can go. Bishops go on long diagonals. Rooks on open files. Knights prefer the center of the board.

## Look for forcing moves.

Put your opponent in situations where he has no choice. The most powerful forcing move is the Mate Threat. Next is the Check. And next, any time a weaker piece threatens a stronger piece. As you learn more tactics, you learn more ways to force a move.

## Find your opponents weaknesses and concentrate your firepower on them.

Look for weak spots in your opponent's game - backwards pawns, pieces that can be pinned, holes in his pawn structure, areas where his mobility is constricted - and concentrate your firepower on them.
> 0 votes

# Answer
The best advice for Amateurs would be the most Basic rules of Chess.

1. Develop your pieces first . Even though you may not be aware of any Opening knowledge or the importance of e4,d4 you should have an idea that Knights belong on Centre Squares , Bishops on good diagonals , Rooks on Open Files and King in a castled position.
2. Always try thinking one or two moves ahead . Solving tactical exercises would help you with that.
3. Basic Checkmate Patterns will help you to checkmate the opponent's king .
4. Make a habit of keeping an eye on all the Opponent's Pieces after your opponent plays a move. (This adheres to even the Best Players and they sometimes miss many moves).
5. When you learn, play Online Live Chess so that you would have an estimation of your own Chess Level.
> 0 votes

# Answer
I really like this question, because I never realized how much of my chess reasoning (for better or worse) I applied elsewhere. So I hope these answers work, or they inspire others to come up with something better.

1. I have related a part of chess to negotiations. This is an oversimplification, but it works as follows: when you have a potential capture for an even trade, don't do it just to have something to do. Whoever blinks first usually gives something up. So taking a piece is like naming a figure in a negotiation. If you'd be happy with it and it's clearly advantageous to you, then accept it. This is particularly useful to chess players who may not be terribly social or say they aren't good negotiators, because it gives them some assurance that thinking calmly and not giving someone else something for free is itself negotiation.
2. You know how you have stuff you check before you leave your house or apartment? Keys, wallet, make sure the door is locked, lights turned off? An even longer list if you're going away for the weekend? Have stuff you check on the chessboard too after each move. Like the leaving-your-place list, it doesn't have to be too fancy, because you don't want to lose your nerves. The obvious stuff like no vicious checks/forks/pieces hanging/weaknesses made will go a long way. Similarly, maybe you have a weekly grocery list that doesn't change much. Each move you can do a simple checkoff. If that list becomes inadequate or too unwieldy (e.g. buying too much/little food), you can always tune it up later.
3. This is a bit of a stretch, and it's a reverse on the previous point, but you could also compare seeing a piece you could just take to a flyer saying "YOU MAY ALREADY HAVE WON!" You need to do your due diligence, but if nothing's fishy, then go for it. Don't respect your opponent too much.
> 0 votes

# Answer
**Strategy** is a strict adherence to rules. Not the legal rules - like moving bishops only diagonally - but guidelines, such as "Control the center." These guidelines are favorably set by you making it nearly impossible to lose, unless you're drinking.

However, the opponent may not be well-informed in strategy. Failure to comply, well-informed or not, results in unforgiving consequences for the violator.

Make your opponent respect your strategy, and don’t rush anything. Every time he breaks one of your rules, punish him with the consequence of breaking that rule.

* Did he exchange a bishop for a knight in an open game? Now take away his advanced posts using pawns and release the potential of your long-range pieces.
* Did he launch a kingside pawn roller with all of his pieces on the queenside? Take advantage of the space you're creating and nullify his anemic attack.
* Is the challenger creating opening *faux pas* by pushing his pawns aimlessly? Infiltrate the weak points e.g. holes.

These **tactics** \- moving of the forces (pawns and pieces) - are the *bridges between positions* that satisfy your strategy.

## On Tactics

Crossing the bridge i.e. performing the tactic leads to the net conversion of one or more positive imbalances. Notice I said net. Some players will fight for queenside space and disastrously give up the center and development in the process.

It's all about assessing the situation. If that gain of space leads to a forced win, great. Otherwise, you're going to have to put up a herculean effort managing his counter-play. Avoiding this mistake is just a matter of sealing the opponent in and making sure the execution of the tactic doesn't give him chances.

## Whose Strategy Is Better?

Usually, we get our guidelines from grandmasters and more commonly from IMs. Compliance with their successful (but verified) principles will result in your rating rocketing to prominence.

