title: When is it the right time to resign?

text:
# Question
Title: When is it the right time to resign?
Most advanced players know when it is time to resign, but many beginners don't. What factors do you consider when it is time to resign?

# Answer
The right time to resign will vary from player to player, even if facing identical losing positions. But basically, the right time to resign is when, despite serious contemplation and effort of thought, you are convinced that there is simply no way to avoid a loss, and in addition you have lost all desire to play the position out. That said, there is nothing more frustrating than resigning prematurely, and a saying I've heard before goes something like "It's better to resign one move too late than one move too early," or "It's never too late to resign."

Some players can feel disrespected if an opponent plays on in what the first player considers a clearly lost position. But of course what one person can see clearly, others sometimes can't (or, not unlike the link above, the player who thinks it is already won might be mistaken). A player has every right to play until the bitter end every game without resigning -- *these times can even be great learning experiences*, seeing how one's opponent goes about winning a won position -- and I believe it is never disrespectful to do so, provided that the player on the losing end isn't, say, just running out the clock, motivated only by a desire to be annoying and waste the opponent's time.
> 24 votes

# Answer
I was able to draw or even win some games I considered "clearly lost", especially if the opponent needed to know some theory (knight and bishop ending, Lucena and Philidor positions, opposition rules...). Consider the possibility of stalemate, or draw by repetition, too. This is often unexpected for the opponent, especially as you may launch a kamikaze attack and sacrifice lots of material in these cases.
> 9 votes

# Answer
The right time to resign is when you are have a disadvantage that is so large that you will reasonably expect to lose. This depends on your strength, and that of your opponent.

Between masters or higher, if one is behind by a clear pawn or more without positional or other compensation, it might be time to resign. On the other hand, as between beginners, even a piece behind might not call for a resignation, because the other beginner might easily lose it back.
> 8 votes

# Answer
I take 3 things into consideration when thinking about resigning:

1) The position on the clocks

2) The position on the board

3) The relative strength of my opponent

First off, if either I or my opponent are down to the last 2 minutes on the clock then I usually play on unless I'm really staring down the barrel. Something might happen and if it is disrespectful or masochistic it is only for another couple of minutes.

A concrete example of this the other way round happened to me a couple of years ago. I was winning comfortably (much better position plus an exchange and 2 pawns up) against a player rated about 200 points stronger than me. But, and it's a big but, I had 5 minutes left and he had 50 minutes. He played on, naturally, and with his extra time and the pressure I felt to try and win he managed to win.

Another player I know who has been within 50 ratings points of me for most of the last 15 years always used to resign the move before checkmate regardless of the situation or opponent. I found this deeply disrespectful and on one occasion about 12 years ago tried to teach him a lesson. I got a comfortable material advantage to the extent that I could do pretty much what I wanted. I still had 5 pawns left at this stage and implemented the following plan.

I won all his remaining pawns and then started advancing my 5 connected pawns up the board as a unit. Once I had 5 pawns on the 7th rank I started queening them with the intention of ending up with 5 queens on the board if possible. He resigned after I queened the third pawn and explained to me that he was resigning because I had a mate in 3. I counter explained that I wasn't interested in mate until I'd queened all 5 pawns (in case he hadn't guessed).

He appeared at the time to be completely unaffected by this although maybe other, more blunt, folk had a word with him because the last time I beat him he resigned in an endgame a pawn down when I was 2 or 3 moves from queening a pawn.

I've never lost to a player more than 200 points lower than me (due as much as anything to lack of opportunity) but when I beat a master rated about 500 points higher than me he resigned 3 or 4 moves before an inevitable checkmate. Fair enough, I think.

At the other extreme about 10 years ago playing a player about 200 points stronger than me I was completely outplayed in the opening and middlegame and as his threats mounted I found myself losing the exchange.

To his surprise I resigned. Why didn't I play on, he wanted to know, I was only an exchange down. The problem, I explained to him, was that before I lost the exchange I had a desperate position and after I lost the exchange I still had a desperate position only now I was an exchange down and within a few moves more material was going to follow and I would still be in a desperate position. He seemed disappointed, the sadist!

On the other hand I have several times against stronger opposition had the experience during the postmortem after a loss finding out that my opponent and I both had the impression that we were winning until quite late in the game, mistakenly on my part, obviously. They may very well have felt that I could have resigned sooner. Unfortunately my ability to evaluate the position accurately wasn't good enough to know that I was losing and should have resigned! If it had been I wouldn't have got into that position in the first place.
> 6 votes

# Answer
"No game was ever won by resigning." -Tartakover

If playing on the team of opponents in a timed simultaneous exhibit, resigning makes it easier on the exhibitor and thus harder on your teammates. Thus one is often advised to *never* resign in this setting: even if your position is hopeless, you may still help your teammates by forcing the exhibitor to actually win it. Then again, some may regard this advice as unsportsmanlike.
> 4 votes

# Answer
All the above answers refer to individual tournaments, but in a team what has happened or is happening on other boards might affect your decision. Admittedly it's more likely to affect what happens when a draw is offered, but you could play on if a draw, however unlikely, rather than a loss was of major benefit to the team as a whole.
> 2 votes

# Answer
It all depends on whether you can confidently expect your opponent to pursue the win to completion competently. Of course, the higher rated the players are, the more likely this is. At the club level, blunders happen frequently.

But even at the highest levels of play, it can happen that the opponent missteps. Here's an example of a stunning upset from the Women's Olympiad, Baku 2016 that just finished. White's ELO: 1932. Black's: 2252 (That's a ***320 ELO difference***)...

```
[FEN ""]
[Event "Women's Baku Chess Olympiad"]
[Site "chess24.com"]
[Date "2016.09.13"]
[Round "11.1"]
[White "Shabanaj, Eglantina"]
[Black "Milovic, Aleksandra"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "1932"]
[BlackElo "2252"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 b6 4. Bd3 Bb7 5. Nbd2 c5 6. c3 Nc6 7. O-O d5 8. dxc5 Bxc5 9. e4 O-O 10. Qe2 dxe4 11. Nxe4 Be7 12. Bg5 Nxe4 13. Qxe4 g6 14. Bh6 Re8 15. Rad1 Qc7 16. Bf4 Bd6 17. Bxd6 Qxd6 18. Qh4 Qe7 19. Ng5 h5 20. Rfe1 Kg7 21. Re3 Rad8 22. Qg3 Qd6 23. f4 Ne7? {+/- 3.26} 24. Rde1? {(=, -0.05) gives away the advantage} (24. Nxf7! {was correct} Kxf7 25. Bxg6+ Nxg6 26. Rxd6 Rxd6 27. f5 e5!? 28. fxg6+ Rxg6 29. Qf2+ Kg7 30. g3 Rf6 {+/- 3.38}) 24... Nd5?? {(-/+, -9.72) An unfortunate choice. In fact, a howler. Almost any other black move is better, including} (24... Bc6) (24... Rf8) (24... Bd5 {, or}) (24... Qc6) 25. Nxf7! {destruction with tempo} Kxf7? {Now it's mate in 5.} (25... Qxf4!? {(+/-, 11.67)} 26. Qxg6+ Kf8 27. Rf3 {is also winning}) 26. Qxg6+ Kf8 27. Qh6+ Kf7 28. Bg6+ Kf6 29. Bxe8+ (29. Bxh5+ {is faster, but the text works fine.} ) 1-0

```

For an example of how this question of "when to resign" plays out (no pun intended) at the GM level, see my response to the question "Is it possible to force checkmate with King, knight, and Bishop vs. King? (It is, of course, but apparently some GM's still want their opponents to prove it...).
> 2 votes

# Answer
For me, it really depends on the situation, and my opponent. If my opponent is skilled (or at least, better than me...), and even I can see that my opponent has a clear (though possibly not immediate) win and that it's just a matter of grinding it out, I'll normally resign. It saves us both a lot of fatigue and time, and I can use the extra time to go outside the tournament site and go get something to eat. ;-)

If my opponent is more around my own level, and my own situation isn't utterly hopeless, I'll wait longer to resign, because you never know when the opponent is going to blunder. The winner of any chess game is whoever makes the next to the last mistake... I've played out (and won) a number of games in this type of situation, where I'm down a couple pieces plus maybe a few pawns in the middle game, and my opponent just "out of the blue" hangs their queen or something.

If I see that my opponent is in the process of executing a particularly pretty checkmate, I'll play it out. They worked for it, they deserve to see it played out on the board, and they deserve to take home a scoresheet with the complete checkmate sequence on it.

One situation I *never* resign in, though, is when my opponent has a massive material advantage, such as multiple pieces against either a bare king, or against a bare king and maybe a few pawns. At this point, I'll start trying to drive towards stalemate. My assumption is if my opponent has that much of a material advantage and I'm still not checkmated, they may not actually have a plan, and they may not be paying a lot of attention to stalemate possibilities. I have managed to "steal" half a point out of games like this on a number of occasions.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: etiquette, resigning
---


# Question
Title: How to exploit an opponent must-win situation
I am 1.5 points clear of the field, and my last-round opponent is in a must-win situation for a prize. Is there a mathematically/statistically proven way for me to take advantage of this state of affairs to maximize my own winning chances?

A sub-question of this is: Has anyone studied the phenomenon of must-win situations in sport? What was their conclusion for the side who is not must-win?

# Answer
> 4 votes
One thing is that you may adjust your opening choice, knowing that any forced draws are wins for you. For instance as white against the Najdorf, 6.Bg5 has many lines that contain forced draws, and black may be used to playing lines where he would welcome them. Now he has to avoid them and that may force him to play inferior lines.

That said -- if this makes you play openings you generally don't play, you will probably just find yourself in a sharp position that you don't know well, which is the last thing you want. And in the given tournament situation, the opponent may already be looking for openings he doesn't have any games in a database with, to avoid any special opening preparation altogether.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Daniel Moskovich asked: Is there a mathematically/statistically proven way for me to take advantage of this state of affairs to maximize my own winning chances?

I think not.

Generally, one should always play the actual position one faces on the board: you do not know in advance what your opponent intends to open with. You suspect your opponent must play for a win so will take risks suggesting a gambit opening and aggresive tactical play.

One strategy could be to pass the fight to Black with a noncommital move like 1.Nf3 or even 1.b3. Some of the Catalan systems played by Kramnik are worth a look at.

Maybe even be really provocative and try 1.a3 or 1.h3 the strategy being to then mimic as far as possible Black's moves ie in effect making Black play against him/her self.

Although you are White you are then in effect playing as Black but with an extra move in hand.

At the very least your opponent will be discombobulated and any prepared lines they have ready for you will be redundant. Also, this strategy may gain you time on the clock!

---
Tags: statistics, psychology
---


# Question
Title: PythonChess - Get engine to predict a list of the best moves in a position
Say that I currently have a board, and then on that board I move my e2 pawn to e4. I'm looking for a way to get the engine to predict the X amount of best moves for black.

I know how to predict the best move given a position:

```
result = engine.play(board, chess.engine.Limit(time=0.1))
board.push(result.move)

```

But that only predicts the number 1 best move. I want a list containing the second, third ... X best moves.

How would I do that?

# Answer
In the world of chess engines, what you're looking for is called **multi-PV** (multiple principal variations): telling the engine to look for and return up to *n* best moves and the associated principal variations for each. ("Up to" because sometimes there's only 1 legal move in a position.)

