# Question
Title: Why is d5 the best move in this position?
What is the thought process behind playing d5 in this position?

# Answer
> 9 votes
I'm not sure if it's the best one but... First of all, it breaks black's pawn structure. Look at black pieces: `Bf8`, `Nh7`, rooks haven't moved, King is in the center. If you have safe king, developed pieces and your oponent is miles behind you, you want to open files. `d5` is a move that I would do without much thinking. Such move just must be good!

After `1. ... - exd5 2. N4c3` and pawn on d5 falls. `Be6` doesn't work due to simple `f5`. This position is much much better for White. Look at this structure. Pawn on d6, black pieces. Argh, I don't like it soo much from black's perspective. And keep in mind, pawn on g5 is hanging because of `1. Bh7 - Rh7 2. fg5 - hg5 3. Bg5`.

# Answer
> 7 votes
user3447603 has already given a nice answer, so I'll just add something orthogonal to his: Bear in mind that d5 comes with a double attack, c6 and e6, so black's ideal response of e5 is not allowed anymore (to try and keep e-file blocked). So either he takes it and destroys his center and gives up the e-file, or he moves the knight and allows black to take on e6 (not the best move but still) and play around the weakened central pawns (also f5 coming in some variations).

Finally this position demands for crude forcing moves, simply because practically speaking you don't want to give black the opportunity to long castle and secure his king.

On a last note, all things said, one shouldn't get carried away here and wrongly assume that any crude and aggressive attack is going to work out, after all no matter how advantageous your position, you need to calculate things.

# Answer
> 0 votes
White is better developed so he wants to 1) open the position and 2) "chase" the knight on c6 (Black's best placed piece).

White plays

1. d5 Na5 2. d5xe6 f7xe6 3. N d4, and White's two center knights have a great attack against Black's two "hanging" center pawns. This result was made possible by the fact that d5 forced Na5.

# Answer
> 0 votes
If black takes the pawn on d5, he will lose control over d5 and f5, which are key squares in Sicilian-type positions. The d-file opens, which makes the d6 pawn weak. Taking on d5 is positional suicide; as such, the lesser evil is for black to move his knight, which loses control over the d5 square, so white could play Nd4 himself at some point and exert pressure on e6 and possibly jump into f5.

From a tactical perspective, the e-file opens, which makes the black king rather airy. Notice how black's pieces are rather poorly placed, and it looks like black is trying to carry out flank operations (while his king is uncastled). General principles suggest that white should strike in and open up the center in response to this.

---
Tags: analysis, strategy, pawns
---


# Question
Title: Is game analysis based on "squares" instead of "pieces" of any value?
Most all analysis I've seen in chess focuses on pieces development, and not the development of unoccupied spaces. Is there any value in analyzing game play in this way, and if so, how is this done?

**NOTE:** The way I look at it is: there are four types of unoccupied spaces: attackable, under-attack, attackable-AND-under-attack, and attack-free. Beyond that, really have no clue, other than I know people tend to focus on positive space, then negative space, and that the rules for positive space in chess are much more complex than the negative space; in fact, I'm only able to think of one rule that applies to negative space, that being the king may not enter an under-attack space.

# Answer
> 18 votes
I think that this is a good question, but also that the most enlightening way to answer might be to point out what I think is a slight misconception behind it. You say that most analysis you have seen focuses on the development of pieces, rather than the development of unoccupied spaces. But when one focuses on the development of pieces, what does this mean? In particular, what is the overall *goal* behind the development of one's pieces in the first place?

There are of course many facets to this, but one (very) rough way to put it is to say that a proper development of the pieces is just one that helps the player to gain as much control as possible of the board, or the "unoccupied spaces" as you phrase it in your question. So, long answer short, I think that your proposed *two* ways of analyzing game play are really just one. But I also think that your question points to a potentially very useful, guiding way of thinking about piece development.

One classic source that could plausibly be seen as particularly emphasizing this line of thought is the work of Aron Nimzowitsch (e.g. *My System*, *Blockade* and *Chess Praxis*), where he stresses in a pretty unified way the importance of restraining an opponent's play by developing one's pieces so as to control the center, overprotect important squares, blockade opposing pawns by plopping pieces down on appropriate unoccupied squares, etc.

Of course, one shouldn't take ideas like overprotection of key squares too far, as illustrated by Hans Kmoch's classic parody game composition Nimzowitsch vs. Systemsson (follow the link for Kmoch's crucial Nimzo-style annotations to the game):

```
[fen ""]
[Event "Composition"]
[Site "Copenhagen"]
[Date "1927.??.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Aron Nimzowitsch"]
[Black "Systemsson"]
[ECO "C00"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "48"]

1.e4 {AN INGENIOUS EXAMPLE OF MY SYSTEM by Aaron Nimzowitsch -
Anderssen started the sacrificial style, Morphy and Gruenfeld
the pure attacking style, Steinitz the positional style,
Tarrasch the scientific style, Lasker the style of styles,
Capablanca the mechanical style, Alekhine a style as brilliant
as sunlight. But it is a generally known fact that originality
and modernism were introduced by me as my own personal
inventions and enthusiastically imitated (without being fully
understood) by the whole world of chess. For the ridiculously
small sum of ten marks, the reader can confirm all this in my
monumental work, My System, published by B. Kagan. Before my
time, chess was so naive and undistinguished! One or two
brutal opening moves, each one involving a vulgar, obvious
threat, a common, banal sacrifice, a painfully elementary,
bestially raw checkmate - such, more or less, was the course
of chess games before my heyday set in. Then I appeared on the
scene and the chess world paid heed. The hegemony of matter
was shattered at a stroke and the era of the spiritual
began. Under my creative guidance, the chessmen, hitherto
nothing but highwaymen, pirates and butcher boys, became
sensitive artists and subtle instruments of immeasurable
profundity. But why waste words!--accompany me, dear reader to
the dizzy heights of the following game.} e6 2.h4 $1 {My very
oldest and latest thought in this opening. To the chess addict
nurtured on spineless convention, this move comes like a slap
in the face--but calm down, dear reader; after all, you cannot
be expected to understand such moves. (Forgive me - it is not
your fault, until now no one has opened your eyes and ears.)
Wait just a little while, and there will pass before you a
miracle of overprotection of more than earthly beauty. (I
assume that I rightly surmise that you are quite familiar with
my great theory of overprotection.)} 2...d5 { Black of course
has no suspicion of What is coming and continues serenely in
classical style. } 3.e5 $1 {A move of elemental delicacy. (We
detest, as a matter of principle, such words as "power" and
"strength"; in the first place, such banal expressions make us
uncomfortable; and, in the second place, we like even less the
brutalizing tendency which such words imply.) Wherein lies the
beauty of 3.e5? Why is this move so strong? The answer is as
simple as it is astonishing. The move is strong because it is
weak! Weak, that is, only in the traditional sense! In
reality, that is to say, it is not the move but the Pawn on e5
that is weak--a tremendous difference! In former times, it is
true, it was customary to reject any move which created a
weakness. Today, thanks to me, this view is obsolete. For,
look, my dear reader, the fact that the Pawn on e5 is weak
obliges White to protect the Pawn more and more until at last
the state of overprotection arises as it were of itself. But,
as we have seen (cf. My System), overprotection is practically
equivalent to victory. Hence it follows automatically that the
"weak" move, 3.e5, is a certain road to triumph. The rest is
more or less a matter of technique. } 3...c5 { All according
to a famous precedent.} 4.d4 {Here it is quite clear that it
is more profitable for White first to provoke c5 and then play
d4, rather than the other way round, which is the customary
course. For, if White first plays d4, there follows c5 and
White's d-pawn is under attack. But my clever transposition of
moves changes the situation completely. For now Black's c-pawn
is suddenly attacked by White's d-pawn!} 4...cxd4 {What else
can Black do?} 5.h5 $1 {All very clever, original and
decisive! Of course the ordinary run of people who envy my
every spark of genius but cannot follow my line of reasoning
for even three paces, outdo themselves in sneering at me with
the poison-dripping epithet, "bizarre." The text move creates
confusion in the whole Black army and prepares for the
annihilating invasion by the Queen 18 moves later.} 5...Qb6
{Naturally not 5...Nc6 6 Bb5! etc. Why should Black play the
French Defence only to allow the Ruy Lopez Bishop move after
all?!} 6.h6 $1 {An avaricious dullard would never hit on this
deeply conceived Pawn sacrifice.} 6...Nxh6 {After 6...gxh6,
White has an even more comfortable game.} 7.Qh5 $1 {The reason
for this becomes clear after next move.} 7...g6 {Black
threatens to begin a successful siege of the weakling at e5
with Bg7. But White forestalls this.} 8.Qh2 $1 {To every
fair-minded observer, this move must come as a revelation! All
the previous manoeuvres now become clear! White has completed
his development brilliantly and proceeds to overprotect
e5. Against this, Black is helpless.} 8...Nf5 9.Bd3 {Note the
splendid cooperation of White's forces: while the e-pawn and
the King Bishop completely blockade Black's position, the
development of the overprotective forces takes place behind
the broad backs of these sturdy blockaders.} 9...Nc6 10.Nf3
{As a rule this is a routine move. But here it is strikingly
original and as such occupies a place in the treasury of my
intellectual property.} 10...h5 {Old stuff!} 11.b3 {A deep
trap, as will soon become apparent!} 11...Bg7 {How Black must
have rejoiced when he anticipated his formidable opponent in
the occupation of the long diagonal. But...} 12.Bf4 $1 {...how
bitterly disappointed he must have been to realize that 11.b3
had only been a trap and Bb2 had not been intended at all. The
position of Black's Bishop at g7 is now quite
pointless. 11...Be7 would have been relatively better.}
12...Bd7 13.Nbd2 Rc8 {Black no longer has any good moves!}
14.Ke2 $1 {Again, an extraordinarily deep move. White sees
through Black's plans, and in addition he prepares a
particularly powerful continuation of his strategy of
overprotection.} 14...Nb4 {Just what White was waiting for.}
15.Ne1 $1 {This was the point of his previous move! Black is
now forced to exchange off the attacking Bishop at d3. But,
with that, even White's King Knight enters the fray with
fearful effect at d3, while the square f3 becomes available to
the Queen Knight. Surely a grandiose piece of strategy. The
fact is that I'm a marvellous player, even if the whole chess
world bursts with envy.} 15...Nxd3 16.Nxd3 $1 {Naturally not
16 cxd3? which would have been quite inconsistent. The Pawn on
c2 is unimportant, and Black only wastes precious time by
capturing it.} 16...Rxc2 17.Rae1 $1 {White continues his
overprotection without much ado.} 17...a5 {This counterattack
has no punch. Black would naturally like to get a passed Pawn
plus a Rook on the seventh, but it is too late for that.}
18.Kd1 $1 {Now the menaced Rook must scurry back, for capture
on a2 would be much too dangerous.} 18...Rc6 $1 {At last,
Black gets the right idea: overprotecting his Pawn at e6. But
it is already too late.} 19.Re2 Ke7 {Introduced into
tournament play by myself. See note to White's 14th move. The
King overprotects e6.} 20.Rhe1 Re8 $1 21.Nf3 $1 {Completing
the overprotection of e5 and thus deciding the fate of the
game. Black has no defence. Note the aesthetic effect created
by White's position.} 21...Bf8 {Now Black threatens to
complete the overprotection of e6 by playing Ng7. But White
has prepared a brilliant combination.} 22.g4 $1 {Much stronger
than the obvious Bg5+ etc.} 22...hxg4 23.Qh7 $1 {Now one
clearly realizes the masterly understanding of position which
went into White's eighth move (Qh2!).} 23...gxf3 {Had Black
continued overprotecting by 23...Ng7 there would have followed
24.Bg5+ f6 25.Bxf6+ Kf7 26.Ng5 mate. Black's basic error was
that he started overprotecting much too late.} 24.Bg5# {One of
my best games! I am proud of it if only because Herr
Systemsson is one of the strongest Scandinavian players. The
game made an overwhelming impression on the players and
spectators as well as on my opponent. The game has become
famous in Denmark as "the immortal overprotection game."} 1-0