On the other hand, following advice from other amateurs isn't taboo as long as they show they're also improving. Your mileage may vary.

## Testing a Guideline

At any rate, flawed guidelines will not be powerful enough to influence the nature of the board. The result is your opponent's army running amok unpredictably (ending usually in your defeat). Your strategy will have to be taken back to the body shop for improvement.

At the body shop (some place with internet and snacks) strategy can easily be fixed by studying games from higher-rated players at least a few hundred points higher than your level. Look for moves that violate your guideline but lead to an advantage (more space, safer positioning, catching up in development, and/or more).

For example say that you believe you should capture any hanging pawn because several others told you it's a good idea. It makes sense, anyway: you agreed that more firepower leads to an easier win. During a game where you're two pawns up, you decide to use the restroom and go for a sip of water in celebration of your position.

When you return you find yourself in check. Subsequently you are checkmated in five moves because of an unforeseen tactic - a confusing experience. Surely being two pawns up guaranteed winning?

Now you have your guideline that needs repair.

1. You then **search for games** in a database from masters (or if you're a master, then FMs) where they violated the guideline (ignored the free pawns) but ended up with a superior position.
2. **Look for the preferred objective** that the master (or FM, etc.) followed instead of gaining material, instead of winning those free pawns. Was he focused on converting his dynamic play into a secure, static position that would bind his opponent and cause him to cry deep down inside?
3. **Make an exception for your guideline, if any.** If your guideline is strong, you may have a few exceptions - at most. Bishops are stronger than knights in open endgames **except** when there's pawns on only one side of the board.

If you find yourself constantly making exceptions for your guideline, the guideline itself may be an exception to some other, strong guideline. g2-g4 should be launched except if you castled kingside. g2-g4 is correct unless the f4 square creates an outpost for the enemy's pieces. After discovering a few more exceptions, you'll discover the stronger guideline: Don't endanger your king. Discard the old guideline for the novel, stronger one.

## The Big Picture

Scrutinize as much as you can, then scrutinize some more. When someone tells you, "X rule should be followed", apply X to several games by grandmasters, IMs, or anyone clearly better than you. If it's constantly being violated, it's probably not useful.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: strategy, teaching
---


title: Endgame: Rook + Knight vs Rook

text:
# Question
Title: Endgame: Rook + Knight vs Rook
What happens in the endgame Rook + Knight vs Rook? Is it a draw, or can the side with the knight win? I came across this a few days ago, and I managed to win with the Rook + Knight, but I am not sure if that is just because my opponent made a mistake.

# Answer
Like its cousin endgame KRBvKR, your ending of KRNvKR is usually drawn. It's not always drawn, of course, but generally speaking KRNvKR is much less dangerous and easier to defend than is KRBvKR. In *Secrets of Pawnless Endings*, John Nunn writes,

> If the defending king is not in a corner there are a few situations when the rook and knight can win tactically within a few moves, usually by a combination of skewer and knight fork, but in general the rook and knight only have winning chances when the defender's king is very badly placed.

The positions of KRNvKR are a part of existing tablebases, so we can be precise about how often it's a win: 35.9% of positions *in which the strong side has the move* are winning (see e.g. Ken Thompson's "Retrograde analysis of certain endgames" from 1986). Note that since that says that giving the strong side the move (which is advantageous most of the time) in a random position yields a win only 35.9% of the time, the overall winning percentage for the strong side in KRNvKR is considerably lower than that; I am unable to pin the figure down from any source so far.

For your particular game, Nunn's words can give some inkling as to whether your opponent made a mistake or was already doomed, but if tablebases have taught us anything it's that optimal play can be quite seemingly random, and that heuristics are of limited use for a reliable verdict. If you have a record of the initial KRNvKR position that appeared on the board in your game, though, then a quick Nalimov tablebase query will tell you whether or not your opponent sealed his fate during that ending or before it.
> 19 votes

# Answer
It is usually a draw, but some positions are winning, which can take up to 33 moves to convert. A complete mastery is shown at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-OlC-evq28
> 5 votes

# Answer
Search for a game of Cuban GM Leinier Dominguez, after many moves he won the game and it was vs another GM, I just don't remember the opponent. I thought this will be a draw until I saw this game. I don't remember the opponents king to be in a bad position.