In python-chess, this is part of the engine protocols, as one of the optional parameters when calling `engine.analyse()`. From the documentation:

> `class chess.engine.EngineProtocol`
>
> `coroutine analyse( [...] )`
>
> * multipv – Optional. Analyse multiple root moves. Will return a list of at most multipv dictionaries rather than just a single info dictionary.

The `.analyse()` method tells the engine to analyse the position, returning a dictionary of information, which includes among other things the moves of the principal variation. Specifying for instance `.analyse(multipv = 3)` will tell the engine to return a list of (up to) 3 such dictionaries -- the first moves in the `pv` value of each dictionary should be what you are looking for.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: engines, software, programming, python
---


# Question
Title: Why isn't the English Attack popular vs. the Sicilian Kan?
As title above states, why isn't the "English Attack" popular vs. the Sicilian Kan? I mean the White setup in the Open Sicilian with Be3, Qd2, f3 and eventually g4 and h4. As far as I know, it is fairly popular vs. the Najdorf, the Scheveningen, the Classical, the Taimanov, and the Dragon (in which case it is named "Yugoslav Attack"). But vs. the Kan, almost nobody, at least at top level, plays it. Is there a specific reason for this fact, or it is just a matter of "fashion"?

# Answer
The English attack is only true mainline for the d6 Sicilian. The reason behind this is that in the e6 Sicilian variation, it's a lot easier for black to pressure your center and break through with a quicker d5. Specifically, black can play a fast Bb4 (pinning your knight and therefore influencing the all important e4 and d5 squares), and break out with d5.

```
[FEN ""]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6 5. Be3?! Nf6 6. Nc3 Bb4! 7. f3 O-O 8. Qd2 d5!

```

Even if black is worried about the pawn structure changing with white playing e4-e5 after d5, then he is fine too if he plays Qc7 instead of O-O to cover the e5 square. Regardless of the exact move order, as soon as black gets in the d5 break, then it's black who is slightly better out of the opening, not white. This English attack setup is too slow against the Kan. Instead of Be3 and a later f3, Bd3 is often used to defend the e4 point and avoid most of the sting out of the Bb4 pin.
> 6 votes

# Answer
While NoseKnowsAll has a great answer, there is a little more, and it comes down to this one thing: **It is just impossible to play a good version of the English Attack due to Bb4 by black at the right time.**

Even if you are careful about move order, and play Nc3 first, and then Be3, and Qd2, it is still very dangerous to castle queenside. It is easy to see from the diagram below, which is a valid line, that black is doing well if white castles long as intended, and Bb4 may be a part of it. The counterattack comes in pretty fast, and white's winning percentage in the position is only 46.6%.

With a pawn on d6, black does not ever have that possibility.

```
  [FEN ""]
  1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6 5. Nc3 Qc7 6. Be3 Nc6 7. Qd2 Nf6 8. f3 b5

```
> 3 votes

---
Tags: opening, sicilian-defense, 1.e4, english-attack, sicilian-kan
---


# Question
Title: Question on how to access a move on a line outside the main line using python-chess
I'm trying to write a simple code that is capable of reading a PGN file and searching for moves and comments throughout the variant tree. However, I have not been successful, I have not yet been able to understand how I access the moves for a particular variant outside the main line.

Here is an example.

Reading the game from the pgn file below:

---

\[Event "?"\]
\[Site "?"\]
\[Date "????.??.??"\]
\[Round "?"\]
\[White "Study"\]
\[Black "Variant Caro-Kann"\]
\[Result "1/2-1/2"\]
\[ECO "B12"\]
\[Annotator "Joao Paulo"\]
\[PlyCount "10"\]
\[EventDate "2020.03.04"\]
\[SourceDate "2020.03.04"\]

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 {Variant 1} (3. exd5 {Variant 2} cxd5 4. Nf3 Nd7 (4... Nf6 {Variant 2.2} 5. c4 dxc4 6. Bxc4 e6) 5. Nc3 Ngf6) (3. Nc3 {Variant 3} dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Nf3 Ngf6) (3. Nd2 {Variant 4} dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nf6 5. Nxf6+ gxf6) 3... Bf5 4. Bd3 Bxd3 5. Qxd3 e6 1/2-1/2

---

Using the following code:

```
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
import chess
import chess.pgn
pgn = open("pgns/Variants Caro-Kann.pgn")
game = chess.pgn.read_game(pgn)
bd = game.board()
node = game
ct = 0;
while not node.is_end():
    print('Current Move')
    print(node.variations[0].move)
    print(node.starts_variation())
    bd.push(node.variations[0].move)
    node = node.variations[0]
    print(bd)
    print(node.starts_variation())
    print(node.comment)
    if node.is_end() == 0:
        print('Next Move')
        print(node.variations[0].move)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
How could I access the bids for the entire variant tree (variants: 2, 2.2, 3 and 4)?
I would appreciate your help.

```

# Answer
> 2 votes
If you want to access every node, then you're basically iterating over the game tree. A straightforward recursion will get you there, something like:

```
def traverse(node):
    # do whatever stuff you want for the node here
    print(node.move)
    # terminating condition
    if (node.is_end()):
        return
    # recursion
    for child_node in node.variations:
        traverse(child_node)

```

And to use it, call `traverse(game)` where `game` is the root node of your game.

---
Tags: programming, pgn, python
---


title: Queenless Imbalanced Middlegame(2)

text:
# Question
Title: Queenless Imbalanced Middlegame(2)
I analyzed the following position with both Stockfish 10 and Komodo 13.2. The 2 monster engines evaluated it at a dead draw at 0.00. Is this really the case or does either side have some sort of an advantage? Notice that in the position black is up 2 pawns although they aren't pawns to feel happy about. White has the bishop pair and a rook on an opening file. Compared to black's rook which is undeveloped. I would also be interested to know what is a neural network's(Leela) evaluation of the position is any of you have it downloaded.

My take: White is down 2 pawns, but he has the bishop pair, and black's pawn structure on the queenside is deteriorated. White also has a very active rook which can maneuver itself between the 2 open files to exert pressure. However, the main idea that I noted was the there are 2 open files so black can play King f7 and bring the rook over one of them. Perhaps the biggest compensation that white has is the massive space advantage due to the strong center. My take is that it should be equal, but can someone explain it better because the engine might not be right?

**White to move**

```
 [FEN "4k2r/p1p1n2p/B1p1bpp1/8/4PP2/B7/6PP/3R2K1 w k - 0 1"]

```

# Answer
My initial impression was that in a practical game, white would win.

If it were not for the plan that the computer found, my impression would be that Rb1-b7, and winning back one pawn, with the remaining weak pawns, white would then likely win back the second, and just be clearly better. White is also ahead in development, and has an incredibly strong bishop pair, as you mentioned. Lastly, if the black king went to f7, as soon as it did, if white could take on c7, the Rh8 will be forced to go to e8, and it will be hard to break that pin. This would be very bad. I had a position once as white that could have ended up in this dream scenario, but my opponent played differently, and I ultimately won tactically instead. That game definitely influenced my initial, and shallow, assessment of the position. My initial, cursory, assessment was wrong.

Now, that I turn on the computer, it took the wind out of my idea immediately, and it is a likely draw for one reason: It is a positional standoff, and immediately, which white should force. With the Rb1 plan, which Stockfish 11 thought was best, black threatens to play Kd7 and Nc8, which defends everything. As soon as black plays Kd7, white needs to play Rd1 forcing the king back, and then can return to b1 with the same threat forcing a repetition. If black does not find that plan, white likely wins, but frankly, it would not be hard for a strong player to find. My initial thoughts were just from a quick glance.

White can try to move around, and induce a black mistake; but there are also many more pitfalls for white than black, and white could also make a mistake. You can never lose sight of the fact that you are two pawns down, and must be careful that there may be a defense that will leave you begging for a draw…if you are lucky.

The evaluation of the position is such:

Black has two pawns, and that is really the major redeeming quality of the position from black’s perspective. It helps that the weaknesses are close to home, which usually makes them more defendable, and the king is close enough to help with that. The white bishops are a bit unfortunately placed for a Bc5xa7 idea due to the move Ra8 winning, so it will take at least an extra move for that plan to work. Black has the possibility of Kd7 and Nc8 holding it together if Rb1 by white, and even with the potential loss of a7, black is up a pawn with a compact structure. White must be careful not to overplay his hand, or the extra pawns could become decisive. The Nc8 is the hero of black’s defense.

White has the two bishops, and a very weakened black queenside to go after. The Rd1 is more active for now, and the Rh8 is out-of-play for now, but might get out in time. The Kg1 is going to be the more active king. It is very important that the Pe4 takes the squares f5, and d5. especially, away from the black pieces. Black is, clearly, on the defensive.

With such a material imbalance, it comes down to very concrete calculation, which computers are particularly good at, and I believe the evaluation; however, there is room for both sides to play on, but to do so leaves the game on a razor’s edge. Black could slip up, and white’s activity could be decisive, but if white is not accurate, the material could have the last word, and from the lines below, this is the more-likely scenario.

The obvious plans for white are Rb1-b7, Bc5 and trying to capture on a7, and bringing the K to the center or queenside via d4 can c5 (it turns out that this is a fantasy though). Some of these might combine with a plan of Bb7-c6. Black’s plans are mostly reactionary to whatever white plays, but some are based on f5, securing the d5 square, or Nc8-d6 or b6.

After seeing the variations below, white easily has enough activity to compensate for the two-pawns deficit, but as the variations show, mostly due to the incredibly well-placed Ne7-c8, no more. To play for more is risking having to play a long defense for white.

In conclusion, I found many positions that white was either worse, or losing outright, but none that white was better. After analyzing this in depth, it is my opinion that with best play, white has absolutely nothing, and has a significantly higher risk of losing than black does, which I found counterintuitive and surprising.