```

---

Despite Kmoch's humorous exaggeration of Nimzowitsch's ideas about overprotection, a very recent top-level game brought Kmoch's parody to mind; namely, it was Caruana's destruction of Topalov during his unbelievable winning streak at the ongoing Sinquefield Cup 2014. In particular, if we compare the position after "Nimzowitsch's" move 21 above with that after Caruana's move 22 below, we see that Caruana has a similar array of forces buttressing the e5 pawn that clamps down on Topalov's position (though not the extreme-to-the-point-of-silliness buildup of every single piece directly supporting it).

```
[fen ""]
[Event "Sinquefield Cup"]
[Site "Saint Louis USA"]
[Date "2014.09.02"]
[EventDate "2014.08.27"]
[Round "6"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Fabiano Caruana"]
[Black "Veselin Topalov"]
[ECO "B46"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "61"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Nxc6 bxc6
7.Bd3 d5 8.O-O Nf6 9.Re1 Be7 10.e5 Nd7 11.Qg4 Kf8 12.Na4 Qa5
13.Re2 h5 14.Qf4 g5 15.Bd2 Qc7 16.Qg3 h4 17.Qg4 Rg8 18.Rae1 c5
19.c4 dxc4 20.Bxc4 Bb7 21.h3 Rd8 22.Bc3 Nb8 23.Re3! Nc6? 24.Bxe6!
fxe6 25.Rf3+ Ke8 (25...Kg7 26.Qh5 Rdf8 27.Rf6! Rxf6 (27...Bxf6 28.exf6+ Rxf6 29.Rxe6 Nd4 30.Qxg5+) 28.exf6+ Bxf6 29.Qxg5+ Kf8 30.Qxf6+ Qf7 31.Qh6+ Ke8 32.Nxc5) 26.Qxe6 Rg7 27.Qh6 Nd4 28.e6 Nxf3+ 29.gxf3
Bf8 30.Qh5+ Ke7 31.Bxg7 1-0

```

After Caruana's 22nd move, Topalov has no good way to create counterplay via a pawn break, because if the e5 pawn were to capture on f6, the power of his supporting pieces would be unleashed (as can be seen in the `25...Kg7` lines given above; `25...Kg7` was Topalov's original intent before he found the `27.Rf6!` reply in his analysis). Because of that fact, Topalov's only productive try is to reroute his knight to d4; but he overlooked that `23.Re3!` makes `23...Nc6?` tactically unworkable.

# Answer
> 1 votes
Actually, the term I would use is "lines," (of which "squares" are a special case). Each of your pieces is connected with a particular kind of line.

In the case of rooks, you want open files, leading you deep into enemy territory, or at least open ranks, along which you can move from one open file to another.

In the case of bishops, you want good diagonals, with either a lot of open "squares," or a lot of enemy pawns that can be fodder for your bishops. You want your pawns on the opposite color of your bishop so they don't block him.

With knights, you want good "squares," specifically in "holes" that can't be attacked by enemy pawns. Any isolated enemy pawn has such a "hole" in front of him.

Finally, pawns like good squares. A white pawn on e5, particularly if "passed," may be worth two ordinary pawns instead of one. A white pawn that's "backward" on e3 might be a disadvantage.

---
Tags: analysis, strategy, theory, positional-play
---


# Question
Title: Has there been a game which was drawn with three queens?
One of my friends who follows chess told me that there was a player in the past whose defensive game was so good that he drew a game in which the opponent had three queens. I couldn't find a game like that. Has there ever been such a game like that?

# Answer
> 8 votes
Currently I still can't find a drawn game, but I found a game where white had 3 queens, black had 2 queens and other pieces, and black won. There was a game on chess.com where black had 0.1s left and promoted in time for checkmate (3 queens).

```
[FEN ""]
[StartPly "137"]

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. d4 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Bg5 h6 10. Bxf6 Bxf6 11. b4 Bg7 12. c5 f5 13. Nd2 Kh7 14. Rc1 Ng8 15. cxd6 cxd6 16. Nb5 Nf6 17. Nc7 Rb8 18. Bd3 f4 19. Qa4 a6 20. b5 Nh5 21. f3 Rf7 22. b6 Bf8 23. Qb3 Ng7 24. Rc2 Qf6 25. Rfc1 Bd7 26. Bxa6 bxa6 27. Nxa6 Rb7 28. Rc7 Qg5 29. h4 Rxc7 30. Nxc7 Qxh4 31. b7 Nh5 32. b8=Q Ng3 33. Qc4 Qh1+ 34. Kf2 Qh4 35. Kg1 Qh1+ 36. Kf2 Qh4 37. Kg1 Qh1+ 38. Kf2 Qh4 39. Qb6 Be7 40. Nf1 Qh1 41. Nd2 Qh4 42. Ke1 Qh1+ 43. Nf1 Bh4 44. Kd2 Qxg2+ 45. Kc3 Ne2+ 46. Kb2 Nxc1+ 47. Kxc1 Qxf3 48. Ne6 Qa3+ 49. Kd2 Be7 50. Qcb3 Qa8 51. Qc7 Be8 52. a3 Qa6 53. Qcc4 Qa7 54. Qf3 Bh4 55. Qh3 g5 56. Nd8 Bd7 57. Qhc3 Rg7 58. Nc6 Qg1 59. Kc2 g4 60. Nb8 Be8 61. Nd2 Bg6 62. Qc8 Qg2 63. Nd7 Be7 64. Nxe5 dxe5 65. Qxe5 Bxa3 66. Qcc3 Bf8 67. d6 f3 68. d7 f2 69. d8=Q f1=Q 70. Qde7 Qf7 71. Qxf7 Bxf7 72. Qf5+ Kg8 73. Qfc8 Qf2 74. Qb4 Bg6 75. Qbc4+ Kh7 76. Qxg4 Bd6 77. Qce6 Bb4 78. Qd5 Rc7+ 79. Kd1 Bxd2 80. Qxd2 Qf1+ 81. Qe1 Rc1+ 82. Kxc1 Qxe1+

```

(white had an advantage but didn't use it properly and hung too many pieces)

# Answer
> 8 votes
Krabbé's first example for "Most Queens: 6" is a game Szalanczy - Nguyen, Budapest 2009, where after 58 a8Q each side had K+QQQ+N+P. The game was drawn on move 75, after two pairs of Queens were traded on moves 65-66.

# Answer
> 7 votes
There is one case cited \[ref. 1, re. ref. 2\] (Emil Szalanczy vs. Nguyen Thi Mai (2009)) wherein "each side had three queens after 58th move until 65th move. The game ended in a draw with a single queen on each side.". That being said though, this example isn't one of a draw with six queens still on the board.
If interested, the game can be viewed with comments at ref. 3 (I copied their PGN code, but the comments aren't showing up in the preview below).

```

[Event "FSIMB October"]
[Site "Budapest HUN"]
[Date "2009.10.04"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Szalanczy, Emil"]
[Black "Nguyen, Thi Mai Hung"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B90"]
[WhiteElo "2354"]
[BlackElo "2213"]
[Plycount "150"]
[Eventdate "2009.??.??"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.Qd2 Nbd7 9.f3 { The most common opening at master level in chess! Najdorf
variation, English Attack. } 9...Be7 10.g4 O-O 11.g5 Nh5 12.O-O-O Nb6 13.Kb1 Rc8 14.Rg1 g6 15.Qf2 { From this point on the game is on its own path. So much
for chess being worked out to a dead end... } 15...Nc4 16.Bxc4 Rxc4 17.Nd5 Bxd5 18.Rxd5 b5 19.Qd2 Qc7 20.Rd1 { It looks like white has a nice position due to
his well placed minor pieces, but still black has a very resiliant position
with counterplay. } 20...Rc8 21.c3 Rb8 22.Bc5 { A tactic. White is aiming for the
7th rank. } 22...Nf4 23.Bxd6 Bxd6 24.Rxd6 b4 25.cxb4 Rcxb4 { Black still has
chances with well placed pieces. } 26.Rd8+ Kg7 27.Rxb8 Qxb8 28.Nc5 Rd4 29.Qc2 Rxd1+ 30.Qxd1 Qb5 { Active defense has allowed black to equalize. } 31.Na4 Nh3 32.Nc3 Qc4 33.Qd6 Qf1+ 34.Kc2 Qxf3 35.Qxe5+ Kg8 36.b4 Qg2+ 37.Kb3 Nxg5 38.Ka4 Nf3 39.Qf6 h5 { You can see the shaping up of a phase four and
even phase five count down as both players begin to mobilize their pawns. } 40.Ka5 Nxh2 41.a4 Ng4 42.Qd8+ Kh7 43.Kxa6 Qg3 44.Nd5 h4 45.Qf8 Qf2 46.b5 h3 47.b6 h2 48.b7 h1=Q 49.b8=Q { Game on! It is hard to say whose king is in
more trouble. } 49...Qa1 50.Qbe8 Qg7 51.Qfe7 g5 { Say it is not so...Black wants to
get another Queen! } 52.a5! { LOL } 52...Nh6 53.Qc6 Ng8 54.Qec7 g4 55.Kb7 g3 56.a6 { A really unreal game. } 56...g2 57.a7 g1=Q 58.a8=Q { The only game in chess
history that I have found where six queens are on the board. } 58...Qb1+ 59.Nb6 { The white king has a strong fortress indeed. } 59...Nf6 60.e5 { It strikes me
humorus that this last remaining pawns feels the call to also move forward. } 60...Ng4 61.Qae8 Qff5 62.Qce7 Nh6 63.Kc7 Qbe4 { Like magnets the Queens are
attracted to the center of the board so as to maximize their radiation. } 64.Nd5 Qfxe5+ { All things shall pass. Here comes the mass exchanges. } 65.Qxe5 Qgxe5+ 66.Qxe5 Qxe5+ 67.Kd8 { Black has little chance of getting a fourth
queen. } 67...Kg7 68.Ne7 Qb8+ 69.Kd7 Qa7+ 70.Kd6 Qa3+ 71.Kd7 Qd3+ 72.Ke8 Qh3 73.Qd5 Qg4 74.Qe5+ f6 75.Qd5 Qa4+
1/2-1/2

```

There are also two further curious cases \[ref. 4\]:

* "Barroso, Ernesto (2440) - Puertas, Diego (2230) \[A00\] Valladolid ch Ascenso a Primera/Valladolid (3) 1992", as cited at ref. 4. It ends on ply 1 of move 62, 1/2-1/2, though all six queens were captured during moves 57 onward.
* "Ruecker, Benjamin (2403) - Schumacher, Dennis (2062) \[A15\] Hessen-ch U18/Marburg (9) 2000"; in this instance **all six queens remain** on the board at the end of the game (which was a **draw**).

---

**References**

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promotion\_(chess)#Promotion\_to\_various\_pieces
2. Boris Schipkov; "17 Astonishing Chess Games with 5 and 6 Queens on the Board". Chess Siberia. Retrieved 24 Nov 2014
3. https://www.chess.com/blog/Boorchess/the-outer-limits-phase-5-multiple-queens
4. http://www.chessib.com/five-six-queens-chess-games.html

---

EDIT: undeleted answer after reconsidering the relevance. This answer doesn't address games with a 3 queen lead by the opponent, but in light of other somewhat tangential answers, this one might be in keeping.

---
Tags: history, draw, queens, famous-games
---


# Question
Title: Why did non-Russian masters allow Capablanca to play "standard" openings against them?
Former world champion JR Capablanca was not a particularly good opening player. Yet he was the "champ" because once he survived the opening, he played better middle and endgames than others. And this occurred because he was able to play a handful of openings time and time again.