It seems to be this game: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1499346
> 4 votes

---
Tags: endgame, knights, rooks, rook-and-minor-endgame
---


# Question
Title: For White, which variation of the Queen's Gambit Declined tends to lead to the most solid, positional, slow, closed, quiet and strategic positions?
I am a 1750 Elo player with a very positional, quiet and strategic style of play.

I would like to know which variation I should play when, as White, I face the Queen's Gambit Declined.

The variation must meet these two conditions:

* On average it must tend to lead to positions which are as much solid, positional, slow, closed, quiet and strategic as possible (I want nothing sharp and tactical).
* I should be able to play it both by beginning with 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 and by beginning with 1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. c4 e6

```
[fen "rnbqkb1r/ppp2ppp/4pn2/3p4/2PP4/5N2/PP2PPPP/RNBQKB1R w - - 1 0"]

```

I am hesitating between these three variations :

* The 5.Bf4 variation: 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bf4
* The 5.Bg5 variation: 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5
* The Catalan: 4. g3

# Answer
> 4 votes
The fact that you would consider opening Nf3 suggests that you are open to openings like the Reti. The Catalan g3 leads to (somewhat) this kind of opening, albeit with a pawn on d4. More to the point, with the light squared bishop on the long diagonal, it appears to be an opening of the slow, steady, quiet variety that you favor, keeping White's strategic advantage for as long as possible, at least until you make a mistake, or Black outplays you.

The other variations, with the black-squared Bishop, do have the advantage of developing a new piece, but they are also more "tactical" and lead to earlier conflict. If I understand your question correctly, that's precisely what you want to **avoid.**

# Answer
> 0 votes
You can also play the London system, which has these categories you like to play and also you can try Rubinstein attack and the Pillsbury attack with knight to e5 pawn going to f4 and after captures the rooks file opens, the f6 knight has to move and the queen is free for a kingside attack.

---
Tags: opening, theory, strategy, positional-play, queens-gambit
---


# Question
Title: Doubling pawns on the c file in King's Indian
Usually King's Indian players don't seem to be afraid to double the pawns on the c file if that means trading a knight for the dark-squared bishop. I was just wondering what are the plans that Black has in mind when doubling those pawns? For instance, if White castles queenside, how can Black use that pawn structure to its advantage?

```

      [FEN ""]
      [StartPly "11"]

      1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. Bg5 Na6 { E73 King's Indian Defense: Averbakh Variation, Modern Defense } 7. Qd2 e5 8. Nf3 Qe8 9. d5 Nc5 10. Qc2 h6 11. Be3 Ng4 12. Bxc5 dxc5 13. h3 Nf6 14. O-O-O

```

# Answer
In that line you posted I'd imagine black would ideally try to blockade d6 with a piece, say via Ne8-Nd6, then begin pawn storming the queenside with a6-b5, or Rb8-b5, or something along those lines. The actual attack itself would be complex, whether to push c4 or b4 first for example, and may need additional piece development to prepare it, as well as accurate calculation to prevent white from being able to blockade the pawn storm.

As far as white attacking on the kingside, it's not so easy to attack into a fianchetto and would likely require a piece sac to break through.

I don't know the variation in question but that's how I'd play it.
> 3 votes

# Answer
The most important thing IMO is that White has voluntarily traded his good Bishop. Black should be thinking of a good N vs bad B endgame, with Nd6 perfectly placed both for attack and defense.

To steer toward such an ending, the general recipe is to threaten an attack, without making overly committal moves and certainly without sacrificing but not necessarily against the King. White then has a dilemma. If he reduces the attack by exchanging then he just brings that endgame closer.

This is not to claim that Black is actually better (although I would prefer Black in the diagrammed position) but they certainly should not fear this exchange. And, as has been remarked, it is not easy for White to attack that King position. Particularly without Bh6 available.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: opening, strategy, kings-indian
---


# Question
Title: What are some techniques for BvN endgames?
Let's say all the pawns are on one side of the board, either left, middle or right. (If there were two pawn groups far from each other, I imagine the Bishop would be much better than the Knight.)

So what are some techniques or rules of thumb for these kinds of endgames? (Are tactics the same thing as techniques?) All I know so far is what I gathered from Wikipedia and my own experience.