After looking at the lines, as long as black sees the Kd7 and Nc8 plan in response to Rb1, which is fairly easy, he has no risk of losing. After looking at the lines, based on my years of experience, between two strong players, I did not see any moves that were particularly difficult for black to find. White should force the draw.

```
 [FEN "4k2r/p1p1n2p/B1p1bpp1/8/4PP2/B7/6PP/3R2K1 w k - 0 1"]

 1. Kf2 {It is the Kf2 plan that offers white the least losing chances.} (1. Bc5 {The Bc5 plan.} Kf7 $15 {For example.} 2. Rb1 Rd8 3. Kf2 (3. Rb7 $2 Rd1+ 4. Kf2 Rc1 5. Be3 (5. Bxe7 Kxe7 6. Rxc7+ Kd6 7. Rxh7 Ra1 8. Bf1 a5) 5... Rc2+ 6. Kf3 Bc8 7. Rxa7 Bxa6 8. Rxa6 Rc3 9. Ke2 f5 10. Kd2 (10. exf5 Nxf5 $17) 10... Rc4 11. exf5 Nxf5 12. Ra7 Ke6 13. Rxc7 h5 {And although equal, black is to be preferred.}) 3... f5 $1 4. Rb7 Rd7 5. e5 Nd5 6. g3 Nc3 7. Ke3 Nb5 8. Bxb5 cxb5 9. Rxa7 (9. Rxb5 $2 Rd5 $15) 9... c6= {But why would white want to play for this?}) (1. Bb7 $2 {The Bb7 plan immediately is just too slow.} Bc8 $1 (1... Kf7 {Is also good.} 2. Rc1 Bd7 3. Ba6 Re8 4. Bc5 f5 5. exf5 Nxf5 6. Bxa7 Ra8 7. Ra1 $1 Nd6 8. Bf2 Be6 $15) 2. Bxc8 Nxc8 3. Bb4 {Only move, and try to figure out why OTB.} Rg8 {Preparing to activate the rook, and black is better. There is no need to continue the analysis as it is clear that black is much better placed than at the beginning when white still had the two bishops, so white should have just forced the repetition.}) (1. Rb1 Kd7 2. Rd1+ {And white can force the repetition.} (2. Rb7 $6 {First, the Rb7 plan, which is trying to push too hard, and black is already at least equal.} Nc8 (2... Ra8 {Is also possible with the idea of Nc8-d6 or b6.} 3. Bc5 Nc8 4. Rb2 {And white is already forced to retreat or see the Rb7 get shut out of play, and maybe later, trapped.} Nb6 5. Rd2+ Ke8 6. Bb7 Rb8 7. Bxc6+ Bd7 8. Bxb6 Bxc6 9. Bxc7 Rb1+ 10. Kf2 Bxe4 $15) 3. Rb8 {Already having to bail out.} (3. Bc5 $4 Nd6 4. Bxd6 {Almost forced since e4 hangs.} (4. Rb4 Re8 {And black is winning now, and free. E4 is very weak.} 5. e5 fxe5 6. fxe5 Nf7 $19 {And d5 is now available for the Be6.}) 4... Kxd6 5. Rxa7 Rb8 6. Be2 Rb2 $17 {With a huge advantage that is almost winning.}) 3...Rd8 {Forcing white to bail out into the worse side of the draw, for example...} 4. Bxc8+ (4. Kf2 $2 Nb6 $17) 4... Rxc8 5. Rxc8 (5. Rb1 $2 Re8 {Again, aiming at e4.}) 5... Kxc8 6. Be7 f5 7. e5 Kd7 8. Bc5 a5 {Still equal, but why go for this when there is much easier?}) 2... Ke8 3. Rb1=) 1... Kf7 (1... Nc8 2. Rc1 Kd7 3. Rd1+ Ke8 (3... Nd6 $4 4. e5 $16) 4. Bb7 Bd7 5. Bc5 $2 Nd6 $1 6. Bxd6 cxd6 7. Rxd6 Ke7 8. Rd1 a5 9. Ra1 Rb8 10. Ba6 c5 $1 11. Rxa5 $4 Ra8 $19) 2. Rb1 (2. Bc5 $2 f5 3. exf5 Nxf5 $17 {And black has solved all his problems.}) 2...Rd8 3. Rb7 {There are too many lines to give them all, but black has no problems.} Rd7 4. Rxa7 f5 5. e5 Nd5 6. g3 Nc3 7. Bb4 Ne4+ {Or Nb5 or Nd5.} 8. Ke3 c5 9. Ba5 c6 10. Rxd7+ Bxd7=

```
> 7 votes

---
Tags: analysis, middlegame
---


# Question
Title: Preparing for an OTB tournament: I must do well!
To give a picture of my level: I started playing chess fairly recently (8 months ago). I knew the rules before, but haven't played since childhood. I developed a huge passion for it and studied very, very hard and with a lot of commitment. I have 2080 Lichess elo on Classical time formats, which is decent but still not fantastic.

In my college, I was invited this year to represent my faculty on the University Chess Olympiads, and I became part of a team of very experienced players, all of which play tournaments since a very young age (I'm 21 and I have only played two very casual tournaments!).

This Friday we will face another university on a friendly competition, and this will be my first tournament as a member of my University team. Of course I want to do well, since I want to make a good impression on my team members, prove them that inviting me to the team was not a mistake, but I have too little experience on OTB tournaments.

My first tournament I did well, winning 4 and losing 6 games (I was 1700 Lichess elo then). My second and last tournament I did HORRIBLE, losing 6 out of 6 games (!) and falling fully under the pressure and tension of the tournament. I was 1900 Lichess elo then. My nervousness was such that I lost won positions, or hang pieces, things that I do not do (except rare exceptions) when I play on Lichess. That was the first realization I had that OTB tournaments, with all their pressure, and playing comfortably from my couch, where two completely different worlds.

With all this said in order for you to understand my background and chess experience I ask: how can I prepare for an OTB tournament? I really want to do decently this Friday, and I need to keep my head cool and control my nerves. Advises for this tournament beginner?

# Answer
> 7 votes
First, from a pure chess standpoint, you are probably as close to prepared as you will be since there is only so much you can learn between now and Friday.

The most important things will be to get a good night's sleep, and the cardinal rule in a team tournament is "don't lose". I know that sounds funny, since it seem obvious, but if you have a four-board team, and you lose, then the remaining three players have to go 2.5/3 to win the match. What that means is that, in practice, you cannot play too wildly since wild play can put the team in a very bad position. Stay solid, and if you can win, great; but be satisfied with a draw if you really do not have anything more.

As far as the nerves are concerned, they are a problem; but you will find that the more you play, the more you will get used to tournament play, and the nerves will subside.

Lastly, at the board during the game except for obvious recaptures, and assuming you have the time, just BRIEFLY consider every reply your opponent has before you make your move. In other words, I am going to play Ng5, but for a second, I just scan every move my opponent can make. I am not analyzing, but subconsciously, if I left something hanging, I often notice it. This will hopefully cut down on the one-, or two-move, blunders

# Answer
> 3 votes
You have stage fright. Experienced actors will tell you that you *should* have stage fright. Something is missing in you if you don't. They will tell you that this is what gets you excited and lifts you to do your very best.

I suggest that you think for a bit about what is good about being nervous. Don't avoid nerves, make use of them!

# Answer
> 1 votes
I can only give one piece of advice that I think is too important not to stress: Demanding too much from yourself never ends well!

While it is good to be ambitious and setting goals for oneself, there is always a real danger in letting those goals become demands. It puts you under a huge amount of self-imposed pressure and it will most likely make you panic and blunder rather than help you stay more alert and sharp in your play. When reading your title I just couldn't help but notice that you wrote that you **MUST** do well rather than **WISH** to do well; I really don't recommend this mindset, since I've managed to do incredibly poorly with it in the past. The last thing I would note on this topic is that you should treat every game independently, and not let your ambitions for the overall result affect what you want out of the game. Win/draw/loss in the previous games don't matter. Don't bring those results as baggage for the next game you play, it can only serve as a distraction.

Another note on nerves during actual play: do not get over-excited!

If you're playing a game, a calm head is more likely to help you find good moves and avoid blunders than if you're too excited. This means that even if you're totally winning you should take some deep breaths to get your emotions in check so that you don't get too eager and play too quickly; I've had many wins turn sour because of this. Conversely, if you're in a difficult position you're more likely to find a good defense if you're calm instead of in a state of panic. Stay as objective as possible and try to avoid having your evaluation of the position be colored too much by your emotions.

---
Tags: tournament, preparation, otb-chess, team
---


# Question
Title: Looking for tips on memorizing positions
After watching a series of ChessBase India videos on YouTube, it is clear that GM's can easily remember 100s (possibly 1000's) of positions. Look at this one example by Vidit Gujrathi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UebAM1CDxn8

My question: For amateurs, what are some good strategies to try to recognize a position and understand which opening it came from?

# Answer
You really have a couple of questions here.

First, when it comes to memorization in chess, it has been shown that the more positions you have seen, the more likely you are to remember other positions. I remember once that GM Susan Polgar was given some random chess positions, and she remembered the "normal" ones exceptionally well, however, when the positions were more random, she remembered at a rate that was roughly what anyone else remembered them.

There are books, unrelated to chess, that deal with learning to memorize better. I would love to see Master Simon Reinhard, World Memory Champion, write a book on memorizing specifically aimed at chess memorization.

Here are a couple more articles specifically on memorization that you might find interesting.

1. Memory Techniques: the Peg system (Part One)
2. Memory Techniques: the Peg system (Part Two)
3. Memory Techniques: the chess equation

Your second question, "what are some good strategies to try to recognize a position and understand which opening it came from?", is more about applying any memorization techniques to learning opening pawn structures, and the plans that are associated with them.

There are many books on this from the very basic, "Chess Opening Essentials: The Complete Series" by New In Chess to the classic "Pawn Structure Chess" by GM Andy Soltis to the more advanced, and outstanding, "Chess Structures: A Grandmaster Guide" by GM Mauricio Flores Rios.

These types of books teach you what you are aiming for in the opening, in general, and thus, when your opponent does not play "book" moves, you are not just lost with no idea what to do. You just have to read these types of books, and absorb some of the positions, and then you are back to the experiment with GM Polgar, even if not on the same level. You will begin to memorize, and recognize more.
> 9 votes

# Answer
World champion Lasker said that he did not memorize anything that he could deduce for himself.

You need to know the BASIC tactical positions and mates but you do not need to memorize thousands of positions. If you have seen the position and understand the motif then you will be able to do it in similar positions in your games.

As to world champions and GMs they do not memorize the positions but they use pattern recognition to realise it is there then they can easily see the full combination to play.
> 4 votes

# Answer
well, I should say there is a bit more discussion here to be made.

1- are you looking to memorize an opening line? 2- are you looking to recognize a position?

If you want to recognize more positions, you should study and spent more time on the game. the more you study chess, the better you understand patterns and can identify the famous positions.

for memorizing opening line, there is a two part to this. 1- for some positional opening, some general understanding of piece placement and pawn structures should be enough, with minimum lines to memorize, with high emphasize on general understanding and middle game forms.

2- for more sharp opening, you should literally remember all the sharp lines, and one mistake could be fatal. in this case, repetition and spaced repetition could be very helpful. maybe use chess base opening drill or chessable move trainer.

In short, dedicate more time to chess and study every single day, even if very small amount of time (15 min).
> 2 votes

# Answer
Simply you memorize just like everything else, repeat the opening positions.

The most common method to recognize the opening is by the pawn structure. Since it's suggested that you only move a couple of pawns in the opening, although there are exceptions such as https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1282302, the opening can be reduced to a few openings based upon where the pawns are and which are exchanged.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: memorization
---


title: Castling question

text:
# Question
Title: Castling question
It is my understanding that a castling move cannot occur if the king / rook moved. However, in the case where a rook and king move but end up in their original spots, can a castling move occur?

# Answer
Sorry, no. Once either has moved, it can no longer be involved in castling. An unmoved king, and the other unmoved rook can still castle.
> 6 votes

# Answer
The answer is NO. Neither the King nor the Rook on the side you want to castle should not had moved previously AND there is one important fact, the Rooks should be on the initial position rank!