Late in his career, he had particular difficulties against Russian masters. Not only the stars like Alekhine, Botvinnik, and Keres, but even second-rank Russian players. A major reason was that they played varied and complicated openings, and got the "jump" on Capablanca in this part of the game.

Why didn't non-Russian players do more to take Capablanca out of his familiar opening lines?

# Answer
Capablanca's non-Russian rivals did not press him hard in the opening because they didn't know how:

> Capa continued to dominate until the unthinkable happened: He lost his world title to Alekhine. A grossly overconfident Capa entered the match unprepared psychologically for the new and improved Alekhine. In the end Capa lost the match because **he had never previously been tested to the degree with which Alekhine pressed him**.

Source: *Capablanca: Move by Move* by Cyrus Lakdawala. Emphasis is mine
> 6 votes

---
Tags: opening
---


# Question
Title: What's a really good tactic trainer rating on chess.com for a Candidate Master?
I'm currently a Class B with a TT rating of 2100. I would like to aim to become a 2100 with norm of Candidate Master. What tactic rating does a CM usually have? How strong are Expert class chess players in tactical calculation?

# Answer
While you cannot get to Candidate Master on tactics alone, most Candidate Masters have much higher tactics trainers ratings than you do. For example, Candidate Master Mago has a TT rating of 2602. While you should continue on your TT journey, you should also study master games, endgames, and positional play.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: tactics, rating, training
---


# Question
Title: Can I play on Lichess with my own "client"?
I love Lichess. It's web based client, but I want to use a program like Scid, scid vs Pc, or babaschess, or any of this clients programs used in FICS: see bottom links this page. Those programs offer possibilities Lichess doesn't such as annotate games move per move, choose engines to run in your own PC (to the contrary on the cloud like lichess, wich could be slower). Can you help me?

# Answer
Lichess does not support the FICS-interface, therefore clients used for FICS do not support it. At the moment you can only play it via a web-client.

~~Maybe in the future the Lichess-API allows sending and receiving moves, etc.~~ Apparently it is already possible as the API already allows it via HTTP, see Link.

EDIT: As stated in this issue tracker thread *pychess* is interested in integrating Lichess support. An official desktop client will most likely not come in the near future as the web GUI is fantastic already and developers can use the time to further improve the current codebase.
> 6 votes

---
Tags: online-chess
---


# Question
Title: How do I host a casual tournament for elementary level players?
I am a chess instructor teaching a summer camp class of 20-ish kids at the 2nd-6th grade.

I want to hold a tournament on the last day of the camp. Any ideas on how to carry this out are appreciated. Here are my concerns:

* The session is only 2 hours long. Therefore I can arrange between 5 and 6 rounds, max.
* I don't want to have an elimination style because I want everyone to feel like their games still matter towards the end.
* I don't have the kids' ratings but I do have them seeded based on observing their play for the last three weeks.
* I anticipate most of the games ending in a draw, therefore I would like to incorporate points (captured material) as a method for tie breaking.

Thanks in advance.

# Answer
> 3 votes
(I work for an after school chess program... I've run 100ish end-of-session tournaments for K-6 kids).

Not sure why you anticipate so many draws... I see maybe 95% checkmates, 4% stalemates and the occasional insufficient material or "failure to make progress" (TD discretion in lieu of 50-move rule).

My goal is to keep kids playing: finished games get new pairings as soon as opponents are available. I don't use clocks, might for older kids if I had them available. I don't track losses. I don't allow resignations. I do track the order they arrive at a given checkmate total. So if I have two kids with three checkmates the one who got to three first prevails.

Yes, there's inherent unfairness in this format. Speed matters. Getting in a tight, slow game can be fatal to kids who should've been contenders. Less offensive to me than having a bunch of kids in an extended wait for the next round. I only have an hour, I really need to be efficient.

I LOATHE piece-value based scoring. I had to do it a couple of times when I was an assistant and it wasn't my decision. It's kind of the only option if you've got kids that can't get checkmates though. But even K/1 groups, if you don't have at least half capable of winning a game after 8 sessions their instructor is a problem.

I don't do a lot of seeding, but I try to keep the contenders away from each other on the initial pairings.

# Answer
> 1 votes
First of all, allow draws and don’t use tie-breakers.

Then, theoretically the best solution is a **swiss-system blitz tournament**, but in your set up it has major flaws. Due to low total time and young players, wasting time for waiting for last match of every turn (while others may be ended in a few minutes), and then sort players, and then do pairings, and then rearrange players, and then again, well, it’s not the best way to use two hours.

You should use a **‘free’ paring system** (just start a new match as soon as a new opponent is available, and only check and pair similar scores if you have the opportunity to choose) together with a easy-to-use **rating system** (*Elo*, or *Glicko*, or our *rankade*), setting blitz time (or avoiding clocks) and using your seeding. Rating system provides a ranking, and this set up rewards fastest players (that can play more matches) and so it push everyone to end matches in a reasonable time (maybe less that clock time - so it works for your task to have significant outputs in two hours), and it assure - if well driven by the master - a fun experience for everyone (multi-losers included).

# Answer
> 0 votes
5 to 6 rounds could be done if they play blitz. If you were to set time controls of game/10 or game/15, you might be able to put the kids in groups of 4 and run quads.

I would recommend pairing them up and having them play 2 games at game/30 time control, or perhaps finding a strong local expert or master to give a simul.

Your suggestion for tie breaking isn't really feasible. That's not how it's done in rated tournaments, and could be confusing if you give them that impression. Draws happen in chess. There's really nothing you can do to avoid them, or change how they are scored.

# Answer
> 0 votes
Is it possible on lichess to host a private tournament? (I don't know - and if not, this answer isn't going to work.) It would handle pairings (including trying to pair as soon as reasonably possible), as well as all normal "rules" issues (e.g., draw by repetition or insufficient material).

For those not familiar, lichess tournaments score 2 points for a win, 1 for a draw, 0 for a loss (ignoring berserking/on fire for answer purposes). Playing more games gives more opportunity for more points, therefore - and it is not unusual to have a relatively high disparity in number of games played. It does tend to minimize "down time," however, which is probably a good thing for younger players.

Of course, this assumes you have access to computers (but negates the need for physical boards/pieces).

---
Tags: tournament
---


title: Promoting a pawn

text:
# Question
Title: Promoting a pawn
When a pawn reaches the opposing side it can be promoted. Given that the most advantageous choice of promotion is to a Queen I have 3 questions.

1. Does this mean that the newly promoted piece (e.g. Queen) stays on the opposing side and can attack from the rear?
2. Does this mean (hypothetically) that there can be 3 Queens on the board?
3. How does one represent the newly promoted Queen if there are still 2 on the board?

# Answer
> 3 votes
1. Yes, it is in all facets equal to an original queen of the same color as the pawn.
2. Yes, in fact this happens quite often, even among grandmaster. There are even cases known where there were 6 queens on the board!
3. In official games, you'll need a queen from another chess set. In casual games, you could put a rook upside down. Don't do this in tournament games - the piece will be considered to be a rook. If there's no queen available, stop the clock and call the arbiter.

# Answer
> 2 votes
1. Yes, it will behave just like any other queen.
2. There can be up to 9 queens on each side -- one for each potential pawn promotion and 1 original one.
3. Just find a queen of the same colour from a different set.

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


title: Check and checkmate on following moves

text:
# Question
Title: Check and checkmate on following moves
I was playing chess with a buddy, and I put him in check. On the following move, without moving his king out of check, he moved a rook to put me in checkmate.

My questions are as follows:

1. Can he do that and leave his king still in check?
2. Even though I'm in checkmate, can I take his king to win the game?
3. Is checkmate an automatic win (meaning no moves can follow), or can I still "try"?
4. If it was an illegal move, where do we resume?

# Answer
> 5 votes
1. No, this is not legal.
2. Not relevant since 1 is illegal.
3. Checkmate is a win and no moves can follow.
4. You go back to illegal move and correct if its a friendly game, I don't know what the official rules are for when a player makes an illegal move.

---
Tags: checkmate, check, illegal-move
---


# Question
Title: Taking the knight on c6 in open Sicilians
Why is it generally uncommon (unsound?) for white to capture the knight on c6 in open Sicilians?

For example (this is just an example; I'm not referring to this specific position, but similar positions in the opening from Dragons, Najdorfs, Sheveningens, Richter-Rauzers, etc.):

```
[fen ""]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Nxc6

```

I understand that not capturing the knight gives black the semi open c-file. But at the same time, capturing closes that c-file and gives it an isolated a-pawn and a semi-open b-file. Is it just because giving away the b-file to black is more dangerous than giving the c-file? I also understand that capturing the knight gives black an extra pawn in the center. But shouldn't white be able to quickly castle on the king side and torment black's a-pawn?

# Answer
> 11 votes
White's d4 Knight is his best piece. Why would he trade it for a common Knight and improve Black's center?

Regarding harassing the `a` pawn... you can have it. While you're doing that, your opponent will be drawing a bead on your King.

Checking 365chess.com, we see that `Nxc6` is a blunder at the sub-master level. Black wins twice as often.

At the master level, `Nxc6` is not played. There are 2 games, the latest being from 2004. Both ended with wins for Black.

The first game is from 9/4/2001 at Glifada. It's an ECO B56. Andreas Kofidis is White. Marijan Petrov is Black. White is completely destroyed in this short game after Black sacrifices a Knight on f3. Very nasty...

Edit - ...but survivable. White lost instantly on `17. Bxf8`. It's hard to believe he didn't see the mating attack since it's pretty easy. So he must have though he was already lost. Instead, `17. Qe3` holds.

```

[fen ""]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. Bd3 g6 8.  b3 Bg7 9. Bb2 Qa5 10. O-O Ng4 11. Qe1 O-O 12. h3 Ne5 13. Na4 Nf3+ 14. gxf3 Qg5+  15. Kh1 Qh4 16. Bxg7 Bxh3 17. Bxf8 Bg4+ 0-1

```

This game is from 3/7/2004. It's ECO B58. Albert Bokros is White. Veniamin Sergeev is Black. Sergeev puts his Queen out there and Bokros tries to trap it. It doesn't work out, and by move 22 Sergeev dominates the center. White seems to be trying a cheap shot mate-in-one on move 33. Perhaps he's under time pressure. It doesn't work out and he drops a piece.

Edit - I see now that the Knight on `a5` is trapped. Black piles on the pieces until it falls.

```

[fen ""]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. Be2 e5 8.  O-O Be7 9. f4 exf4 10. Bxf4 Qb6+ 11. Kh1 Qxb2 12. Qd2 Qb4 13. Rab1 Qc5 14. Na4  Qa3 15. Nb2 O-O 16. Nc4 Qc5 17. Be3 Nxe4 18. Qe1 Qd5 19. Bd3 Qe6 20. Na5 d5 21.  c4 f5 22. Bc2 Ba6 23. Bb3 dxc4 24. Bc2 Kh8 25. Bd4 Bf6 26. Bxf6 Rxf6 27. Bxe4  Qxe4 28. Qb4 Rg8 29. Rbe1 Qd5 30. Rf3 h6 31. Qc3 f4 32. Rf2 Rf5 33. Re7 Qxa5  34. Qh3 Re5 35. Rxe5 Qxe5 36. Qf3 Qe3 0-1

```

But what's important in both of these games is that Black is granted counter-play out the wazoo - a Sicilian player's dream. We see Queen sorties in both games on the `a5-d8` diagonal. The `b6` square allows the Black Queen to get a bead on the traditionally weak (yet dangerous!) `b2` square and also peer menacingly at the castled enemy King.

# Answer
> 5 votes
It's about the d5 square. Black's first move, ...c5, meant that the c-pawn could never cover d5 again.

Then white got a semi-open d-file, and from then on, if black plays ...e6 to cover d5 then it means that pawn d6 is weakened. Also there may sacrifices on e6, or white sacrificing a piece on d5 (because ...exd5 exd5 opens a line to the king).