* If you have the Bishop, an enemy pawn promoting on the wrong color is harder to stop, so try to deal with it earlier. But I have no idea if your own pawn promoting on the wrong color is easier, harder, or makes no difference.
* A Bishop orthogonally adjacent to a Knight cuts off half of the Knight's moves (unless one of those moves is defended by another piece). A Bishop 3 squares orthogonally away from the Knight does the same thing.
* The Knight is better when most pawns are on the same color as the Bishop. Apparently this is true whether or not the pawns are enemies or allies of the Bishop.
* An edge pawn is harder to stop for a Knight. (Thanks to user1583209 from my previous question.)

What I'm really hoping for is a some kind of rule of the triangle or rule of key squares as they exist in King and Pawn endgames.

# Answer
1. In races when bishop can sacrifice itself for last pawn, it can stop one pawn for loooong time. Don't expect to build a knight bridge faster then the enemy king kills other side and promotes. You need rook pawn or two pawns (one to win a bishop, one to make a queen) for races. Good to have some idea about this rule.
2. Bad bishop itself doesn't lose often in blocked positions, bad handling of it does. Have in mind you don't need to guard all pawns. In f4 g3 h4 vs. f5 g6 h5 you must often give up on a g pawn as you need to cut the enemy king and be active. The remaining two can be protected from active swuares. Be patient. You can also give up on pawns that blocks your king. In Kc3 Bd6 d4 f4 h4 vs. Ka4 Ne6 d5 f5 h5 the f4 pawn is very good one not to care about. Guard h4 with bishop if needed, guard d4 with king and control opponent's king. The f4 don't need protection as after taking you move king to f3 and use 1.) if your opponent wants to race. Otherwise just sit and wait.
3. Surrounding the knight is used very often, often as indirect pawn protection. You would be surprised how easily the knight can be locked. On smaller areas killed, on bigger repetitioned to draw or just imprisoned with no way out. Imagine Bg1 Ke5 and enemy knight stupid enough to hunt pawn on b2. You win the knight after Nxb2 in few moves with Kd4.
4. Knight wants connected pawn formation.
5. Knight can stop last pawn only with king assistance, bishop can fight longer and against some pawns more in the center not far enough it can stop them forever without needing an assistance.
6. Good to have an idea about elementary 1:0, 2:0, 2:1 pawn ratios. For example Kf5 Nf3 g4 h5 vs. Kh6 Bc1 is draw! Knight also has big problems helping h+f pawns to promote, here rules are more difficult and big precision and patience needed. Also Kf5 Ne4 f3 g4 vs. Kh6 Bc1 g5 is easy draw as you never lose g5 pawn. When you need to protect it, you are on h6, when Nf7 is threatening, you go to g7.
7. If you are patient like a zen master and you can calculate like a computer, you can do miracles with bad bishop.
8. Have in mind wrong bishop to rook's pawn always.
9. On one wing both these pieces should be able to stop x+1:x majority to x being 3 and less. Not easily of course. Maybe horsie defending 3 vs 4 is lost with good corner bishop, but don't think so.
> 5 votes

# Answer
With pawns on one side of the board the Knight is usually better but keep in mind that maybe this is not enough to win the game. Some simple rules to remember are that N+P vs B is drawn as the bishop will be sacrificed for the pawn. The same applies for B+P vs N although this is a little harder to defend. Another rule is that B+ a or h P vs King where the bishop is of the opposite color of the promoting square then it is a draw if the king can get to this square before his counterpart. Another thing to have in mind is that the knight is also better if there are pawns on both flanks but the enemy bishop is bad(same color as his pawns). Actually, it is more possible to win good N vs bad B with pawns on both flanks rather than N vs B with pawns only in one side.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: endgame, tactics, knights, bishops
---


# Question
Title: Where to find specific endgame practice exercises/puzzles/practice bots?
I'm looking for a set of exercises (contained in a book, website, or chess engine) where I can practice what I know in regards to **rook and pawn vs. rook** endgames. I could find a friend to randomly place pieces on the board for me, but I don't see what would be in it for her or him.

Something ideal would be a website that displays a puzzle that I can solve, but the pawn would have to be on the a- or h-file and 7th rank. If I can set these parameters while randomizing the position of the rooks or king, that would be great.

Where can I find such a website, and if there isn't any, how can I create such an object? **The object would set the pieces randomly on the board, with the exception of my selection.** So if I select the pawn to be on a7 and the king to be on a8, it will randomly place the other pieces elsewhere. I'm only interested in the following pieces being on the board: A pair of kings, a pair of rooks, and one pawn.