There were some lacks in rules of castling in chess history and some people made fun of this by creating funny joke puzzles like this one:

An example was composed by Tim Krabbé and relied on a loophole that existed in the definition of castling. In the diagram, White must mate in three moves. The solution begins 1. **e7,** then the main variations are:

**1... Kd3 2. e8=Q gxf3 (other moves allow Qe2#) 3. 0-0-0#
** **1... Kxf3 2. e8=R! (an underpromotion), and now:
** **2... d4 3. 0-0#
** **2... Kg2 3. 0-0-0-0#!
**

In the last variation, White castles with his newly promoted rook, moving his king to e3 and the rook to e2. Under the rules of chess at the time, this move was arguably legal because the rook had not moved yet. **Afterward, FIDE amended the rules to require that the castling rook must occupy the same rank as the king**

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke\_chess\_problem
> 3 votes

---
Tags: rules, castling
---


title: Alphazero-Stockfish game 10 move 19

text:
# Question
Title: Alphazero-Stockfish game 10 move 19
Given sufficient analysis time, say 24h per move on an decent computer, can current top chess engines (including Stockfish) eventually "see" that move 19 by Alphazero is actually good, and even suggest that move? And in general elevate the play so as to discover many Alphazero key moves in the others games as well (which could have neutralized Alphazero)? Games here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01815.pdf

# Answer
Current top engines running for 24hours would change their evaluation and find some improvements but would not be able to find ALL the key moves that A0 did.

"Old style" engines problems are twofold:

1. their eval functions are worse than A0(because of humans adjusting heuristics). This is somewhat similar to why "blank-state" A0 beats AlphaGo which was "seeded" with human games.
2. Their search algorithms suffer from horizon effect(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon\_effect) that A0 was able to exploit in the examples given.

Let's take Game 10 in question:

```
[fen ""]
[White "AlphaZero"]
[Black "Stockfish"]
[Date "2017.12.05"]
[Result "1-0"]

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. d4 e6 3. c4 b6 4. g3 Bb7 5. Bg2 Be7 6. O-O O-O 7. d5 exd5 8. Nh4 c6 9. cxd5 Nxd5 10. Nf5 Nc7 11. e4 d5 12. exd5 Nxd5 13. Nc3 Nxc3 14. Qg4 g6 15. Nh6+ Kg7 16. bxc3 Bc8 17. Qf4 Qd6 18. Qa4 g5 19. Re1 Kxh6 20. h4 f6 21. Be3 Bf5 22. Rad1 Qa3 23. Qc4 b5 24. hxg5+ fxg5 25. Qh4+ Kg6 26. Qh1 Kg7 27. Be4 Bg6 28. Bxg6 hxg6 29. Qh3 Bf6 30. Kg2 Qxa2 31. Rh1 Qg8 32. c4 Re8 33. Bd4 Bxd4 34. Rxd4 Rd8 35. Rxd8 Qxd8 36. Qe6 Nd7 37. Rd1 Nc5 38. Rxd8 Nxe6 39. Rxa8 Kf6 40. cxb5 cxb5 41. Kf3 Nd4+ 42. Ke4 Nc6 43. Rc8 Ne7 44. Rb8 Nf5 45. g4 Nh6 46. f3 Nf7 47. Ra8 Nd6+ 48. Kd5 Nc4 49. Rxa7 Ne3+ 50. Ke4 Nc4 51. Ra6+ Kg7 52. Rc6 Kf7 53. Rc5 Ke6 54. Rxg5 Kf6 55. Rc5 g5 56. Kd4 1-0

```

This is a game worthy of Tal from Alpha0! White is making a positionally based long term sacrifice of a piece and pawn. Ie nice idea but surely a computer would defend this. However human intuition turns out wrong here.

At move 19. we are at least 30 ply (15 full moves) from Stockfish giving back the piece.

There is no way for regular engines to fully search 30ply deep in the middle game without improvements in their pruning algorithms.

As an experiment I run 30 threads(15 cores) on latest Stockfish 8 at 25kn/s for some time with various hash sizes. So my machine was 1/3 of Google's -\> ie I have to run it at least 3 times longer.

Even at move 32. Stockfish was thinking it was better.

What was interesting that within 1 second of me making the move Stockfish was suggesting as good the eval dropped and Stockfish realized the move was bad. This could be the limits on its hash size or just the horizon effect.

A0 will hopefully provide inspiration for regular engines to incorporate new techniques.

My hope is something like Stockfish Zero which would use 1000s of crowdsourced GPUs to train the network then only requiring a single high end GPU to play.
> 2 votes

# Answer
Yes, they can. Running the computer at www.chess.com/analysis (which is Stockfish 10) to depth = 47, this is the principal variation and recommended move:

> 19.Re1 Kxh6 20.h4 f6 21.Be3 Bf5 22.Rad1 Qa3 23.hxg5+ fxg5 24.Qh4+ Kg6 25.Qh1 Kg7 26.Bc1 Qc5 27.Be3 (0.00)

Playing 19. Re1 is always one of Stockfish's top 3 options, too. Further, keep in mind that Stockfish 10 is old, we now have Stockfish 11, and Stockfish dev is even stronger.

That said, do be careful about taking AlphaZero's proposed moves as gospel. It's very possible it is wrong, and the position after 18...g5 is drawn or even lost for White. We will never know for sure unless and until we have tablebases.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: computer-chess, alphazero
---


# Question
Title: Is chess a good game to fight against gambling addiction?
I read a couple of poker books and I thought I could win, which was not the case.

Fortunately for me I have a decent chess level, 1930 in rapid, and I simply changed poker books for chess books and returned to the club. I have not lost a lot, but I realized if I don't win money why play something I enjoy less than my favourite game since I was a child.

As the game is helping me not to gamble, I wonder if it is documented from a medical point of view similar cases where chess helped.

# Answer
I have seen plenty of people, who are addicted to chess, as it can become very time consuming if you take it seriously. So yes, it could easily help people swap an addiction that most would see as potentially more detrimental for one that is more healthy.
> 5 votes

---
Tags: psychology
---


# Question
Title: Is the "Pawn Box" possible in standard chess?
Is it possible to create a "pawn box" as shown below (using legal moves and the help of black) in standard chess?

The positions don't need to be exactly as shown, and there can be more pieces on the board if required.

```
[FEN "8/1k6/3PPP2/3P1P2/3PPP2/8/8/2K5 w - - 0 1"]

```

Note that this is, of course, not too difficult in *horde* chess as a black knight can remove the central pawn in the box.

# Answer
> 23 votes
As @BrianTowers showed, it can be done. Here’s a shorter proof game for the fun of it.

```
[FEN ""]

1. h4 g5 2. hxg5 f5 3. g4 Nf6 4. gxf6 d6 5. gxf5 Be6 6. f4 Bb3 7. axb3 c5 8. e4 c4 9. bxc4 d5 10. cxd5 e6 11. dxe6 Na6 12. b4 Nc5 13. bxc5 Qd5 14. c4 Bd6 15. cxd6 Rf8 16. cxd5 Rh8 17. d4

```

# Answer
> 20 votes
Here is one simple solution:

```
[fen ""]

1.c4 d5 2.cxd5 e6 3.dxe6 f6 4.g4 g6 5.g5 Ne7 6.gxf6 Nd5 7.e4 Nc3 8.bxc3 Qd4 9.cxd4 b5 10.d5 b4 11.a3 c6 12.axb4 c5 13.bxc5 Bd6 14.cxd6 g5 15.h3 g4 16.hxg4 Rg8 17.f3 Rg5 18.f4 Rf5 19.gxf5 Na6 20.d4

```

More moves can be added to reach the exact position with no other pieces other than kings.

# Answer
> 9 votes
This is really not difficult. Brian gave you one example, but you could imagine many more.

It is quite obvious that in order to achieve the "box" as given, white needs to capture 10 black pieces.

Out of the 16 black pieces, all but the black king can help in achieving the box by letting themselves being captured.

The black a and h pawns don't seem at first all that useful as white wants to capture towards the center, however they could still help if they first capture white pieces then sacrificing themselves on say the b,c or f,g files.

A more interesting question could be: On which part of the board can you achieve such a box?

---

Trying to answer my own question (I label the box by its central square).

1. box on h-file not possible because of border
2. box on g-file not possible (too many captures necessary)
3. box on f-file (I count 14 captures, so possible)
4. box on e-file possible, see example by Brian
5. files a-d don't need to be considered separately because of symmetry (a is the same as h, b the same as g, etc)

So in summary, it should be possible to create such box for white on the squares: c5, c6, d4, d5, d6, e4, e5, e6, f5, f6. Similarly for black on the mirrored squares: c3, c4, d3, d4, d5, e3, e4, e5, f3, f4.

---
Tags: pawns, problems
---


title: Trading queens in the opening

text:
# Question
Title: Trading queens in the opening
Which standard openings in chess usually pave the way for an early queen trade in the game? In other words, which opening has a high probability of exchanging the queens in the opening itself? Does any opening contain queen trade as a part of standard theory?

# Answer
> 25 votes
There is not opening that usually paves the way for a queen trade. There are plenty of specific lines that allow for it, but it takes cooperation from your opponent.

The first line that comes to mind is hugely popular at the GM level: The Berlin in the Ruy Lopez.

```
 [FEN ""]
 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O Nxe4 5. d4 Nd6 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. dxe5 Nf5 8. Qxd8+ Kxd8

```

Another one, but that is only particularly popular at club level is the King's Indian Exchange Variation.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. dxe5 dxe5 8. Qxd8 Rxd8

```

GM Edmar Mednis wrote a book called "From the Opening into the Endgame", which covers a lot of early transitions to the endgame, including quite a few lines that were popular, and lead to an early queen trade, but again, you cannot force your opponent to allow the queens to come off.

Here are a few of the lines covered.

The Grunfeld

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 c5 7. Nf3 Bg7 8. Be3 Qa5 9. Qd2 {Can lead to an early exchange of queens on d2.}

```

This line in the English was hugely popular in the 1980's.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. cxd5 Nxd5 4. Nf3 g6 5. e4 Nxc3 6. dxc3 Qxd1+ 7. Kxd1

```

Another Ruy Lopez Exchange line that was popular in the 1980's.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. O-O f6 6. d4 exd4 7. Nxd4 c5 8. Nb3 Qxd1 9. Rxd1

```

The French Tarrasch Variation.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bb5+ Bd7 6. Qe2+ Qe7 7. Bxd7+ Nxd7 8. dxc5 Qxe2+ 9. Nxe2

```

The Modern.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. c4 d6 4. Nc3 e5 5. dxe5 dxe5 6. Qxd8+ Kxd8

```

It is not impossible to trade in the Pirc, but it leads to a position that white has a 75% winning percentage, and it not in the spirit of the type of position that black wants when playing the Pirc.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Nf3 Bg7 5. Be2 O-O 6. O-O e5 $6 7. dxe5 dxe5 8. Qxd8 Rxd8 9. Bg5

```

And one last one, first played by the great Capablanca as black.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 Bf5 4. Bd3 Bxd3 5. Qxd3 Qa5+ 6. c3 Qa6 7. Qxa6 {Avoiding the exchange of queens makes it difficult to develop.} Nxa6

```

The Petrov.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. Qe2 Qe7 6. d3 Nf6 7. Bg5 Qxe2+ 8. Bxe2 Be7

```

---
Tags: opening, books, queens, trading
---


# Question
Title: Communication with Stockfish engine via Python
I try to access the Stockfish engine via Python, but only get bestmove = a2a3. If I enter the same commands into the MAC-terminal, the engine calculates the correct move. Can anyone help me, please ?

My Python code is:

```
p = subprocess.Popen('/Applications/TigerJython/LuChess/Stockfish/stockfish-11-mac/Mac/stockfish-11-64', stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
                     stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
                     stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)

p.stdin.write("uci\n")
p.stdin.write("ucinewgame\n")
p.stdin.write("position startpos moves e2e4 e7e5\n")
p.stdin.write("go infinite\n")
p.stdin.flush()
print(p.communicate())

```

The result is shown below:

```
('Stockfish 11 64 by T. Romstad, M. Costalba, J. Kiiski, G. Linscott
id name Stockfish 11 64\nid author T. Romstad, M. Costalba, J. Kiiski, G. Linscott

option name Debug Log File type string default
option name Contempt type spin default 24 min -100 max 100
...
uciok
bestmove a2a3
None

```

# Answer
> 2 votes
**The Problem was p.communicate(), which kills the subprocess. The interaction with the engine works well with the following code:**

```
def put(command, inf_list, tmp_time):

    engine.stdin.write(command+'\n')
    engine.stdin.flush()
    time.sleep(tmp_time)

    if command <> "quit":

        engine.stdin.write('isready\n')
        engine.stdin.flush()

        while True:
            text = engine.stdout.readline().strip()

            if text == 'readyok':
                break

            elif text !='':
                inf_list.append(text)

inf_list = []
put('uci', inf_list, 0)
put('setoption name Hash value 8192', inf_list, 0)
put('ucinewgame', inf_list, 0)
put('position fen rq3r2/2pbppk1/3p1np1/1N5p/1n1PP2P/2N2P2/PP1Q2P1/R3KB1R w KQ - 3 15', inf_list, 0)
put('go movetime=3000', inf_list, 4)
put('stop', inf_list, 0)
put('quit', inf_list, 0)

```

---
Tags: stockfish, programming, python
---


# Question
Title: What is the fastest way to reach stalemate?
It is known that the minimum number of moves required for checkmate is 2 moves (4 half moves) resulting in a victory for Black. However, what is the minimum number of moves required for stalemate? Clearly, this would take a lot more moves since no piece from one party must be able to move, thus it must either be captured, pinned or completely blocked.

# Answer
> 39 votes
Sam Loyd, a famous puzzle composer, created this 10 move, 19 ply, stalemate game over 100 years ago. I found it via Google, in this post by AndersElborg on chess.com. Most black pieces are blocked, which saves some moves because those pieces don't need to be captured.

```
[FEN ""]
[StartPly "19"]

1.e3 a5 2.Qh5 Ra6 3.Qxa5 h5 4.h4 Rah6 5.Qxc7 f6 6.Qxd7+ Kf7 7.Qxb7 Qd3 8.Qxb8 Qh7 9.Qxc8 Kg6 10.Qe6

```

---
Tags: stalemate, records
---


title: Queenless Imbalanced Middlegame(3)

text:
# Question
Title: Queenless Imbalanced Middlegame(3)
In the following position white is down the exchange, but up a pawn. Stockfish 10 and Komodo 13.2 evaluate it at 0.00. My Question is essentially which side has the advantage(if any) and if so how would that side push for a win. I don't necessarily trust the engine in this position as it's a very imbalanced position.

```
[FEN "5rk1/6p1/2p2r2/p1pp2N1/P4P2/1P1P2P1/2P1R1K1/8 b - - 0 1"]
[StartPly "3"]
[StartFlipped "0"]

1... Rb8

```

# Answer
First, I think that your lack of faith in strong computers is misplaced. My Stockfish 11 quickly gets up to a depth of over 40 ply, and still reads 0.00. Just because a position is imbalanced, it does not mean they are wrong. It would be a truly exceptional case at that depth for them to be wrong. That said, regarding your sentence about who has the advantage, it is clear that only black can legitimately try to win this. White should have no prayer of winning this, but nevertheless, as with any position, if you try too hard, you can lose; and I give several lines below where it is possible for black to push too hard, and lose, or at least, be worse. I have pushed like that in similar positions myself, so I can relate.

The evaluation of the position is such:

White has one pawn for the exchange, but has several other pluses. For example, not only does white have the move, in essence, white sometimes might have two moves since black might eventually have deal with the threat of Re8 mate in some lines (right now, Rf8 would work if the Rb8 moves off the back rank). Related to that, the Ng5 is a monster for now, and combines nicely with the Re2, which will be seen in a number of lines below, and white owns the file. Black also has very weak pawns spread out over three pawn islands, which give white a lot of targets to counterattack. Lastly, and we see this in a few lines, if g7 drops, the connected passers on g3 and f4 gain a lot of strength, and provide ample counterplay.

In contrast, black has the exchange, and the possibility of c4 seriously weakening the white queenside. Ideally, black should want to trade a set of rooks since R vs. N endings with pawns on both sides are often among the easiest endings to win.

There are a virtually unlimited number of possibilities here since they all read 0.00, so you can go down any number of paths, but that demonstrates that the computer sees a GREAT NUMBER of defensive resources since white is very active. That is not to say that there is not the opportunity for a lot of play. Equal here does not equal a "dead draw" by any means.

I am going to give the two main plans that I can see for black: Trying to trade a set of rooks, and playing c4.

```
 [FEN "1r4k1/6p1/2p2r2/p1pp2N1/P4P2/1P1P2P1/2P1R1K1/8 w - - 0 1"]

 1. Kf3 Rff8 (1... c4 2. dxc4 dxc4 3. bxc4 $1 {This look very weakening, but white is active enough to maintain the balance.} Rb4 4. Re8+ Rf8 5. Re7 {Only move.} Rxc4 6. Ne6 Rf6 (6... Rf7 $2 7. Re8+ Kh7 8. Ng5+ Kg6 9. Nxf7 Kxf7 10. Rc8 Rxc2 11. Kg4=) 7. Rxg7+ Kh8 8. Re7 Kg8 (8... Rxc2) 9. Rg7+ Kh8 10. Re7= Rxc2 $2 11. g4 $16) 2. Ne6 Rfe8 3. Nxc5 Rxe2 4. Kxe2 Kf7 5. c3 Ke7 6. Kf3 Rh8 (6... d4 7. cxd4 Kd6 8. f5 Kd5 9. Ke3 Re8+ 10. Ne6 g6 11. g4 gxf5 12. gxf5 Re7 13. Kf4=) 7. Nb7 Kd7 8. d4 Rh2 9. Nc5+ Kd6 10. b4 axb4 11. cxb4 Rb2 12. a5 Rxb4 13. a6 Rb2 14. f5 Kc7 15. Ne6+ Kd6 {Only move.} (15... Kb6 $4 16. Nxg7 Kxa6 17. f6 Rb8 18. Ne6 $18) 16. Nxg7 c5 17. dxc5+ Kxc5 18. g4 Ra2 19. Ne8 Ra3+ (19... Rxa6 $4 20. f6 $18) 20. Kf4 Ra4+ 21. Kg5 (21. Kf3=) 21... Rxa6 22. f6 Ra7 23. Kg6 d4 24. f7 Rxf7 25. Kxf7 d3 26. Nf6 Kd4 27. g5 d2 28. g6 d1=Q 29. g7 Qb3+ 30. Kg6=

```
> 2 votes

# Answer
I would much prefer to play Black.

Rb4, then pawn c4 looks like a very promising break.
But then I am not a GM.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: analysis, middlegame
---


# Question
Title: Does USCF still pay for the FIDE Master application fee?
There is not much to add to the question. Quite simply, does USCF still pay for the FIDE Master application fee?

# Answer
Per Chris Bird, the USCF's "FIDE Events Manager", the USCF only pays for GM, IM, WGM, and WIM titles. FM(WFM) and CM(WCM) are the responsibility of the player. The USCF still applies on your behalf, but you pay the fee.

The fees are currently as follows:

Grandmaster/WGM: 330 Euro

International Master/WIM: 165 Euro

FIDE Master/WFM: 70 Euro

Candidate Master/WCM: 50 Euro
> 5 votes

---
Tags: fide, uscf, titles
---


# Question
Title: Do the top women players play professionally?
By top women players, I mean the players who regularly participate in top women-only invitationals, e.g. the ongoing Women's Grand Prix Lausanne. Some names would be Nana Dzagnidze, Mariya Muzychuk, Ju Wenjun, Aleksandra Goryachkina (Hou Yifan is clearly not playing professionally right now since she is studying at Oxford University). By "professionally" I mean whether they treat chess as a full-time job.

Do the current top women players play professionally, or only as a hobby?

# Answer
> 4 votes
I think there is no doubt that the answer is "yes". The question is whether they are particularly successful at it, or not; and whether they have to supplement tournament winnings with other activities like teaching.

In addition, a common use of the term "professional" in sports is if someone gets paid, and the Grand Prix consists of four events with prizes in each ranging from 3,000 Euros to 20,000 Euros, and the overall prize standings at the end from 2,500 Euros to 15,000 Euros for the standings winner. So they do get paid, and thus, are professionals, at the very least, technically.

That said, I think that most may have their participation in tournaments and income supplemented beyond teaching, most probably by national federations, but organizers may also offer incentives to attract top women players. The Grand Prix pays the women's travel expenses, and lodging (Section 5.2), for example. Some may even pay modest appearance fees, but these would surely be few, and far between.

WGM Natalia Pogonina's manager, Peter Zhdanov, wrote here that "Saratov State Law Academy helps WGM Natalia Pogonina by paying for some of her chess trips". Again, it always seemed like she is, or was, one of the "professionals", but how successful was she? Based on what Peter Svidler told me about men a long time ago, I would guess that it is a rough life financially without some kind of outside sponsorship.

Things have changed for men, but around 20 years ago, Peter Svidler told me on ICC that with the exception of world championships (same for the women today as the recent women's world championship had a prize fund of 500,000 Euros), at that time, even the top 10 men only earned around $50,000 per year. Of course, at that level for men, you really cannot do it part-time, and supplement with lessons since it requires that much dedication. Judit Polgar, clearly, did nothing but chess, and in 2015, Hou Yifan only earned an estimated $265,000.

While it is relative, these women are at the same level as the men, meaning at the very top when competing against their own gender, and I cannot see how they would be doing it part-time any less than a man could in the top 10. Most of the women in the Lausanne Grand Prix are grandmasters, and to be a grandmaster, for most, is a full-time occupation at the "top".

Of course, this is all discussing being a professional primarily from tournament winnings. The Internet today makes it easier for anyone, even weak players, to start a Twitch channel, and develop a following, and earn a living if they are good at attracting an audience.

P.S. I found it very difficult to find hard sources with quotes about how top women chess players sustain their careers, but I did put what I could find, and the rest is just common-sense analysis from reading over the many years.

---
Tags: women
---


# Question
Title: Finding a plan in the Archangels Spanish when white plays Be3 to exchange the dark-squared bishop
Black to play and find a plan:

```
 [FEN ""]
 [StartFlipped "1"]
 [StartPly "25"]