In some lines, these things are more of a problem than in others. For instance in the Dragon black has already played ...g6 and therefore he's very reluctant to play ...e6, making d5 really weak.

Exchanging the knight moves a black pawn to c6 where it controls d5.

But of course, there are lines in which white does exchange on c6, perhaps to push e4-e5 immediately, or the knight was chased away from d4 by ...Qb6 or so and exchanging it gains some time. It's always a matter of pros and cons.

# Answer
> 4 votes
**Overview**

This is considered to be the classical variation of the Open Sicilian. The wikipedia article for this position states "Of all the responses for white, Bg5 is perhaps the best". However, when analyzing with Stockfish, it suggests either Bb5 with a weight of 0.28 in White's favor.

*Why is it generally uncommon (unsound?) for white to capture the knight on c6 in open Sicilians?*

**Control**

Here is my take on this, and it is just an opinion. In general, it is better when possible to allow your opponent to initiate a trade because it will usually allow you to end up still controlling that space. This is true in the current situation where, if allowed, Black's knight would take White's, and then White's queen would take.

*Is it just because giving away the b-file to black is more dangerous than giving the c-file?*

**Tempo**

If White does take on c6, and then bxc6 Black actually has a lot of options. It allows for d5 to be played with support from the c file, and overall, it is good if you can manage to take towards the center of the board with your pawns. It also means that, possibly, Black's bishop could end up on a6 which could be problematic in some lines.

*But shouldn't white be able to quickly castle on the king side and torment black's a-pawn?*

**Exactly**

White should be trying to castle and develop in this position. Both of which are achieved with `6. Bb5`. This creates an attack, forces Black to defend with his Bishop on d7 (forcing generates tempo), and allows for White to castle all while Black's dark bishop is locked in at f8. Whichever direction Black aims for, you will have at least one move to prepare for it, and that little bit of gained tempo can be the difference in breaking open a position.

Lets just leave Black's a-pawn out of this. It is a tough cookie and will be around for a while.

**Goal In My Opinion**

```

[fen "r2qkb1r/pp1b1ppp/2nppn2/1B6/3NP3/2N5/PPP2PPP/R1BQ1RK1 w kq - 0 8"]

```

# Answer
> 0 votes
Those are bad exchanges for White.

First, White has invested two moves in the knight on d4, and Black only one move in the knight on c6. So White loses a move by "exchanging" knights.

Second, when he recaptures, Black turns his b pawn into a c pawn. White earlier took a "hit" by exchanging his (center) d pawn for Black's (noncenter) c pawn. By allowing this sequence, White has effectively exchanged his d pawn for only a b pawn.

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


title: What is a "big pawn"?

text:
# Question
Title: What is a "big pawn"?
I've seen the term "big pawn" come up a few times (such as here and here), but I can't seem to trace down an exact definition. What is it?

# Answer
A piece (often a bad bishop, but in your second example a queen) which is doing nothing more than protecting a few squares is often called a big pawn. To be honest, I don't find your second example a real case of a 'big pawn', because the queen can easily move away and do something useful. And, as Dag Oskar Madsen mentions, in the first example the *pawn breakthrough* is big, not the pawn itself.

In the position below, the white bishop is a typical example of a big pawn, because of Black's dominance on the dark squares:

```
[FEN "r4r2/5pkp/1q1pb1p1/2p1n3/2P1P3/1P3P2/2BN2PP/1R1Q1RK1 b - - 0 1"]

```
> 6 votes

# Answer
The term *big pawn* is usually used to mean an ineffective bishop trapped behind its own pawns. An example from the game Charousek-Maroczy, Budapest 1895:

```
[FEN "6rk/1pp3p1/1r3p1p/p3nP1P/P1PpP3/1P1P4/2B1K1R1/6R1 w - - 0 1"]

```

In this position, the white bishop is just doing the work of a pawn and doesn't have any bigger prospects.
> 6 votes

# Answer
As mentioned, the first one refers to the amount and importance of pawn play throughout that game.

The second example seems to be making a joke about how the Queen is so ineffective in its position that it might as well be a pawn. If you play through the puzzle you see that it is not able to prevent the sequence.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: pawns, terminology, pieces
---


# Question
Title: What is the point value of each chess piece?
I would like to know the point values of each chess piece. I forgot the values because I have not used that system in quite a long time.

# Answer
> 3 votes
General consensus values chess pieces as follows:

* Pawn = 1 point
* Knight = 3 points
* Bishop = 3 points
* Rook = 5 points
* Queen = 9 points

However, you should consider this valuation scheme (as well as any valuation scheme) to be very vague, to the point where it is almost sloppy to assume it is correct in any specific position. For instance, two bishops together are often valued higher than 3+3, sometimes 6.5 or 7. Or a passed and advanced pawn may easily be worth a piece, especially when connected with another pawn. Rooks, bishops, and queens are worth less than normal when the position is closed, whereas knights thrive in such positions. When the position has clear lanes for the long-range pieces, the knight is less outstanding.

Of interest, too, is the valuation of the king's tactical strength. The king is generally valued between 3 and 4 points, slightly higher than a knight or bishop. Of course, this valuation is meaningless when it comes to calculating exchanges.

Wikipedia's article on this topic is well-referenced and extensive. There is a table listing various valuation schemes, both historical and modern, and an average of all schemes in the table is given as follows:

* Pawn = 1 point
* Knight = 3.2 points
* Bishop = 3.3 points
* Rook = 5.2 points
* Queen = 9.6 points
* King = 3.5 points

---
Tags: point-value
---


# Question
Title: Why does chess.com's tactics player avoid taking the queen in this problem?
Why can't the black pawn take the queen at h6? Instead the computer makes the king go to g8.

# Answer
1... gxh6 2. Nxf6+ Kh8 3. Rg8#

```
[FEN "4rb2/pbqr2pk/1p3p1p/4p3/2P3NP/1P4R1/P5P1/2Q2B1K w - - 0 1"]

1. Qxh6+ gxh6 2. Nxf6+ Kh8 3. Rg8#

```
> 13 votes

# Answer
The pawn on g7 performs two vital functions:

1. It protects the pawn on f6 from capture by the White knight.
2. It indirectly bars the way to g8 to the White rook on g3.

If it captures the queen on h6 (thereby "moving"), it loses both these functions. Then:

1. Nxf6+ Kh8
2. Rg8 mate.

For White, the checkmate would be well worth a queen, for Black, not.
> 7 votes

---
Tags: tactics
---


title: Chess engines for analysing games

text:
# Question
Title: Chess engines for analysing games
Up untill now, I have used Rybka for analysis of my games. What other chess engines have you used, and how helpful are they?

I am not interested in a list of chess engines with their respective websites, the name of an engine you have just heard of. I want a fact-based review from someone who has used the engine mentioned in their answer for a long time, and found and helpful.

What I am looking for in the mentioned engine is to find a way to calculate the accuracy of the game:

* How often the player was making good moves.
* How often the advantage in the game was changing

Previously I saw such options in Rybka, but in my current version Rybka v4, I cannot see this option as available.

Many thanks to @ETD for a helping hand in giving a direction on what exactly I want in an answer.

# Answer
I use Stockfish, and have found it useful for analysis largely because of its multipv support (I switched from Crafty a couple of years ago), and it being free. I feel it lacks EGTB support, so it's not up to par with Rybka in that respect, but haven't felt willing to shell out the money for Rybka yet, just for that feature. It sounds like it also might do a better job of reporting forced draws, but I haven't confirmed that myself.

I agree with Ed, you should give guidance on what you want to hear in your answers. Rybka is a fine analysis engine.
> 8 votes

# Answer
Here's an obligatory post about the benefits of Rybka...

The biggest advantage to Rybka (especially Rybka 4) is that it has a very good positional understanding. It is capable of giving a fairly accurate assessment of the initiative and king safety, subject to the same limitations of all other chess engines.

Generally speaking, I find that Rybka is slightly slower tactically than Houdini or Stockfish, but that the positional "understanding" more than makes up for this weakness. Granted, Rybka and I work well together and that's a personal preference, but I have tried all of the major engines in some tricky positions and Rybka always seems to make me more productive.
> 7 votes

# Answer
Chess engines all work in a similar way, but Graphical User Interfaces(GUIs) report this info in different ways. Chessbase produces GUIs based on Fritz which show a little engine window with a number, plus if white is winning or minus if black is winning. Chessbase GUIs also have a little light that flashes red when one side's move was a blunder. This Chessbase line of GUI/engine combos includes Komodo 9, Houdini 4, Rybka 4 and Deep Fritz 14. The GUI part in each case is the same. You can buy just the engine, or download a free engine like Stockfish, and plug it into a GUI that you have.

A lot of GUIs do full game analysis, both commercial - Aquarium, Chessmaster, Chess Assistant, Shredder(in its own or a Chessbase GUI) and Hiarcs Chess Explorer - as well as free alternatives, Arena, SCID and SCID vs. PC. Automatic game analysis does highlight certain turning points in each game, but you probably learn more by going through the game yourself with the engine running, and exploring different lines to see what happens.

Individual engines have their own quirks. Rybka had an excellent feel for material imbalances and sacrifices, but it has problems with certain endgames seeing an advantage in theoretically drawn positions. Komodo 9, Stockfish 6 and Houdini 4 all benefited from Rybka's ideas, and their latest versions are stronger than Rybka 4. Komodo and Houdini are perhaps a bit more conservative than Rybka, while Stockfish has a different style from the others. For a regular player just trying to improve his game, all these engines are going to seem pretty similar though, and a lot of the time they recommend the same moves.

Engines in general have trouble with long term planning and evaluating endgame positions. They often pursue short term material gain, while ignoring long term weaknesses like king safety, weak colour complexes and pawn structure. Engines are very strong at tactics though.
> 2 votes

# Answer
I would strongly recommend Stockfish. My reason for this is that it is the strongest open source engine that ia currently available. Being open source, you can not only work out how it evaluates, but also modify its code to suit your style and needs. It's very easy to install, build and use.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: analysis, engines
---


title: multi pv mode in GUI

text:
# Question
Title: multi pv mode in GUI
is their any facility in babas chess (4.0) to facilitate multi pv mode. babas chess that i have only shows single pv. if it doesn't then which GUI (free) has facility for the multi pv mode running for pc.

# Answer
> 1 votes
While I don't use Babas chess, I'm sure Chessbase and Arena support multi-pv.

# Answer
> 0 votes
Try adding this to your Babaschess engine configuration:

---
Tags: engines, software
---


# Question
Title: Do users of chess-db get informed when you play against their computer simulation of themselves?
If I were to play against the computer simulations of chess players that have an account on chess-db (titled or none titled I know), will they get informed that I trained or prepared against them by playing their computer simulation?

# Answer
No, they are not. Chess-db has no good way of contacting those people anyway.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: engines, software, websites
---


title: Looking for SmallChess source code?

text:
# Question
Title: Looking for SmallChess source code?
I'm currently looking for this chess engine: http://www.smallchess.com/ but the link to access it is dead.

Can anyone help ?

# Answer
The source code for SmallChess is not available as it is closed source. The link for the source code is for SmallFish.

If you still want the source code you might have to wait, as neither does Google have that page cached nor does The Wayback Machine.
> 2 votes

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


# Question
Title: Which webpage broadcasts a single chess game, usually Carlsen's, in infinite analysis?
I would often visit a site that had a live Carlsen game analyzed by a strong computer, and deeper than the "average" chess site, but I can't seem to find it. I think it had something to do either with the TCEC or the Stockfish team.