# Answer
If you're looking for a truly random position, I'd just roll an eight-sided die a couple of times to determine the column and row of each piece. (If the position is illegal, just reroll.) You can then enter the position into a chess program and play against the engine. Here's an online dice roller in case you don't have physical ones, the one you're looking for is called the `d8`.

If you're looking to practice key positions in KRP vs. KR specifically, you'd probably be interested in John Nunn's Secrets of Rook Endings. I forgot how this book is organized exactly, but it contains almost all positions in this ending which are worth studying.
> 1 votes

# Answer
I would go to Week In Chess, load the weekly games into Chessbase, and do some search filtering and play the game out at some point against a comp. When you fail (it will happen), then you can at least get an idea from the practical viewpoint of the players and review the completion of the game as played.
> 1 votes

# Answer
I made a program.

Just run (button near the top) it until you get a legal position. Even if you add a black pawn, most of the time it should only take one try.

You could try downloading a python chess library that has a simple method which checks if the position is legal.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: software, endgame, problems, rook-endgame, study
---


title: What would you do in this situation?

text:
# Question
Title: What would you do in this situation?
After black moved his rook, what would you do as white? I did not find the best move according to the chess engine; I'm wondering what ideas you have.

```
[FEN "1r2k2r/p1Q5/3p1qn1/4npp1/7p/1B6/PP1B1PPP/R3R1K1 b K - 0 1"]

1... Rbd8

```

# Answer
Black's queen is the only defender for the mate on f7 (the knight on e5 is pinned). This makes Bxg5 a very attractive move, as the black queen has nowhere to go (the only safe spot, Qf8, is met with Qxd8 and mate).

```
[FEN "3rk2r/p1Q5/3p1qn1/4npp1/7p/1B6/PP1B1PPP/R3R1K1 w - - 0 1"]

1. Bxg5!

```

Black can chase the white queen for a couple of moves but his position will collapse very soon.
> 19 votes

# Answer
The Scenario here does not call for any Strategic plan but it is a tactical shot of Deflection and Queen gets overloaded with B\*g5 move . Black is in a precarious position with no offence but to resist for sometime . Black has 2 knights and King in centre with Rooks not even joined to each other . White on the other hand has its Bishops pointing towards Black and Rooks yet to join the party and the Queen is keeping a close watch on the 7th rank .

Even if the Tactical B\*g5 would not have been possible White should win with normal moves .
> 0 votes

---
Tags: engines, analysis
---


# Question
Title: Knight sacrifice performed by Deep Blue against Garry Kasparov
Below is the 1997 game of Deep Blue VS Garry Kasparov:

```
r1bqkb1r/pp1n1pp1/2p1pn1p/6N1/3P4/3B1N2/PPP2PPP/R1BQK2R w - - 0 1

```

The last move `7...h6?` was played by Kasparov (black), after which Deep Blue played the knight sacrifice 8.Nxe6.

Wikipedia says:

> The computer is aided by having this knight sacrifice programmed into its opening book. This move had been played in a number of previous high-level games, with white achieving a huge plus score. As an indication of how far computer chess has progressed in the 20 years after this match, modern programs deprived of their opening books are able to correctly evaluate Nxe6 as strongest; but at the time this was played it was considered probable based on other programs' performance that it was only the opening book that was responsible for this choice. The compensation white gets for the material is not obvious enough for the computer to see by itself.

How would white compensate for their sacrificed knight?

# Answer
History of this line is interesting. People used to think it's good for white, maybe majority still do as well as openings books do. But in correspondence database I use there are four games with Nxe6 fxe6 and black scored two wins and two draws out of four games. The wins are from 2012 and 2013. I know a lot of white players avoiding the sacrifice these days as it is easy to lose even against much weaker opposition while it doesn't even have the objective quality. Black play is easier and more obvious. I don't like White's position, I like Black here. It is too closed without direct threats for such a material investment. I know mainly the defensive plans for black here as it is in my repertoire, ok white try to play on e-file, disrupt you with Ne5 and f7 fork threat, may want to play c5 with B/Qa5+ sometimes and even b2-b4-b5 as black is undeveloped for quite some time. It is positional sacrifice and very interesting one.
> 5 votes

# Answer
Honestly the Sacrifice of the Knight compensates with one pawn and a check of Bg6+ which forces the King to an unhealthy square of e7 . There is definitely an initiative which White has in the rest of the game but I will suggest that this move order is good for players like Mikhail Tal / Robert Spielmann / Rashid Nezhmetinov who has a daring style of play and sacrifice is their main weapon in major chess games . It is indeed difficult to answer and no fixed algorithm as how White will bring out the game and win it . Infact it could be Black who has better chances .