 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O b5 6. Bb3 Bc5 7. c3 d6 8. h3 O-O 9. Qe2 Bb7 10. d3 Ne7 11. Be3 Bxe3 12. fxe3 Ng6 13. Nbd2

```

I often find myself in positions like this in blitz games and I think it's only a matter of time until it happens in a long OTB game. I know that I'm playing this wrong, but I couldn't figure out how to approach this position in general. Playing an early d5 is bad because it weakens c5 too much and gives white an excellent square for his knight on e4.

I tried using Stockfish to find a plan here, but it doesn't seem like the engine has a clue about what's going on. Sometimes it just moves about aimlessly and you cannot make out a plan. One move Stockfish suggests is 13. ... a5, followed by 14.a4 c6 and 15. ... Qb6, with the idea of getting play via the b-file. That all looks nice and good, but if white doesn't take on b5 and opens the b-file, black is just sitting there and doing nothing. So, I'm not really convinced yet. My question is thus two-fold:

* What's black's best plan in this position?
* Should I maybe avoid taking on e3 on move 11 to keep some more dynamic possibilities?

# Answer
> 3 votes
There is a lot to this...some of it is pure chess, and some of it is how you approach the game. I love a practical approach that does not give my opponent the opportunity to really seize the initiative. It is a little like prophylactic thinking for one move, but on the scale of the whole game.

What I mean, and what I am getting at is that despite it being the computer's first choice, I do not like taking on e3 to begin with. In the lines I will give below, black has various plans, but white is going to be able to have too much say in what plans black can choose from, due to the potential for a strong attack by white on on the kingside. In other words, what black tries to do will be the direct result of how white maneuvers. That is true in many positions, but here black may play a5-a4 and is it to slow, or after axb5 cxb5 have to play something else to open the queenside, or in other lines, Qb6 is good, but in others, it looks dangerous. White has a lot of say in that...too much for my liking in a practical situation. In general, I also do not like to give my opponent the chance to attack my king at all. Of course, this whole line is virtually equal per the computer, so from a pure chess standpoint, it is fine to play, but we are human, and one slip-up, and we can find ourselves in deep trouble.

That said, I like the idea of deviating with 11...Ng6!? It sets white some difficult practical positional problems right away, and even the resulting positions seem easier to play for black. White will play a4, and open the queenside, but black will get pressure on the kingside. I will also give some lines that you can look at in the exact variation that you posted.

There are also fairly extensive written notes in the variations below, not just moves, so do not pass them by.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O b5 6. Bb3 Bc5 7. c3 d6 8. h3 O-O 9. Qe2 Bb7 10. d3 Ne7 (10... h6 {is more common here, but I like your move better since it does not open the f-file, and make f5 harder to defend after Nh4 by white.} 11. Be3 Bxe3 12. fxe3 Na5 13. Bc2 c5) 11. Be3 Bxe3 (11... Ng6 $5 {This might solve your dilemma by avoiding the positions that you are not having good results in, and setting some pitfalls for your opponents. Personally, I do not favor positions that may give my opponent an attack, so in general, I do not like opening the f-file here.} 12. Bxc5 dxc5 {And c4 is a real positional threat, as well as Nf3, which they are more likely to worry about.} 13. Qe3 $2 {There is no time for this.} (13. g3 $2 {Stopping Nf4, but ignoring the more potent idea.} Qd7 14. Kh2 c4 15. Bc2 cxd3 16. Bxd3 c5 $15) (13. Rd1 Nf4 14. Qe3 Qd6 15. Bc2 N6h5 {With good play on the kingside. I prefer this with the idea of Rad8, and maybe Qg6, Bc8 and f5 at some point. From a practical point of view, this is much easier to play for black.} 16. g3 $2 {Trying to catch a knight.} Nxh3+ 17. Kh2 f5 $1 18. Kxh3 (18. Bb3+ Kh8 19. Kxh3 f4 20. Qe2 Qh6 21. Kg2 fxg3 22. fxg3 Qg6 23. Qf2 c4 $19) 18... f4 19. Qe2 fxg3 20. fxg3 Qh6 21. Kg2 Qg6 22. Qf2 Nf4+ 23. Kf1 Nh3 24. Qg2 Rxf3+ 25. Qxf3 Rf8 26. Qxf8+ Kxf8 $19) (13. Nbd2 $2 Nf4 14. Qe3 Qxd3 15. Nxe5 (15. Qxc5 $2 Nxe4 16. Nxe4 (16. Nxe5 $4 Qxf1+ 17. Rxf1 Nxc5) 16... Qxe4 17. Qxe5 Qxe5 18. Nxe5 Bxg2 $19) 15... Qxe3 16. fxe3 Ng6 $17) (13. Bc2 Nf4 14. Qe3 Qd6 15. Rd1 {Transposes to the Rd1 line.}) 13... c4 $1 14. dxc4 Nxe4 $15) 12. fxe3 Ng6 13. Nbd2 a5 14. a4 c6 15. Qf2 (15. Rf2 bxa4 16. Bxa4 (16. Rxa4 Ba6 17. Bc2 Qb6 {Compared to the note below, I do not mind this as much here since the Queen is denied f3-g3.} 18. b3 d5 {With good play.}) 16... Qb6 {Idea d5.} 17. Nc4 Qc7 {Again, with d5 next.}) 15... Rb8 {Planning axb4, or Bc8/Ba6, or even d5 in some cases.} (15... Qb6 {The computer's first move, but one that "feels" dangerous to me since you would be removing the queen from from the defense of the Kg8. I prefer a move that threatens to open the queenside, but without doing leaving the king's defense.})

```

# Answer
> 9 votes
In the final position, the black pieces are pointed toward the king side, so logic says that you should attack there. The two obstacles are the bishop pinning the `f-pawn` and the control provided by the doubled `e-pawns`. Stockfish pushes the `a-pawn` to chase away the bishop and uses the queen to apply pressure on `e3`.

<sup> *Pressuring and exploiting white's dark-square weaknesses* </sup>

I prefer the immediate `d5`. This neutralizes the bishop and forces white to decide between exposing a weak pawn on `d3`, accepting the isolated and doubled `e-pawns`, or liquidating the center with `d4`. It's possible to delay the `d5` break with the restraining move `c5`.

<sup> *Quick d5 break: challenging white's light-square control & backward pawns.* </sup>

On move `11.Be3`, exchanging bishop seems to be the only move for black. Allowing white to exchange ruins you pawn structure. The weaknesses on `e5` and `c5` are greater than the exposed `d3` pawn weakness.

<sup> *Trade of bishops on c5 leaves black with 2 weakened pawns.* </sup>

---
Tags: opening, strategy, ruy-lopez, planning
---


# Question
Title: French defense: Key ideas on the Winawer
I am beginning to study the Winawer variation (`1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4`), mainly because the only line I actually know against `3.Nc3` is the Rubinstein (`3...dxe4`), which is very dry and boring to my taste.

I have studied the main line, and I'm beginning to appreciate the key ideas of the Winawer, but still I would like to ask to more experienced French defense players what are the key ideas, notes and/or concepts I should keep in mind while studying (and playing!) this sharp variation? This will make me study with better fundamentals and play with more precision, I hope.

# Answer
Since the question is posed very generally, I'll only give a rough overview of some of the more typical ideas behind the Winawer for black. I'll mostly focus on positions after `4.e5` as that is the key line allowing white to fight for an advantage out of the opening.

It must be noted that the ideas tend to vary somewhat greatly depending on which specific variation of the Winawer we consider, as there are quite different ways the opening can continue after `1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5`, namely:

* The advance variation with `4...c5,`
* The other advance variation with `4...Ne7`,
* The Petrosian variation with `4...Qd7`, etc.

Let's start with `4...c5,` and consider the following typical position of the Winawer, arising after `5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3:`

## Strategic assessment:

* First of, black has willingly decided to give up their dark-squared bishop, so white has the bishop pair.
* In turn, this has allowed black to damage white's pawn structure.
* In particular, the pawn structure favours black in the endgame thanks to white's isolated `a-pawn` and the doubled `c-pawns.`
* Although black is clearly behind in space control, the central pawn structure makes it very difficult for white to actually open up the position. The position remaining closed favours black as white has the bishop pair and is getting their pieces more effectively developed than black is able to.
* Black's main two weaknesses are: the `c8` bishop having no simple prospect of getting effectively developed, and the highly weakened kingside caused by giving up the `f8` bishop and the inability to establish the kingside knight on the ideal `f6` square, which is prevented by white's early `e5.`
* The two aforementioned aspects are what makes the advance variation with `4.e5` favourable for white, as these weaknesses offer white a tangible and concrete edge to play with.
* From black's perspective, these difficulties in parrying a kingside attack or finishing development effectively means, on the one hand, black has to be ready to opt for dynamic remedies to solve their problems, such as the poisoned `g7-pawn` continuation to answer white's early `Qg4.` On the other hand, black has to know and recognise a lot of positional combinations in order to defend against white's various attacking options. These combinations are typically in the form of very subtle manoeuvres that at first glance appear to completely undermine all opening principles.

With that, let's have a look at some of these subtleties you need to be definitely aware of when playing the Winawer. To understand their necessity, we must first develop a feel for where white's best attacking chances lie. Consider again the following typical structure, but this time after black's best move 6th move, `6...Ne7:`

## White has three main *active* continuations here:

* `7.a4:` with the idea to develop the `c1` bishop to `a3` and quickly exert pressure on black's dark-square weaknesses.
* `7.h4:` a quick advance on the kingside to either play `h5` (often followed by `g4`) to boot black's `e7` knight from the key light-square posts `g6-f5.` Additionally, advancing the pawn to `h6` is also possible, to either damage black's pawn structure after `gxh6` or to further weaken the dark-squares after `g6.`
* `7.Qg4:` immediately exploiting black's weakened kingside and in particular the undefended `g7` pawn.

## Important typical manoeuvres for black:

To prevent an early `7.a4`, black has the option to play `6...Qa5` (instead of `6...Ne7`) with tempo as `c3` is attacked, with the idea to block next the `a-pawn` with `Qa4!` Indeed this looks dubious at first as the queen is being used as a blockader, but in fact on top of the blockade, the black queen is also well-established for creating counter-attacks on the queenside and in the center.

After `6...Ne7,` in reply to white's `7.Qg4`, as opposed to the more risky lines with `7...O-O,` black has the option of playing the Poisoned Pawn variation, which after `7...Nbc6` entails: Sacrificing the `g7` pawn for a quicker development, queenside castling, and dynamic play:

A typical continuation is:

```
 [title "Poisoned Pawn Variation:"]
 [fen ""]
 [startply "13"]

 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 c5 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 Ne7 7. Qg4 Nbc6 8. Qxg7 Rg8 9. Qxh7 cxd4 10. Ne2 Qc7 11. f4 dxc3 12. Qd3 d4 13. Nxd4 Nxd4 14. Qxd4 Bd7 15. Rg1 Nf5 16. Qf2 {black is a pawn down but has decent positional compensation thanks to white's compromised king position, the well-established knight on f5 and the white's g2 pawn against which black can continue to mount pressure with Qc6-Qd5-Bc6.}

```

The Petrosian variation starting from `4...Qd7` (instead of `4...c5`) looks really dubious at first since: we're developing our queen by blocking our own bishop, and even before having developped our minor pieces. But in fact, `Qd7` is a really useful **multi-purpose** move: it prevents `Bb5+` and prepared to trade the light-square bishops with `b6-Ba6` and it indirectly defends the `g7` pawn against `Qg4.` Since with the queen on `d7`, `Qg4` can be replied with `f5`, a *discovered defense* if you will :)

And the list goes on... But you see the pattern behind these subtleties: they are all backed by highly concrete ideas and thus, far from a mere application of opening principles. These are things you need to take into account if you really want to adopt playing the Winawer, these systems are not everyone's cup of tea.