# Answer
> 3 votes
You are probably thinking of analysis.sesse.net.

---
Tags: analysis, engines, carlsen
---


# Question
Title: Is the Ulvestad variation playable for black?
The Ulvestad variation starts with `1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5` Now white's best is `6.Bf1 Nd4 7.c3` leading to this position:

```

      [FEN ""]
      [StartPly "13"]

      1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 Nd4 7.c3

```

Usually play continues `7...Nxd5 8.cxd4 Qxg5 9.Bxb5+ Kd8 10.O-O! Bb7 11.Qf3` and here black has tried both `11...exd4` and `11...Rb8`. I have had a game that continued `11...Rb8 12.dxe5 Ne3 13.Qh3 Qxg2+ 14.Qxg2 Nxg2 15.d4 Nh4 16.Bg5+ Be7 17.Bxh4 Bxh4 18.Nc3 Bf3 19.b3 Rb6` and we arrived at this position.

```

      [FEN ""]
      [StartPly "38"]

      1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 Nd4 7.c3 Nxd5 8.cxd4 Qxg5 9.Bxb5+ Kd8 10.O-O Bb7 11.Qf3 Rb8 (11...exd4) 12.dxe5 Ne3 13.Qh3 Qxg2+ 14.Qxg2 Nxg2 15.d4 Nh4 16.Bg5+ Be7 17.Bxh4 Bxh4 18.Nc3 Bf3 19.b3 Rb6

```

I think that this position is almost winning for white after `20.Bd3` since the checkmate threats are covered. For example, black can try `20...Rg6+ 21.Bxg6 hxg6` but `22.Rfd1!!` and white should now be winning.

```

      [FEN ""]
      [StartPly "43"]

      1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 Nd4 7.c3 Nxd5 8.cxd4 Qxg5 9.Bxb5+ Kd8 10.O-O Bb7 11.Qf3 Rb8 (11...exd4) 12.dxe5 Ne3 13.Qh3 Qxg2+ 14.Qxg2 Nxg2 15.d4 Nh4 16.Bg5+ Be7 17.Bxh4 Bxh4 18.Nc3 Bf3 19.b3 Rb6 20. Bd3 Rg6 21. Bxg6 hxg6 22. Rfd1

```

So my question: is the Ulvestad in trouble, or is there some other variation that makes it playable? The only real alternative that I have found to the variation I gave above is `12...Nb4!?`, but I have had several games as white where I won with `13.d4! Qg6 14.d5! Bxd5 15.Rd1! Rxb5 16.Nc3` followed by Rxd5.

```

      [FEN ""]
      [StartPly "31"]

      1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 Nd4 7.c3 Nxd5 8.cxd4 Qxg5 9.Bxb5+ Kd8 10.O-O Bb7 11.Qf3 Rb8 (11...exd4) 12.dxe5 Nb4 13.d4 Qg6 14.d5 Bxd5 15.Rd1 Rxb5 16. Nc3

```

Is there another option for black that keeps the Ulvestad alive, or should black be playing `5...Na5` or `3...Bc5` instead?

# Answer
First, I think this is an excellent question for this forum, so thanks for posting it. I'm going to use a mix of computer analysis with stockfish and crafty, and the chesstempo game database to respond.

Your main question: Is Ulvestad playable for black? I think is a definite yes. There are many options unexplored still, but I think even in your specific game black can at least draw with `20. ... f5` to counter `20. Bd3`, and it's not a picnic for white, either--they have to play fairly precisely to keep it even. I'll get back to this at the end.

To avoid making this overly long (I can tell it's going to be long!), I'll just point out some of the unexplored options you don't cover in the question. For example, move 8 isn't set in stone with 8. cxd4, there are also:

```
8. Ne4
8. Nxf7
8. h4

```

But we'll continue down your line with `8. cxd4 Qxg5 9. Bxb5+ Kd8`, after which the options for white look like:

```
10. O-O Rb8 11. Bc6 exd4 12. d3 Qf5 13. Re1 Nf6 14. Nd2 Qxd3 ... (+0.80 D25 - stockfish)
10. Qf3 exd4 11. Bc6 Nb4 12. Bxa8 Nc2+ 13. Kd1 Bg4 14. Kxc2 Qc5+ ... (+0.56 D25 - stockfish)

```

After `8. cxd4 Qxg5 9. Bxb5+ Kd8 10. O-O` there are another few potential options:

```
10. ... exd4 11. Bc6 Rb8 12. d3 Qf5 13. Re1 Nf6 14. Nd2 Qxd3 15. Nb3 Qxd1 ...(+0.60 D29 - stockfish)
10. ... Rb8 11. Bc6 exd4 12. d3 Qf5 13. Re1 Nf6 14. Nd2 Qxd3 15. Nb3 Qxd1 ...(+0.60 D29 - stockfish) (transposes to above)
10. ... Bb7 11. Qf3 exd4 12. d3 Qe5 13. Nd2 Bd6 14. g3 a6 15. Ba4 Qf6 ... (+0.72 D29 - stockfish)
10. ... Qg6 11. dxe5 Rb8 12. Nc3 Nf4 13. Qf3 Bb7 14. Qg3 Nxg2 15. d4 Nh4 ...(+.80 D29 - stockfish)
10. ... Bg4 11. Qb3 Nf4 12. dxe5 Bd7 13. Qg3 Qxg3 14. fxg3 Ng6 15. Nc3 Bc5+ ...(+.84 D29 - stockfish)

```

Again, we'll go with your line, `8. cxd4 Qxg5 9. Bxb5+ Kd8 10. O-O Bb7 11. Qf3`, to which there are a few ideas possibly worth looking deeper at:

```
11. ... Rb8 12. dxe5 Ne3 13. Qh3 Qxg2+ 14. Qxg2 Nxg2 15. d4 Be7 16. Be2 Nh4 (+0.72 D26 - stockfish)
11. ... exd4 12. Re1 Be7 13. d3 Qf6 14. Nd2 Rb8 15. Bc4 Nb6 16. Qxf6 Bxf6 (+0.76 D26 - stockfish)
11. ... Qf4 12. Qxf4 exf4 13. Nc3 Nb4 14. Rb1 Bd6 15. d3 Nc2 16. d5 Nd4 (+1.01 D26 - stockfish)

```

Again we'll go with your line, `8. cxd4 Qxg5 9. Bxb5+ Kd8 10. O-O Bb7 11. Qf3 Rb8 12. dxe5 Ne3 13. Qh3 Qxg2 14. Qxg2 Nxg2 15. d4`, and again black has several responses to explore:

```
15. ... Be7 16. f4 Nh4 17. Nc3 Nf3+ 18. Kf2 Nxd4 19. Rd1 c5 20. Be3 Bf3 (+0.84 D26 - stockfish)
15. ... f6 16. Be2 Nh4 17. f4 Bb4 18. Nd2 Nf5 19. Nc4 Ke8 20. Rd1 fxe5 (+0.92 D26 - stockfish)
15. ... Nh4 16. Bg5+ Be7 17. Bxh4 Bxh4 18. Nc3 Bf3 19. Rab1 Rb6 20. Bd3 Kc8 (+1.01 D25 - stockfish)
15. ... Kc8 16. f4 Nh4 17. Kf2 c5 18. Be3 Bg2 19. Nc3 Bxf1 20. Rxf1 cxd4 (+1.05 D25 - stockfish)

```

We're almost to the line you left us, but you can see you probably had several other possibilities. We'll continue with the line: `8. cxd4 Qxg5 9. Bxb5+ Kd8 10. O-O Bb7 11. Qf3 Rb8 12. dxe5 Ne3 13. Qh3 Qxg2 14. Qxg2 Nxg2 15. d4 Nh5 16. Bg5+ Be7 17. Bxh4 Bxh4 18. Nc3 Bf3 19. b3 Rb6 20. Bd3`, which presents us with an interesting position.

It looks like my f5 idea was pretty good, as it seems to be a solid draw for black if both sides play perfectly (as far as I can tell). Interestingly enough, computers don't tend to see f5 until they get 30 deep or so. The goal being to get the h8 rook involved ASAP. If white slips up, they can be in for some pain.

There are two reasonable responses to `20. ... f5`:

```
21. Ne2 Rg6+ 22. Ng3 Rf8 23. Rae1 (+0.32 D28 - stockfish)
21. Bxf5 Rc6 22. Nd1 Rf8 23. Ne3 Bg5 24. Bg4 Rg6 25. Bxf3 Bxe3+ 26. Kh1 Bxd4 (+0.00 D28 - stockfish)

```

The rest look like probable bad news:

```
21. e6 Rxe6 22. Bxf5 Rc6 23. Rac1 Rf8 24. Bd3 Bg5 25. Rc2 Rf4 (-0.92 D28 - stockfish)
21. exf6 gxf6 22. Bc4 f5 23. Rfe1 Rg6+ 24. Kf1 Rg2 25. Re3 Rxf2+ (-1.53 D28 - stockfish)
21. Rfe1 Rg6+ 22. Kf1 Rg2 23. Re3 Rxf2+ 24. Kg1 f4 25. Rxf3 Rxf3 (-2.14 D28 - stockfish)
21. Rfd1 Rg6+ 22. Kf1 Rg2 23. Rd2 Rxh2 24. Ke1 Bg5 25. Rdd1 c6 (-2.70 D28 - stockfish)

```

I let stockfish think about this position for several hours, and when it gets to about 30-31 deep, the score for both of the best moves dwindles to 0.00 or 0.08 (which indicates a likely draw). I played out several scenarios which involved different colored bishops and rooks that had easily defended pawns, but that couldn't obviously make progress. Or Rook+Knight vs Rook+Bishop. There were a few times that black had a bishop traded for a couple of pawns, but couldn't do anything with it. Never got to a 6 piece EGTB position--always too many pawns leftover. If someone can find a win for white with 20. ... f5, I'd like to see it!

**Update 6-20-2012**

`21. Bxf5` seems to be a bad choice after `21. ... Rc6 22. Rfc1 Rf8`.

I haven't looked at other moves other than `22. Rfc1` deeply yet (such as `22. Rac1` and `22. Nd1`), but white doesn't have many good options at `23.` `23. Bxh7` looks like it has potential, but after `23. ... g6` the bishop becomes hard to use. `23. Bd3` is in second place so far, `23. Bd4` is in third, and `23. Bb1` is in fourth, but they all score negative with 30 depth.

`21. Ne2` looks like it offers white a few chances for draw by repetition several moves in. This line, for example (I need to check some of the others for black to see if there's something better than `21. ... Rg6+`, but that seems unlikely): `21. ... Rg6+ 22. Ng3 Rg5 23. Rac1 f4 24. Rc3 Rf8 25. Rfc1 c6 26. Bb5 fxg3 27. hxg3 Bxg3 28. fxg3 Rxg3+ 29. Kh2 Rg2+ 30. Kh3 Rg6 31.Bxc6 Rh6+ 32.Kg3 Rg6+ 33.Kh3` ends with a pretty straightforward draw by repetition drawish looking position:

Another update: `21. Ne2 Rg6+ 22. Ng3 f4 23. Rfc1 Rg5 24. Rc3 Bb7` looks promising for black.

Update: Here is some analysis, if anyone is interested: http://mongochess.skeweredrook.com/ulvestad-variation
> 13 votes

# Answer
Yes, it is playable in my opinion. The starting position on the diagram may not be reflective of Black's best chances in the Ulvestad because it assumes that 6...Nd4 it best, while it scores much worse than 6...h6. After 6...h6 White scores only 47% according to ChessBase, I don't think you can find many opening lines as playable for Black as this (we're only on move 6).
> 0 votes

---
Tags: opening, 1.e4, two-knights, italian-game
---


# Question
Title: Steps to checkmate in my endgame position
There is a black bishop at a4, black queen at b4, a black king at e5 and a white king at c1. There is a checkmate in 3 moves. I want to know what the moves are.

```
[FEN "8/8/8/4k3/bq6/8/8/2K5 b - - 0 1"]

```

# Answer
> 6 votes
Black mates in three with

```
[FEN "8/8/8/4k3/bq6/8/8/2K5 b - - 0 1"]

1... Qb7 2. Kd2 Qe4 3. Kc1 (3. Kc3 Qd4#) Qc2#

```

The paradoxical Qb7 is the only solution, you can check this with an endgame database.