True Black is cramped with King in Centre but Black has all its pieces surrounded and White has nothing except a Bishop on g6 which takes off some squares but with good play Black should be able to neutralize White's attack .After Qc7 or Qa5 Black's king will be safe on d8 with no immediate attack from White .
> 1 votes

---
Tags: analysis, sacrifice
---


# Question
Title: London System as White: exchange of the light-squared bishops
The following is a position that frequently arises in my games when I play the London System as White:

```

  [FEN ""]

1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 Nf6 3. e3 Bf5

```

At this point I am unable to place my light-squared Bishop in its best square (d3) without allowing an exchange of Bishops which does not seem favorable to me as the White light squared Bishop is better than the Black (all White pawns in the center occupying black squares - especially after c3 which will also be played at some point).

Yet, when browsing the database at lichess.com the most frequent continution is `4. Bd3` which invites exactly such an exchange. I' ve toyed with ideas of `Nf3` followed by `Nh4` in an attempt to drive off the Black Bishop (or exchange him with my Knight) but without much success.

How should White approach this Bishop exchange? Should it be avoided and, if not, how does the London System plans (for White) change after the light squared Bishop is lost?

# Answer
There are many solutions to this problem .

1. The first thing is that I feel that you have a problem without the light square Bishop . You must learn to play with Bd3 and look for games in chessgames.com how white scores the rest of the game . Rather than an opening it is more of a psychological problem . Playing London from White does not necessarily mean you have to do a K-side attack . The exchange of light square bishop prohibits the K-side attack . You need to change your plans .
2. You can play c4 -c5 and then bring out the Bishop .When you play c4 then Black plays e6 in most occasions this cuts off the Bishop on Q-side . When c5 then b6 from Black White can take advantage and play Bb5+ with Queen on a5 putting some pressure . Knight can jump to e5 in next moves .
3. You can develop the Bishop on e2 and after Nf3,Ne5 you play g4 ,h4 .
> 3 votes

# Answer
The best way to deal with the "copycat" is to switch to the Queen's Gambit with c4 with the idea of following up at the right time with Qb3 to take advantage of the weakness on b7.
> 6 votes

---
Tags: opening, london-system
---


# Question
Title: Why did Smirin resign against Anand in the Blitz semifinal 1994?
There is a video on YouTube about how Anand took 1:43 for move four in the Blitz semifinal and ended up winning the match. What I cannot understand is why White resigned because I can not see the checkmate. Can someone explain how checkmate is possible in one or two moves?

Here is a link to their game.

# Answer
> 6 votes
While in the final position, checkmate is still a move or 20 away, it's clear that White is lost. Black is a piece ahead with no compensation for White at all. People resign in such a position already on the higher level of club play. In a normal (i.e. non-blitz) game between grandmasters, White would probably already have resigned by move 30.

```
[FEN ""]
[White "A. Smirin"]
[Black "V. Anand"]
[Event "New York Intel Active (blitz)"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Date "1994"]
[StartPly "100"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. d4 Ne4 4. Ne5 d6 5. Nf3 d5 6. Bd3 Nc6 7. O-O Be7 8. c4 Nb4 9. Be2 Be6 10. Nc3 O-O 11. Be3 Bf5 12. Rc1 dxc4 13. Bc4 c6 14. Ne5 Nc3 15. bxc3 Nd5 16. Qb3 f6 17. Qb7 fxe5 18. Qc6 Be4 19. dxe5 Kh8 20. Bd4 Rc8 21. Qa6 Nf4 22. f3 Rc6 23. Qa4 Rc4 24. Qc4 Bd3 25. Qc6 Ne2 26. Kh1 Nd4 27. cxd4 Bf1 28. Rf1 Qd4 29. f4 Qe5 30. g3 Qc5 31. Qe4 Bf6 32. Kg2 Rc8 33. Rf2 Qc6 34. Qc6 Rc6 35. g4 h6 36. Kf3 Rc3 37. Ke4 Kh7 38. Re2 Rc4 39. Kf5 Rc5 40. Ke6 Rc4 41. Rf2 Kg6 42. h3 Rc3 43. Rh2 Rf3 44. f5 Kg5 45. a4 Kh4 46. Kd5 Ra3 47. Kc6 Ra4 48. Kb7 a5 49. Kb6 Ra3 50. Kb5 Rh3

```

# Answer
> 2 votes
Smirin resigned as Anand had one bishop, through which he could have easily advanced his pawns towards the other end and thus it's game over (one rook and a queen).