---

## Summarised notes

Again, this was simply a rough overview, attempting to bring to your attention the kinds of positions and manoeuvres you need to get yourself accustomed to if you want to start playing the Winawer. Let's finish by summarising mostly black's trumps in the Winawer:

* Black ensures the center remains closed with early trade on `c3` leading to the typical pawn structure of `c2-c3-d4-e5` for white and `(c5)-d5-e6` for black. White has the lead in space and has the bishop pair, so it's vital to keep the position closed, unless a liquidation is possible.
* The early trade on `c3` gives black, statically, the better pawn structure and it leaves white with an isolated `a-pawn` and doubled `c-pawns.` Thus, typically, early liquidations towards an endgame are better for black, but of course white should not allow that.
* With all of white's central pawns fixed on dark-squares, black can undermine the pawn chain with `c5` and can easily mount further pressure on `c3` and `d4` pawns (moves such as `Nbc6, Ne7-Nf5, Qb6, Qa5`).
* However, dark-squares can also easily be black's undoing in the Winawer, specially, if black is unable to create a clear counter-play and white manages to force further dark-square weaknesses on the kingside, then white's queen and dark-squared bishop coordination can become dominant and decisive. See e.g. Hou Yifan's instructive win against Kramnik in the Winawer, an absolute dark-square domination.
* As for instance advertised in the Poisoned pawn variation, black commonly has the option of also castling queenside to finish development, and play actively.
* Black's main worries in the Winawer are: how to **parry the induced dark-square weaknesses**, and how to complete development, in particular, **the king position and the locked out `c8` bishop**. If white plays passively early on, and allows you to comfortably resolve these, then you'll have equalised, if not even a bit better because of the pawn structure.
* Exploit white's exposed queenside in order to create counter-play by targeting white's pawns, in particular the `a4` square, which if occupied by either the `c8` (`Bd7-Ba4`) bishop or queen (`Qa5-Qa4`), `c2` can be targeted and more importantly black prevents the `a4-Ba3` setup for white as discussed earlier.
* Also note that lines where white sacrifices their `e4` pawn do not really work, and you need to be ready to refute them. For instance, after `1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. a3`, (instead of `e5`), black stands even slightly better after: `4...Bxc3+ 5. bxc3 dxe4 6. Qg4 Nf6 7. Qxg7 Rg8.` Similarly for `4.Ne2`, which allows black to comfortably equalise: `4. Ne2 dxe4 5. a3 Be7 6. Nxe4 Nf6`.
* As a whole, the Winawer can be a very dynamic weapon to play for a win as it can lead to highly imbalanced positions and still bears some hanging fruits to be discovered.
* As a general recommendation for learning about ideas underlying a specific opening, make sure to spend a lot of time studying games of experts of the opening you're interested in. Look into the games of for example, D. Bronstein, Y. Seirawan, T.V. Petrosian, V. Smyslov, F. Caruana and N. Zhukova.
> 8 votes

# Answer
I was not sure that I could answer this question because there are so many non-standard types of positions in the Winawer, and it covers entire books. I am primarily going to discuss the famous main line, and what its basic ideas are for both sides.

The main line is where white plays an early Qg4, and attacks the black kingside. The main ideas for both sides in their simplest forms are that white is trying to take on g7 and h7, and eventually queen the h-pawn...simplistic, but accurate, but nevertheless, a long way from fruition.

In the meantime, black is playing to rip apart the center with c5, cxd4/dxc3, castle long, and take on e5, sometimes via a sacrifice (with the queen on c7 and after f4 by white) to attack the white king, which is usually stranded in the center. After this potential sacrifice, there may also be tactical ideas against the wayward white queen trapping it. If black can open the center successfully, and make the center pawns count by advancing them, and using the center to open lines to the white king, the white king will not be safe and often perish. Obviously, this general plan is VERY tactical, and requires a lot of book knowledge, and calculation during the game once you have left book. This main line is so sharp (even the description sounds sharp) that there are not a lot more generalities that I can add since they are very specific to the positions that arise.

The problem is what happens when white, and this happens a lot at lower levels, decides not to play into that mainline scheme because of being afraid of theory? There is too much here, and goes beyond the scope of one SE question. That leaves a lot of different possibilities from not playing either e5 (Anti-Winawer with cxd5, Bd3, or even Qd3 among others) or a3 (Semi-Winawer with Bd2 primarily) at all, to exchanging on d5, which bring up radically different plans. White can also play positionally with Nf4 and a4.

Instead of 4...c5, you can also opt for 4...Ne7, which aims for a more closed game, and to avoid the sharpest lines, but I tend to think that black does well playing the main line.

As I looked at my library, and looked up books specifically on the Winawer, I found two books that I would recommend.

I do not own this book, but based on the Amazon "Look Inside" feature, it is one of the most impressive opening books I have ever seen in terms of spelling out the ideas, especially in a complicated opening:

"The Wonderful Winawer: Strategic Ideas & Surprise Weapons for Dynamic Chess Players" by GM Viktor Moskalenko

The second book, "Winning With the French", and I do own this one, is by GM Wolfgang Uhlmann, who was probably THE authority on the French during his peak years, and never played anything but the French in response to 1.e4 during his career (or so they say). The book is exclusively taken from 60 of his games, and the explanations are very good, but watching how a master of this opening handles it will be invaluable.

Lastly, I also suggest studying the games of Viktor Kortchnoi, another noted expert on the French.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: opening, strategy, french-defense, winawer-variation
---


title: How is this move illegal?

text:
# Question
Title: How is this move illegal?
I'm black and it's my turn. I'm playing in the Arena chess player against Stockfish. This is my current board:

```
[fen ""]
[startply "31"]

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 e6 3. dxe6 fxe6 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Bc4 c6 6. O-O Bc5 7. d4 Bb6 8. Re1 O-O 9. Nc3 Nbd7 10. Ng5 Ne5 11. dxe5 Qxd1 12. Nxd1 Ng4 13. Nxe6 Bxf2+ 14. Nxf2 b5 15. Bb3 Nxf2 16. Nc7+

```

I want to play **Rb8**:

```
1rb2rk1/p1N3pp/2p5/1p2P3/8/1B6/PPP2nPP/R1B1R1K1 w - - 2 17

```

but I keep getting errors telling me that's illegal.

**HOW IS THIS ILLEGAL??**

# Answer
It turns out I was in check:
> 6 votes

---
Tags: rules, check, illegal-move
---


# Question
Title: Could you show me some very easy mate in 20?
I am looking for some puzzles where there is a forced mate in as many moves as possible (ideally 20 or more). Yet the puzzles need to be as easy as possible!

You will probably need to find some puzzles where the defending side has a lot of spite checks to delay the mate.

.

**Edit :**

I just made a very easy mate in approximately 23. White to move:

It's really really easy since Black can do nothing. But it doesn't totally satisfies me since the position is of course not legal...

# Answer
> 9 votes
I present unto you a superbly easy mate in 21 that I found the other day in the Matplus.net forums. Give it a try!

```
[Title "Filip Bondarenko, Feenschach 1960, Mate In 21"]
[FEN "8/7Q/2r1p3/2rkr3/2rrr2Q/7K/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

This is a mate in 24 that I quite like. You can view the solution in Yet Another Chess Problem Database.

```
[Title "Martin Hoffmann & Franz Lutsenberger, Schach-Almanach 1977-1978, Mate In 24"]
[FEN "8/7p/6pP/5pP1/pK2pP2/1pBpP3/pn1N4/k7 w - - 0 1"]

```

Finally, just for fun, here is a legal version of @Fate‘s idea that I have created solely for this answer.

```
[Title "me, chess.stackexchange.com 8/16/2019, Mate In 20"]
[FEN "6bB/3p1pB1/2pP1Ppr/2P3P1/2p5/2P3p1/5pPk/5Kbr w - - 0 1"]

```

# Answer
> 9 votes
There are many:

```
     [Title "Mate in 20"]
 [FEN "3K1B2/1p6/pp6/rk2N3/b1p5/1pP5/1P2P3/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

You should search puzzles from the 1900. It was a golden era for chess puzzles. I found a mate in 63 some days ago.

Chessmaster also has a nice collection of interesting(and long) puzzles. There are many sites where you can sort puzzles according to difficulty and turns to mate, but I can't remember any atm.

# Answer
> 4 votes
Here's an easy mate in 20 with a unique solution (which becomes a very easy mate in 19 after the first move):

```
[Title "Noam D. Elkies, Chess Stack Exchange 2020"]
[FEN "6bn/p4p1k/p4Ppp/p7/p3K1P1/P4N2/1P6/7n w - - 0 1"]

```

---
Tags: checkmate, problems, elementary-mates
---


# Question
Title: Chess Position Trainer in Conjunction with Chessbase or Similar
I have a repertoire stored in Chessbase and currently export these as PGNs when updated, and train them in ChessTempo for its spaced repetition. I do not like the Chessbase repertoire training feature, as it doesn't let me go through my entire repertoire.

Enter Chess Position Trainer. I am battling through the manual during the evaluation period. My questions are:

a) can you train your entire repertoire in one swoop? Or are you forced to choose each opening module and train one at a time? I am thinking along the lines of ChessTempo's white/black repertoire with spaced repetition.

b) does anyone have a decent workflow for exporting Chessbase repertoires and importing them into CPT? If I make small adjustments in Chessbase, how much destruction will I cause to my current CPT repertoire my importing that new PGN? I understand that it will add new positions, but will it delete old unused ones?

Many thanks in advance.

# Answer
> 2 votes
> a) can you train your entire repertoire in one swoop? Or are you forced to choose each opening module and train one at a time?

you have to choose the opening you want to train. However, you have control of what is included in an "opening" The only constraint is that White and Black must be separate. So you could have a single "white" opening and a single "black" opening to train.

I have two white openings and three black openings.

---
Tags: opening, software, training
---


title: Why does Hikaru Nakamura avoid Carlsen?

text:
# Question
Title: Why does Hikaru Nakamura avoid Carlsen?
I like watching Hikaru's youtube videos.

His commentary on the games is very descriptive, unlike other players that stay quiet for most of the game. Hikaru's always talking, letting you know what's going on.

However, one strange thing I've noticed is the COMPLETE absence of any sort of online interaction with Magnus. He's uploaded hundreds of videos, yet none contain matches against Carlsen.

I thought this was strange, since I know Carlsen plays a lot online too, and Hikaru's got matches with a lot of other top players, but never Carlsen.

The other day, I noticed a youtube comment in his video that said "play Carlsen", and somebody responded with "we don't mention that name here", and it got tons of upvotes.

So I am clearly out of the loop here: what's going on? Why is Hikaru actively (seemingly) avoiding Carlen online?