---
Tags: endgame, checkmate
---


# Question
Title: What are the main ideas for White in the Queen's Gambit Accepted, 3.e4 variation?
What are the main ideas for White after 1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4?

```
[FEN ""]
[StartPly "5"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4

```

# Answer
> 5 votes
Black has 4 main tries and one dubious line. White's plans vary based on the tabiya. The positions below are the lines given in *Starting Out: Queen's Gambit Accepted* by Reatsky and Chetverik:

## 3...e5

```
[FEN ""]
[StartPly "5"]

  1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4 e5 {Best and thematic. A strong central counterattack that made the 3. e4 QGA unpopular in the '80s.} 4. Nf3 {White defends the pawn and prepares to castle kingside.}

```

Now Black has 2 choices: 4...Bb4+ and 4...exd4.

## 4...Bb4+

```
[FEN ""]
[StartPly "7"]

  1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4 e5 4. Nf3 Bb4+ {Black develops with tempo and blocks a defender of the d4 pawn.} 5. Bd2 Bxd2+ {Black is happy to trade, seeing as he is up material and has slightly less space when the c4 pawn falls.} 6. Nbxd2 {6. Qxd2 exd4 7. Qxd4 Nf6 8. Qxd8+ Kxd8 actually sucks the venom out of white's attack, as the queens are gone and the trades benefit black, whose king is open and has less space.} exd4 7. Bxc4 Nc6 8. O-O Qf6 {Black aims to play ...Nge7 and ...O-O.} 9. e5 {The queen has developed early and can be attacked, gaining space. The pawn cannot be taken due to tactics on the open e-file.} Qg6 10. Re1 Nge7 11. Nb3 {Thematically regaining the pawn.} O-O 12. Nfxd4 {The material is now even with quite even development and safe kings. But why was it the f3 knight that recaptured? Well: 1) 12...Na5, pestering the bishop, is prevented, and 2) The queen can develop to the kingside, e.g. Qf3 easily.}

```

## 4...exd4

```
[FEN ""]
[StartPly "7"]

  1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4 e5 4. Nf3 exd4 {Black invites white to play 5. Qxd4? Qxd4 6. Nxd4 Bc5 which equalises. Similarly, 5. Nxd4? c5 6. Nf3 Qxd1+ is also good for black.} 5. Bxc4 {White should definitely develop the bishop to regain a pawn and take control of a key diagonal.} Nc6 6. O-O Be6 {Defending the diagonal leading to the weak f7 square, this almost forces a trade of a well developed piece.} 7. Bxe6 {7. Bb5 is playable. See Kaspaprov-Anand, Linares 1999} fxe6 8. Qb3 Qd7 {Why not 8...Qc8? Well this is too passive and can be punished by 9. Ng5!} 9. Qxb7 Rb8 10. Qa6 Nf6 11. Nbd2 Bd6 {The bishop develops to a flexible square that discourages e5.} 12. Qd3 O-O 13. a3 {Preventing any annoying ...Nb4 or ...Bb4 manoeuvres.} Ng4 {Black seeks to place a knight on e5, a well placed steed.} 14. b3 Nce5 15. Nxe5 Nxe5 16. Qxd4 Ng4 17. e5 Nxe5 18. Bb2 Rb5 19. Qe4 Nd3 20. Bd4 Rf4 21. Qa8+ Rf8 {With a likely draw by threefold repition.}

```

## 3...c5

```
[FEN ""]
[StartPly "5"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4 c5 4. d5 Nf6 5. Nc3 b5 {Principle: attacked in the centre, counter on the wing} 6. Bf4 {The Bishop thematically comes to f4 as in some variations the bishop takes on b8, often in conjunction with a rook on b1.} Ba6 {Black has to develop rapidly, as the game is somewhat open and Black is being squeezed in the centre.} 7. e5 b4 8. exf6 bxc3 9. bxc3 gxf6 10. Bxc4 {This initiates a combination that simplifies into an endgame where white plays against the pawn weaknesses on c5 and the kingside.} Bxc4 11. Qa4+ Nd7 12. Qxc4 Nb6 13. Qb5+ Qd7 14. Qxd7+ Kxd7

```

## 3...Nc6

```
[FEN ""]
[StartPly "5"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4 Nc6 4. Nf3 Bg4 5. d5 Ne5 6. Bf4 Ng6 {6...Nxf3 7. gxf3 Bd7 is not so strong for Black, as White now has a semi-open g-file to work with, and the White king is reasonably safe in the centre.} 7. Be3 e5 8. Bxc4 Nf6 9. Nc3 a6 {Black threatens to remove the defender of the e4 pawn with 10...b5 11. Be2 b4 12. Ng1 Nxe4} 10. Be2 {White would like to offer to trade the bad light square bishop with Nd2, when Black should preserve their light square bishop with ...Bd7} Bd6

```

## 3...Nf6

```
[FEN ""]
[StartPly "5"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4 Nf6 4. e5 {White gains a bit of space in this line but not much else.} Nd5 5. Bxc4 Nb6 6. Bb3 Nc6 7. Be3 {7. Nge2 is also playable, but 7. Nf3?! walks into the pin 7...Bg4, which is uncomfortable, seeing as Black doesn't mind trading his bad bishop if the question is put to it.} Bf5 8. Nc3 e6 9. Nge2 Be7 10. O-O O-O

```

## 3...b5?!

```
[FEN ""]
[StartPly "5"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4 b5 4. a4 {White challenges the base of the pawn chain.} c6 {Black reinforces the base...} 5. b3 {...so white attacks the head of the chain instead!} e5 {Thematic and best. Over and over we will see ...e5 as been a crucial move in the 3. e4 QGA variations.} 6. axb5 cxb5 7. bxc4 Bb4+ {Black is desperate to gain counterplay (and material!) seeing as white's central pawns are so menacing.} 8. Bd2 {Forced. Blocking with Nd2 enters into an uncomfortable pin, and Ke2 loses castling rights and blocks up the kingside.} Qxd4 9. Bxb4 Qxa1 10. Nf3 {Despite white being down in material, White has: 1) More space, 2) Better development, 3) A vulnerable enemy king, queen and rooks to go after.}

```

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


# Question
Title: Best resources to learn the Chigorin variation of the Ruy Lopez for both colors?
I faced this opening 3 times recently in a tournament, and only scored 1 win and 2 losses. I would like to know: what are the best books or DVDs that cover the Chigorin variation of the Ruy Lopez?

# Answer
> 3 votes
I'm not going to say its the best for exhaustiveness but great entertainment st louis chess club

---
Tags: opening, books, ruy-lopez
---


# Question
Title: What is the current highest rated chess engine?
http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/ \- Indicates that it is Komodo 10 but I am not completely sure this is up to date.

# Answer
> 5 votes
CCRL has not tested Komodo 10.1 yet.

IPON has: http://inwoba.de/

2016.07.23 Komodo 10.1 with a plus of 8 Elo in the full list and 11 Elo from one RRRL to the next. This version would not be tested because it is to close to the last release but as it is the reigning world champion it should be integrated.

1 Komodo 10.1 3253
2 Stockfish 7 3228

# Answer
> 3 votes
The CCRL maintains a list of chess engines and their ratings. Currently, Komodo (3358) is the strongest, closely followed by Stockfish (3340). According to the information on that page:

> Computed on July 23, 2016 with Bayeselo based on 642'252 games

it is quite up to date.

---
Tags: engines, rating
---


# Question
Title: What are some good books for chess openings?
I am not new to chess, I have been playing for around 6 years. But I don't know much about chess openings technically. What are some of the very good books to learn important opening moves?

# Answer
> 13 votes
There are two excellent modern surveys of openings: Sam Collins' *Understanding the Chess Openings* and Paul van der Sterren's *Fundamental Chess Openings*. They both cover every major opening, demonstrating the main ideas and variations. I would start with Collins, since it is shorter and easier to read through in its entirety, but both are highly recommended.

# Answer
> 4 votes
It depends on what you are after and what your level is, but John Watson's Mastering the Chess Openings series has a good reputation.

# Answer
> 4 votes
If you're not familiar with openings your best bet would be to start with a decent general book on openings rather than going for something too specific. Being familiar with chess you will probably have settled on what kind of player you are, and therefore what types of openings suit your style.

Your first task should be to find the kinds of openings that suit you by studying something broad. Once you've found the types of openings you like you can then focus on learning more specific openings with more specific books.

Sorry I don't know any books off the top of my head. I prefer to learn openings by playing and supplementing this with general internet searches.

# Answer
> 4 votes
I like "Chess Opening for Dummies". It features the main openings with two commented games for each one: one game in which white wins and one in which black wins. This allows to avoid bias toward the choice of adding an opening in the repertoire.

# Answer
> 3 votes
You'll hear many masters tell any chess enthusiast of the "beginner" to intermediate level to pick of the books "Winning chess strategies for kids" by Jeff Coakley (which doesn't read like a kids book and is fantastically written) and "Chess strategies for club members" by Herman Grooten.

Also, chess.com has a great opening explorer. There's always YouTube as well! Hope that helps.

# Answer
> 3 votes
The Complete Book of Chess Strategy by Silman. Just saw this yesterday for the first time and its the first Chess Book I felt I had to spend the money on. Simple, easy to digest and full of tactics and strategy. I'm already finding myself playing better in just one day as a direct result. I find a lot of the above books to either be to loaded with notation and grand master games to be useful to a beginner, or in the case of Collins' *Understanding Chess Openings*, to be a bit over the top in his language.

Compare if you will:

> The development of White's bishop to c4 prepares castling, eyes the f7-pawn and hinders an early ...d5. We would need a pretty compelling reason not to play such an obviously logical move and unfortunately such abstention is justified by the fact that Black, by most accounts, has a pretty easy route to equality in all variations. Attention has thus moved away from the Italian Game, with its more durable neighbour the Spanish Game (Ruy Lopez) proving a more promising route to an enduring edge for White.

*-Collins*

There's just much easier ways to say the same ideas. All he does is make it more confusing.

Compare that with some text from Silman:

> While the Caro-Kann (1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5) and the French Defense (1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5) both strive to gain a central foothold with a defended d5-pawn, the Caro leads to calmer positions than its French brother. On the positive side, the move ...c6(instead of ...e6) keeps the c8-h3 diagonal open for Black's light-squared Bishop. The negative side of this opening revolves around the fact that ...c7-c5 is still an important source of counterplay and, as compared to the French, Black has already moved this pawn and lost a tempo as a result. This slight loss of time in playing ...c7-c6 followed by a later ...c6-c5 means that Black will try to slow the play down.

*-Silman*

Silman's book is just great in my opinion for beginners because of how clear and easy to use it is.

# Answer
> 3 votes
Both Sam Collins and Paul van der Sterren's books I also highly recommend. Besides books youtube is also a great source for learning about openings. Both thechesswebsite and Dereque Kelly's channels are excellent for such.

For learning about specific openings I can recommend the Starting Out series by Everyman Chess which covers the selected opening in a very clear and instructive manner, also covering its variations.

For a more advanced look at an opening the Grandmaster Repertoire series by Quality Chess is top notch. Likewise any opening book published by Quality Chess is of good quality. http://www.qualitychess.co.uk

Of course Everyman Chess also produces more advanced openings books such as the Play the... (or Play...) and Move by Move series. http://www.everymanchess.com

The Chess Opening Essentials series by New In Chess is great, the series of four books covers various openings from the various defenses to 1.e4 to 1.d4 and so forth. http://www.newinchess.com/Chess\_Opening\_Essentials\__Vol\__1\___4-p-1930.html

Winning Chess Openings by Yasser Seirawan is fantastic http://www.amazon.com/Winning-Chess-Openings-Everyman/dp/1857443497/ref=sr\_1\_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1406887013&sr=1-8&keywords=Chess+openings

I assume at your level it is much more beneficial to know about the basic ideas of an opening rather than memorizing lines which stem from it. A simple google search can inform you greatly about an opening. If there is any opening book you should buy let it be one which covers many openings and presents the various ideas behind them. The already mentioned books are all excellent and I would like to add to their recommendation. I can only offer by this post some more fantastic books and advanced ones for if you progress to that level.