---
Tags: analysis, blitz, resigning
---


title: Is this rook sacrifice intended?

text:
# Question
Title: Is this rook sacrifice intended?
```
rnbqk2r/p1pp1pbp/1p2p1pn/4P3/2BP4/5Q2/PPP2PPP/RNB1K1NR w KQkq - 0 1

```

Is the rook sacrifice intended by the black to trap white's queen or is it just a misplayed move?

# Answer
In general, it's very hard to trap a queen like that. After Qxa8 Nc6, the white queen can't escape immediately but it's not hard to devise an escape plan; with Bb5 White threatens to exchange the only defender of the a7 pawn, and at the same time winning another pawn on c6. So my conclusion is that Black's last move was a blunder.
> 6 votes

# Answer
It may have been a misguided attempt to trap the queen, but since there is no immediate follow-up threat against her, she will have time to escape, in which case the sacrifice has to be considered a mistake. The queen may be out of play for a while during this extrication effort, giving Black the chance to gain in development, but that's unlikely to prove to have been sufficient compensation for the sacrifice. The recommended Bb5 move for White seems to be the quickest way to initiate the extrication.
> 1 votes

# Answer
It's a poorly played trap and definitely a blunder. White would still be up material even if the queen is lazily given up for pieces (see mainline.) **However,** white shouldn't be too impatient in freeing up the queen if it is decided that it should be kept (see sideline with checkmates.)

The best plan for white is probably to escape using minor pieces.

```
[FEN "rnbqk2r/pppp1pbp/4p1pn/4P3/2BP4/5Q2/PPP2PPP/RNB1K1NR b KQkq - 0 1"]

1...b6?? {Nf5 or Nc6 instead are playable} 2. Qxa8!+- Nc6 3.Nf3 {many other moves are playable} ( 3. Bg5?? Qxg5! 4. Qxc8+?! {Ne2 or Nd2 instead should be played} Ke7!-+ {the only move} 5. Qxc7 {Qb7 or Qa6 instead lead to the same checkmates} Qc1+!! (5... Bxe5?! 6. dxe5 {is not forced} Qc1+!) (5... Qxg2?? 6. Nd2!!+-) 6. Ke2 Nxd4+ 7. Kd3 Qxc2+ 8. Ke3 Nhf5+ 9. Kf4 {you can find two checkmate in threes from here})( 3. Bb5?! Nxd4 4. Qe4?! Nxb5 5. a4 {traps the knight}) O-O 4. O-O (4. Bb5) (4. Bg5) Qe7 5. Bb5 Ba6 6. Qxf8+ Qxf8 7. Bxa6

```
> 0 votes

# Answer
This rook sacrifice is a blunder. OK, you need to prove from a calculation standpoint also. Let's take the piece placement, and some basic common sense.

* Black has two pieces developed on K-side. His best move is to castle.
* His Q-side is static except his intentionally mistaken move b6.
* To trap the mighty queen you need to make moves, which will consist of tempo-gaining moves, and continuously attack the Queen, which does not seem to have.
* After Q\*a8 Nc6 stops the queen's retreat. Bb5 or d5 and ed5 Bd5 attacks the knight, and then it is not clear from black how he would trap the queen. In fact there is no such way.

So in short b6 seems to be a misplayed move. You can even check this out with an engine.
> 0 votes

# Answer
Black moves his/her knight to block the Queen from getting out. Then white is forced to work without a Queen or waste time trying to free her while black can make some aggressive moves without fear of the Queen being in the way. IMO it is a trap, at the expense of a rook but it buys time to make some pretty serious moves.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: rooks, queens, sacrifice
---


# Question
Title: Is there a multiplayer Chess GUI that allows you to choose the starting position?
With a human vs. computer, simply set Stockfish to `depth == 1` and play it. Or, you can choose another (weaker) engine.

With a human vs. human *online*, is it possible to set the starting position? If so, what is the website?

# Answer
You can play it in https://lichess.org/editor. Chose your default opening, or just customize it, then click in 'Continue from here'. You can chose if you want to play with with engine or with a friend.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: software
---