# Answer
There was there match in the 2017 chess.com speed chess championship final, but I think that it has to do with Carlsen mainly playing on chess24 and lichess while Hikaru plays on chess.com(mainly). This is not to say that Hikaru tries to avoid playing Carlsen in general as they both had huge fighting games together. An example I can give is their game from the London Chess Classics 2017.
> 8 votes

# Answer
To be clear, Hikaru is not actively avoiding Carlsen. It's just that their affiliations make them play on different sites.

Hikaru has a partnership/sponsorship deal with chess.com whereby one of the stipulations is that he plays exclusively on chess.com.

Magnus Carlsen has invested in Chess24 (among other chess-related sites), and he will default to that site for regular content in order to drive more traffic there.

I've followed both players closely, and I've seen no indication that they are actively avoiding each other. In fact, both players will always seek out the best possible opponent that is currently online whenever they make content. But playing on different sites, they will very rarely play each other.

Carlsen will, however, often play leagues and tournaments on different sites, including both chess.com and lichess.org. For instance, you'll often find him as a contender in the monthy Titled Arena tournaments on lichess. For instance, he won last month's tournament.

Another example, though I believe this was before his investment in chess24, he competed with Hikaru in the final of chess.com's GM Blitz Battle. You can see their whole match here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuehyRf88ac

Disclaimer: Just because I haven't seen any clear indication of *active* avoiding, doesn't mean that there isn't any. I just haven't seen any reason to believe that is the case.
> 4 votes

---
Tags: online-chess, carlsen, chess-videos, nakamura
---


# Question
Title: Why is pawn c6 is not winning here and what is the missed win for black?
When I played a game on chess.com and then ran the analysis afterward, the computer said that the pawn move c6 was incorrect.

```
 [title "Black to play"]
 [fen "r1b2rk1/p1p2p1p/5p2/2bNq3/8/8/PPP1BPPP/R2Q1RK1 b - - 0 1"]
 [startflipped "0"]

 1... c6

```

I don't understand why the move is considered a missed win. Can anyone explain why?

# Answer
Look at the diagram. The engine tells you the best move (Rd8).

The idea behind that move is that it pins the white knight to the queen and at the same time attacks the knight a second time.

* Moving the knight white would lose the queen (for a rook).
* If white tries to defend the knight (with c4, Bc4 or Bf3), black would play c6 attacking the pinned knight with a pawn.

So the idea is: first pin, then win the knight with c6.

If you play c6 first, white could just retreat the knight to c3.

It is worth memorizing this theme (pin a piece, then attack it again) as it is quite common. Also works with diagonal pins by queen/bishop.
> 14 votes

---
Tags: analysis, winning
---


title: Custom message for an online chess game

text:
# Question
Title: Custom message for an online chess game
I am trying to setup an online chess game that shows a custom message at the end of the match. The game would need to be setup as a human vs. the computer. Does anyone know of an online website that allows you to do this?

# Answer
> 1 votes
I just checked three of the major sites: Chess.com, Chess24.com, and Lichess.com, and none of them seem to support this.

This is close, but not just online, but The Internet Chess Club, aka ICC, lets you do this, but only using the newest client, "ICC for Windows".

Here are the instructions.

And here is a screenshot.

---
Tags: online-chess, websites
---


title: Stockfish 11 for Android - binaries

text:
# Question
Title: Stockfish 11 for Android - binaries
I have an Android app that uses precompiled binary files of Stockfish. There are both arm64-v8a and armeabi-v7a binary files for direct use in version 10.

On Stockfish site there's however not such an update for latest SF 11 for months!

https://stockfishchess.org/download/

What is the way to go now, are we supposed to wait or is it no longer supported?

I don't want to make any additional steps like compiling source code myself, as long as it's not absolutely necessary. I am currently also not overly interested in supporting custom engines in my app.

I found it to be very comfortable to use these binaries. Or did Android Stockfish turn to something else?

I checked some talk chess forum but I am not part of it, I don't know people there and downloading whatever executable thing from unknown sites just because someone says it's replacement of Stockfish seems a bit loose and unresponsible to users of my app. That's why I am still running on SF10.

# Answer
> 3 votes
Stockfish is a free project, people don't work for financial returns. Unfortunately, that would mean your request might never be honoured. As a programmer with technical skills, you are expected to compile the code yourself.

Sorry, this is how a free open source project work. They give you the code for free, so you just have to do some works.

---
Tags: engines, programming
---


# Question
Title: Queen's gambit declined: is it too late to counter-offer my c pawn if white pins my f-knight? Will this overload my f bishop?
In the traditional queen's gambit, white offers their c pawn to the e5 pawn, threatening to take back with their f bishop and enjoying a central pawn advantage. My response is to play symmetrically, that way I can learn how to play it by defending against it first, so I reject the c pawn and offer my own pawn on c5 in response. I also like to place my knight on c6 after that.

A common opening theme is for a bishop to pin a knight and a royalty piece, inhabilitating the knight and threatening to double up a pawn thus weakening the castle pawns. My tipical response is to block with my bishop.

Is it possible to respond to both of these threats simultaneously in the same way that I respond to them individually? This is important because it would simplify my opening book significantly. The main challenge is that the f bishop is overloaded with the task of defending the thematic c pawn and the f knight.

Consider the following game:

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Bg5 c5 5. e3

```

I would ideally delay c5, but I want to keep the example simple here. My dilemma is, how do I develop my f bishop? I can't move it to d6 because after:

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Bg5 c5 5. e3 Bd6 6. dxc5 Bxc5

```

I would have wasted a turn moving my bishop twice in a row, and I would have to waste another one if I ever want to move my queen or protect against a Knight attacking my f6 knight.

I can't move my bishop to e7 either because after:

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Bg5 c5 5. e3 Be7 6. Nc3 O-O 7. Bxf6 Bxf6 8. dxc5

```

And recapturing that pawn seems very awkward, all pieces are 2 moves away, and c5 is not a particularly good place for any piece to be, especially if cxd5 and the c file is open for white's a rook. At any rate the main theme of the opening is broken.

My best answer so far is to play b6, so that my c5 pawn will have 2 defenders. If after c5 my opponent immediately takes my pawn, I recapture with my bishop,

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Bg5 c5 5. e3 b6 6. dxc5 Bxc5

```

However if I my bishop had already developed to its knight-guarding spot, I take with my b pawn.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Bg5 c5 5. e3 b6 6. Nc3 Be7 7. dxc5 bxc5

```

# Answer
There are a lot of different defenses to the Queen's Gambit Declined, but in most of them, you do not need to worry too much about white trying to take on c5, and holding it since it is very difficult to keep in most lines.

I am going to post some basic lines that lead to different variations, and some comments about each. This material will give you a very basic look at how you can play as black, and if you choose a line, I would gladly expound upon it, but the topic as a whole, can cover entire books. I mention the Ragozin with Bb4, for example, and I recently got a 351-page book on that one line alone.

There are a lot of notes to the moves, so make sure you read those as you go through this in the viewer.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Bg5 c5 {If you play an early c5, then white might opt to give you an isolate pawn, and force you to play the Tarrasch Defense, which scores a sky-high 73.5% for white in the Mega 2020 database.} (4... Bb4+ {This is the Ragozin Defense, which also has drawbacks like giving up the bishop pair, or certain structural weaknesses, but in exchange for piece activity. Note that had white played the move order with 3.Nc3, white also has the option of Qa4+ since Bb4 is not check, thus it would force Nc6 blocking the c7 pawn.}) (4... Be7 {The traditional QGD, where black completes development, and only then is prepared to hit back in the center with c5, or play other lines with the freeing Ne4, or cxd4. In this line, you need to be prepared to play the Exchange Variation, which is very popular at the club level, and leads to the minority attack.} 5. cxd5 (5. e3 O-O 6. Nc3 Nbd7 7. Rc1 c6 8. Bd3 dxc4 9. Bxc4 Nd5 10. Bxe7 Qxe7 {Is one of the lines, for example.}) 5... exd5 6. Nc3 c6 7. Qc2 O-O 8. e3 Nbd7 9. Bd3 Re8 10. O-O Nf8 11. Rab1 {Preparing the "Minority Attack" (attacking the majority of pawns on the queenside with a lesser number) with b4-b5, weakening the black queenside.}) 5. Nc3 (5. cxd5 exd5 6. Nc3) 5... Nc6 (5... cxd4 $1 6. Nxd4 Be7 (6... e5 $1 {This is very active, and scores well for black with white winning only 42% of the time per the Mega 2020 Database. It would require learning a fair amount of theory though.}) 7. e3 O-O 8. cxd5 Nxd5 9. Bxe7 Nxe7 10. Be2 Nbc6 $14) 6. e3 Be7 7. dxc5 {This is a main line, but you do not need to capture back with the bishop right away.} Bxc5 {The line you gave.} (7... O-O $1 8. cxd5 (8. Qc2 $1) 8... exd5 9. Be2 (9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. Nxd5 Bxb2 11. Rb1 Ba3 {And black will get back c5 with a good game, but white is still slightly better.} 12. Bd3 $1) 9... Be6 10. O-O Bxc5 11. Rc1 {With a typical Tarrasch.})

```

It was starting to get too deep for one board, so I put the answers to your edited question in this board. Again, make sure you look at the prose that is include with the various lines.

```
 [FEN ""]

 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Bg5 c5 {I feel like this is just too early for my solid style.} 5. e3 Be7 (5... Bd6 6. cxd5 exd5 7. Nc3 Be6 {And having moved the bishop twice is not that big a deal, but you have to be prepared to play the Tarrasch which requires good opening preparation due to the fact that you have the isolated pawn, and you need to know how to get the piece activity that is associated with it. I have a student at the high school club that I run, who plays this all the time, but I have been telling him lately to avoid it since it does not fit his style. If you are a player, who likes very complicated open positions and play 1.e4, the Tarrasch might be for you.}) (5... b6 $4 {A positional blunder since it wastes too much time, and weakens the light squares heading toward the king. It is almost losing since your king is not developed.} 6. cxd5 Qxd5 (6... exd5 7. Bxf6 Qxf6 8. Nc3 {And there is no good way to defend d already.} Be6 $2 9. Bb5+ {The light squares come into play.} Nd7 10. dxc5 (10. Bxd7+ Kxd7 11. dxc5 Bxc5 12. Nxd5 Bxd5 13. Qxd5+ Kc7 14. O-O $18) 10... bxc5 11. Nxd5 Qxb2 12. Rb1) 7. Bxf6 gxf6 8. Nc3 {With a winning position.}) 6. Nc3 O-O 7. Bxf6 $2 {Giving up the bishop pair since you cannot really win c5 is not good. Black will give it back, and you will have a huge weakness on c3 on an open file.} Bxf6 8. dxc5 $2 {This makes it worse.} Bxc3+ 9. bxc3 Qa5 10. Rc1 dxc4 11. Bxc4 Qxc5 12. Qd4 Qe7 13. O-O Nd7 14. Rfd1 Nc5 15. Ne5 b6 {With the slightly better position after Bb7, and the rooks coming to the center.}

```
> 3 votes

# Answer
You are overcomplicating your question by misusing a lot of terminology you apparently don't understand. There is no countergambit here nor is there an offer of a pawn nor is the bishop overloaded.

This is a very simple position and black has several choices that are equal or near equal: Be7, dxc4, c6, Nbd7 and Bb4+ are perfectly playable. White isn't threatening anything.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: opening, queens-gambit-declined, pins
---