# Answer
> 3 votes
Irving Chernev's *Logical Chess* annotates 33 games in a really accessible way, including the openings.

Each move gets a detailed explanation of its pros & cons in an accessible way (i.e. more engaging text, less variations), e.g. explaining how to exploit a lead in development or control of the centre.

The openings that feature the *most* are:

* Queen's gambit declined (there is a whole chapter dedicated to queen's pawn openings)
* Nimzo-Indian defence, mainline
* The Italian Game
* The Ruy Lopez

But there are a few others as well (I'm guessing from your question that you're not after any specific opening)

The chapters cover:

* Attacking the King
* Queen's pawn opening
* Master games, with an emphasis of those played by Capablanca

Also, you asked for books but the YouTube videos by National Master Dereque Kelley where he runs through the mainlines of many common openings are very good to!

# Answer
> 1 votes
Some chess opening books for beginners, I can recommend:

* Chess Openings by Michael Basman
* Discovering Chess Openings: Building Opening Skills from Basic Principles By John Emms
* Mastering the Chess Openings: Unlocking the Mysteries of the Modern Chess Openings, Volume 1 By John Watson

# Answer
> 1 votes
A classic reference book (or more like an encyclopedia) is Modern Chess Openings (or colloquially, MCO) by Nick de Firmian. While it doesn't have a lot of discussion on chess openings or the strategy behind a chess opening, and is noted for typos, it is extensive in types of commonly used openings. Definitely not easy reading. I believe the most recent edition is the 15th. Again, it will not teach you strategy behind the moves, but for that, I would pick up books specific to the opening you want to learn. Additionally, nothing can substitute good old fashioned tournament experience.

# Answer
> 1 votes
Mastering the Chess Openings in 4 Volumes by John Watson:

https://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Chess-Openings-Unlocking-Mysteries/dp/1904600603/ref=sr\_1\_sc\_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1469395910&sr=1-1-spell&keywords=mastering+ches+openings+john+watson

---
Tags: opening, learning, books, recommendations
---


# Question
Title: Is there an online chess game or app that allows for custom setup of pieces?
Question arose with a friend when he he posted this picture on his blog.

Is there a game where you could configure a game with the pieces like this? I know it is a bit odd, but he and I suspected it would be a somewhat fun diversion to actually play that board. Obviously you could do it with a physical board, but I usually play online or on my phone.

# Answer
You can use Xboard/Winboard depending of the OS you have and uncheck the option "Test Legality" at the general options menu, I did it myself with in my Xbord/Linux configuration and this is it:
> 6 votes

# Answer
Yes, the very popular lichess website has a mobile app with a board editor that would allow you to setup this position and pretend to play.

Here's a screenshot of the board editor:

You may also want to look into "Horde" chess, which is a similar variant to what your friend posted. From this site: https://en.lichess.org/variant/horde:

> Horde chess is a variant where the white side has a lot of Pawns (36 to be exact) (therefore shortnamed "the Pawns") and the black side ("The Pieces") needs to destroy the Horde to win.
>
> All pieces moves similar to standard chess. In other words, a move is legal if and only if it is legal in standard chess for a similar position. There is an exception for the Pawns.
>
> The Pieces wins by capturing all the Pawns. This includes pieces promoted from the Pawns.
>
> The Pawns wins by checkmating the King of the Pieces. Pawns on the first rank may move two squares, similar to Pawns on the second rank. However, Pawns of the Pieces may not capture Pawns on the first rank that has moved two squares, as it is not a valid en passant capture.
> 3 votes

# Answer
Almost any commercially decent chess software allows you to set up your own position.

Chessbase, crafty, and numerous other chess engines allow you to do that. However, in the picture that you have posted, there are more than 16 pieces of one color. Since this is not possible in a real chess game (not matter how wild) most of these engines will reject the position as being 'illegal.'

If a position is legal, you can set it up as the starting point and play against a computer engine, or get an evaluation for that position.

Hope that helps.
> 2 votes

# Answer
http://www.apronus.com/chess/wbeditor.php allows you to set up any illegal position and then you can create an image of the diagram to share or you can create a link to that position and use the link in a post or in an email, effectively allowing you to play any chesslike game by exchanging such links with your online partner.
> 1 votes

# Answer
I still don't have the ability to comment so I'll have to make this an answer, but Lichess has a variant *somewhat* similar to what your looking for called Horde. It's 36 pawns against a normal starting side.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: online-chess
---


title: Opening book for stockfish

text:
# Question
Title: Opening book for stockfish
I am looking for a relatively up to date opening book for stockfish5 chess engine. I do not need it to be created by a stockfish team (only to work together with stockfish).

Up till now the only thing I was able to find is really old book (it was updated during the time of version 2).

Is there anything newer?

# Answer
> 2 votes
This github post has links to polyglot books; the Komodo book looks especially enticing to me: https://github.com/michaeldv/donna\_opening\_books

Direct link to Komodo downloads: http://komodochess.com/downloads.htm

---
Tags: opening, stockfish
---


title: Checkmating with two bishops

text:
# Question
Title: Checkmating with two bishops
Let White have the two bishops. Given any setup, has the maximum number of moves to forced mate been calculated on an nxn board (for large enough n)? If not, are there any bounds on this number?

Of course, information on extensions of this problem to say any rectangular board, are also welcome.

I should note that for a 2xn board checkmate isn't possible. Also, for m \>= 3, with n \>= m without loss of generality, I'm not certain whether forced mate is always possible. I would say though that it is given m,n sufficiently large though.

To update let the bishops be on opposite colored squares, of course.

Update again: I noticed someone edited the question out. It isn't meant merely for the 8x8 board, but for any nxn board, where n is any sufficiently large natural number. I know R&K vs K has been solved in this way for any nxn board. I'm wondering whether the same has been done for K BB vs. K on any nxn board. Please watch what you edit next time. Also, an answer has been accepted to the edited question, not my intended question.

# Answer
> Mate could be forced sooner...\[the\] two bishops \[can mate in up to\] 19 \[moves\].

Source: Last paragraph from Daniel's answer to 'With only a king left, how many moves remaining until a draw?', with editing from me, seeing as I am taking just the part relevant to this question.

For a table of maximum number of moves to mate, see Wikipedia, which cites *Batsford Chess Endings* by Speelman, Tisdall and Wade.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: checkmate, bishops, mathematics
---


title: Can't decide on an opening for white

text:
# Question
Title: Can't decide on an opening for white
My opening repertoire so far includes pretty much exclusively the French Defense as Black against e4, and that is about it. What does this indicate about what type of player I am?

Also what would be some good suggestions to play as White? I tried the King's Gambit a lot but it either is just not my style or maybe it requires more study than I have put in to get decent results with it.

# Answer
> 3 votes
I agree that 1.d4 and Queen's gambit are the best option from what you told about yourself.

In French, it's typical to have d4-d5 pawns in the center, a bad black white-squared bishop, space advantage for White and a plan based on c7-c5 for black. These points are also common in the Queen's gambit declined. I write from my own experience of playing these openings.

You might also search through a database and see which grandmaster's style fits you well, and copy their opening repertoire. Good luck!

# Answer
> 2 votes
Do you like the french defense?

If you prefer more halfclosed/closed positions (which often arise from the french defense), then i would suggest to play queens gambit because it focus more on positional play rather than attacking right out of the opening like king's gambit.

But besides that, you should know some opening theory regardless which opening you play.

# Answer
> 1 votes
Basically (really):

If you have an attacking style, with a preference for combinations with a lot of space to move your pieces, then you should go for open games (e4, as a first pawn move, can generally lead yout to that kind of positions, example : the Sicilian) King's gambit (1.e4 e5 2.f4), for instance, is maybe not the best way to appreciate that (too cutting edge and still dangerous for white), instead you could try (1.e4 e5 2.d4) which can put you very quickly on the battlefield.

On the contrary, if you like slow, closed, positional games with long piece maneuvres, then you should go for d4, that generally leads to closed games (exp: Queen's gambit, semi-slav defence) !

Anyway, the better way for you to know waht really suits you is to try as many different openings as you can, until you get it !

# Answer
> 0 votes
If you are an attacking player who likes to develop quicker, I would recommend the Danish Gambit or Evan's Gambit. Even if declined, white can get a pretty decent advantage in development and can attack the weak pawn of f7 on the Black board. However, if you are a solid player, I reccomend the Italian Game or Reti's Opening. I owe a lot of my success in the intermediate level to these openings as white. As black, I nearly always play the Sicilian to e4 and the King's Indian against d4. The few times I do see c4, I play e4 and try to get a reverse Sicilian position.

# Answer
> 0 votes
I read your question. To answer it, it would be necessary that you provide more détails on your "personal" situation. I mean, what are your strength (elo?), your age, your experience, your motivation (time to learn), your aspirations? How long have you been playing, are you a newcomer to chess? What did you play until now with white (with what results), what is your preference: slow, positional, tactical play, both, manoeuvering, middlegame, opening rapidity of motion/development, do you like open or closed games. For instance, but just for instance, if you like slow positional, almost contactless play, you can adopt (with modifications to be made for opening developments since publication) the repertoire proposed by Emms in Attacking with e4 (an "old" but very good book). However, to continue with my example, if you are young and you want to learn and to make progress, there is a precondition for progressing, it is mastering tactical basic schèmes (all of them) and more advanced ideas, to be acquainted with tactics of everyday (by this i don't mean basic themes, as someone else understood here, but the subtle interweaving of themes and foremost the concrete calculation necessary to accomplish plans), and so on. Which kind of French positions do you like and predominantly, what don't you like as regards pawn structure types? You can furthermore take into account the frequency of types of positions played in the opening you choose. I mean if you play the Rubinstein French and you like a specific variation and dislike other variations and the statistics say the variations you don't like represent 80% of the played French Rubinstein games, then you should make a more pragmatic choice to increase your chance of getting a convenient (to you) position type. This does, as is quite evident, not mean that you can avoid all unwished variations. Furthermore, you should be aware, should you wish to play a reversed French, that the difference between the french and the reversed french is the fundamental nature of it. The french is concrete and immediate whereas the reversed french, while offering no special advantage, postpones the concrete and direct confrontation in the late middlegame as a result of the absence of contact.

# Answer
> 0 votes
If you're style is defensive, `d4` would be nice, it avoids Sicilian which can be very aggressive with opposite castling and most lines are passive with not much attacking potential.

If you are playing queen's gambit, beware of Albin countergambit as the game can be highly aggressive.

If you're opponent plays (Old)Benoni Defence, I recommend `1. d4 c5 2. d5 Nf6 3. c4`

`1. d4 c5 2. d5 Nf6 3. c4 e5` will be a very passive game

`1. d4 c5 2. d5 Nf6 3. c4 e6` might be slightly aggressive on the queenside, but you could should be able to prevent any potential successful attacks

As for Benko gambit, I recommend `1. d4 c5 2. d5 Nf6 3. c4 b5 4. cxb5 a6 5: b6/e3`

For `b6`, the queen would take and white will attempt a queenside attack

For `e3`, you will be the one attacking, however, it should be easy as white's position is quite locked up by the pawns

Now if you're opponent plays dutch, it is defiantly an attacking game. Dutch is normally rare as it does nothing for black development, it only starts an early kingside pawnstorm but weakens their kingside, so you'll just have to defend the kingside or attack with your opponent.

I'll also recommend you to learn the London system which is a highly passive game and normally is a draw. If a draw is fine for you, you would want to look up the London system.

P. S. If you send some of your games, we could find openings that suit your style

---
Tags: opening
---


# Question
Title: Why is closing the center by White generally considered a concession?
Why is closing the center by White generally considered a concession? I mean, pushing e4-e5 when there are Black Pawns on d5 (and e6), or pushing d4-d5 when there are Pawns on e5 (and d6), is often considered "the second best way" to play, and something that White has to do only if necessary. I.e. vs King's Indian is considered generally a stronger opening strategy to keep the d4-e5 tension (by delaying d4-d5) until necessary. Why?

# Answer
> 5 votes
The pawn advance reduces the potential, what is done cannot be undone and Black uses the information to set up accordingly. This is probably the broadest and most general explanation. In the end, however, it may turn out to be a matter of taste or fashion.

# Answer
> 1 votes
Based on my understanding it's not closing the position that is a concession, it's releasing the tension for no reason that is the true concession. Finding meaningful moves in a position while maintaining tension, whether that is not moving pawns in contact that can take each other or pieces in contact, is approaching master level play (I say this being a master myself). The only time you want to release tension is when you get some tangible benefit. The results of releasing tension too soon is usually just slightly worsening your position, but can result in an outright blunder occasionally.

Concerning the Kings Indian you mentioned in the Mar del Plata variation where black plays 7...Nc6, closing the center with 8. d5 is the most "correct" move as you gain a tempo and gain space by releasing the tension. This makes releasing the tension completely worth it. In the Petrosian variation of the Kings Indian by comparison white only gains space by releasing the tension, which while not that bad often leads to equal positions with best play, losing the advantage of the first move. In systems of the Kings Indian where black plays Nbd7, often white is served best by maintaining pawn tension until black plays Re8 or Qe7 to prepare to play exd4 and try to gain piece activity along the e-file, then he can release the tension with d5, gaining space and pointing out black wasted a move to misplace his rook/queen to a file that will never be open.

You could say the philosophical reason to maintain the tension stems from forcing your opponent to develop his pieces and plan his moves in such a way that he has to react to a much larger series of positions and plans from yourself. This helps limit his pieces and keeps them from being placed optimally and efficiently. Whoever released tension first generally is simplifying the game for his opponent and making it easier for him to maximally place his pieces. Hence releasing tension must be justified with some sort of benefit, or because the tension just can't be maintained since the opponent has too much pressure on your position (understanding when this point is reached can be very difficult).

So closing the center itself isn't bad generally, it just depends if it's the right time to release tension or not.

# Answer
> 0 votes
Those pawn advances are not concessions, but rather stylistic choices.

Chess is about having choices.

# Answer
> 0 votes
White has the advantage of the initial move. As such, he will want to preserve as many options as possible (all other things being equal).

"Closing" a position reduces those options (by definition). That's why Black will sometimes play e6 and d5 (French defense) in response to d4, to try to induce White to close the position with e5. Some players feel that the advanced pawn in e5 is sufficient compensation, others do not.

---
Tags: strategy, pawns, center, closed-position
---


title: How do I get better with my strategy?

text:
# Question
Title: How do I get better with my strategy?
I don't know how to beat my grandpa, he's really good and I don't know if he's beatable. He's hardcore when it comes to chess.

# Answer
It seems like you are fairly new to chess. Pick up a beginner's book like Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess or Chess for Dummies. It will be a long time before you beat your grandfather, however. Chess takes an hour to learn but most will never master it.
> 3 votes

# Answer
I'm a chess coach and a chess master, so I'll tell you what I tell my beginner level students.

What worked best for me to improve my middlegame when i was new to chess was solving puzzles in the book 303 tricky tactics by Fred Wilson and Bruce Albertson to get tactically strong, and to read the book The Amateur's Mind by Jeremy Silman to get positionally strong. Rereading either book more than once will only make you better.

If your grandpa is too good you might also need to read Silman's Complete Endgame Course by Jeremy Silman. This will give you a basic understanding of endgame positions that should be enough to play up to the 1700-1800 level in endgames.

As for openings it's best to bring your pieces to the center, and try to get all your pieces out before you move any of them more than once. I'd suggest searching the italian opening and the colle system on youtube, and check out some free videos masters have made on them. they are good openings for beginners and get you a reasonable position to try and play from.

Goodluck beating grandpa!
> 2 votes

# Answer
I can't figure out how to just comment so here's my answer:

I've been studying chess for a couple of months now and I started with *Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess*. It's nothing profound but it'll help you get a basic understanding of mating and how to mate from different positions. From there I read *Pandolfini's Ultimate Guide to Chess*. It wasn't the most interesting book but it offers a lot of insight into the motive and consequences behind various moves. I then moved onto *Logical Chess: Move by Move*, which contains a number of world champion chess games but the author thoroughly explains **every single move**.

Studying these texts has been really helpful for me, but in order to develop the skill you'll read about you need to supplement it with your own playing and application.

Becoming good at chess is no easy feat though. Depending on how good your grandpa really is it may take quite a bit of studying to beat him.
> 1 votes

# Answer
I found the study plan on Chess.com Study Plan very useful to pick up my game. I also found Dan Heisman's book helped me build up my rating.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: learning, beginner
---


# Question
Title: Where to buy my favorite magnetic chess set
From childhood I have this favorite chess set which I use every day. The Black King and Queen no longer have the small white balls on their heads and the board is scratched in many places. I would like to buy a new one but cannot find it in any of the chess stores in Poland where I live. Can anyone point me to a seller of this kind of magnetic chess set anywhere in the world?

EDIT: I have already purchased a set like that thanks to Aric Fowler's answer, which is going to receive a 100 point bounty. Unfortunately, this new set is even more damanged than my old one. I have only managed to replace my damaged queen with a healthy one but I am still looking for another set, so this question is still open.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Is this what you're after?

Chess set

Vintage plastic magnetic chess set in carton box. Made in USSR, Latvia. Material: Plastic, magnet. Circa: 1980s. Has vintage condition. One white figurine has a crack, black king missing the top. Measurement: the box is 250 x 130 mm (9 7/8" x 5 1/8")

One problem is the black king in this set is also missing the white top, in which case you would have one incomplete piece. Also, the board has a black edge instead of white, however hopefully that isn't a problem.

---
Tags: equipment, chess-set
---


# Question
Title: Looking for sound files from a VERY old version of Chessmaster Live
I've been searching (for a long time) for some sound files to a chess program from way, way back (early 90's). There was an online version of Chessmaster called Chessmaster Live. I'm sure it is a long shot, but does anyone have a copy of this program or know where I might find it so that I can get the sound files?

The sound files are basically the sounds that are made as one moved a piece, captured, castled etc.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Let me suggest another way.

You are assuming that the game had sounds in the form of files that are reusable. This may not be the case.
But why not start searching for files yourself with search terms like mp3 chess pieces (or chess pieces sounds or sound effects chess moves, or other variations)? These will lead to e.g.:

The rest is left *as an exercise to the reader* ;-)

I found that chess.com actually has a question about this as well.

Any of these may good enough for you.

# Answer
> 2 votes
On this forum: http://www.chessbanter.com/rec-games-chess-computer-computer/17342-chessmaster-online-sound-effects.html, one member says the same sound effects were used throughout the desktop applications (up through CM9000).

Is it possible a version of Chessmaster--like 6000--would contain those sound effects.

# Answer
> 0 votes
Looks like it might be Chessmaster 5500 according to this article -http://www.gamespot.com/reviews/chessmaster-6000-review/1900-2538403/ . This might be available to buy online or as abandonware, though no guarantees about the legality of this.

---
Tags: online-chess, chessmaster
---


title: Full Footage From 1972 Championship

text:
# Question
Title: Full Footage From 1972 Championship
Since the 1972 chess championship was televised I imagine there must be full footage of all the matches somewhere. I have spent time looking around, but found nothing but short clips of the games. Does anybody know if and where this footage might exist?

# Answer
> 3 votes
The Holy Grail of chess match footage! This question has been asked before on Reddit, on Chess.com and probably on many other websites and no one has come up with an answer.

There are many sources that claim that Chester Fox, an american businessman, had procured the filming rights for the match. According to an unsigned article on mark-weeks.com, "Fox sold the rights to the American television company ABC for 100.000 US$", apparently after the eighth game.

Another source of footage is Shelby Lyman's series of television programmes for PBS (Public Broadcasting Service). See, for example, The man behind the Fischer-Spassky show by Rudy Chelminski (Chessbase.com, 2003). It is not clear to me where he got his images (unless the programmes didn't use any footage that was shot during the games).

An article by Edward Winter about the match also contains a pointer to some coverage in the archives of AP (Associated Press), but these are mostly short news items and some footage from outside the playing hall.

So my best guess is that the footage is in the vaults of ABC and PBS.

---
Tags: history, world-championship
---


# Question
Title: Well-annotated books for average players
I am looking for well-annotated books as a follow up to my reading Chernev's *Logical chess: Move by Move*. I have been playing chess on and off, but not quite seriously.

I am also trying to build my chess library - I currently own Chernev's *Move by Move*, Weeramantry's *Best Lessons of a Chess Coach* and reading through Silman's *The Amateur's Mind*.

Additionally, are there any books that cover the psychological aspects of the game?

I would like to take my game to the next level, so I would appreciate your inputs. Thanks!

# Answer
> 5 votes
I'd direct you to NM Dan Heisman's recommended reading list, specifically his **Recommended Instructive Game Anthologies** section.

# Answer
> 4 votes
The game collections I always recommend to people graduating from Chernev are:

* Sunil Weeramantry, *Best Lessons of a Chess Coach* (you already got this one)
* Steve Giddins, *50 Essential Chess Lessons* and *50 Ways to Win at Chess*
* Neil McDonald, *Chess: The Art of Logical Thinking*, *The Art of Planning in Chess*, and *Chess Success*

All are very well written and annotated, concentrating on the things you should be thinking about as a 1500-level player and not spending paragraphs on the things that would be over your head at this level.

And some anti-recommendations, since I sometimes see these mentioned but I disagree with the choices:

* Dan Heisman, *The World's Most Instructive Amateur Game Book*. Some really good stuff here aimed at beginners, but far too much of it is just glosses on computer evaluations. His *Guide to Chess Improvement* is gold, though.
* John Nunn, *Understanding Chess Move by Move*. Seems like a successor to Chernev but far too advanced. Wait until you hit 2000.

# Answer
> 3 votes
A few years ago, I got a copy of `Max Euwe's` **`Road to Chess Mastery`**. I think it is also released in the name, **`Chess Master Vs Chess Amatuer`**.I have also read Chernev and Silman books you mentioned. But none has been as striking as reading Euwe's book. Let me give a small description of Euwe's book.

First of all, it is a list of annotated games(around 25 games I think). All games are played by Max Euwe against different amatuer players. Don't be fooled by the 'amateur' tag. These players are really good at chess, they have good tactical vision, good at calculating variations. But they struggle to find the correct plan after playing out the opening moves, which they were mostly learning by rote.

Games cover many different openings. The purpose of the moves behind each opening is explained with great detail. I found that I can hold myself against club players by just following the ideas of openings in this book.

I remember there is a chapter on chess psychology. In fact, on the start of each game, there is a 1-2 page description on several aspects of the game like tactics,strategy,positional play etc. They are really inspiring for an improving player.

Where this book excelled my expectations for me was in explaining the middle game principles. This is where the real game of chess is played. It explains how a master formuates a plan based on certain aspects of a position. Since we are following through the complete games rather than start from a given position, it becomes very interesting reading.\**

# Answer
> 0 votes
There are good books where the annotations are done by strong players, but if you want books annotated by the people who played the games there are few.

I like the second Santa Monica Piatigorsky Cup tournament book with greats like Spassky, Larsen, Najdorf and others, and the Church's Fried Chicken Dallas, Texas 1970s tournament with players like Larsen, Petrosian, Browne and other greats.

If you want something in-depth, check out the Kasparov series on his own games.

---
Tags: books, psychology
---