Thanks Chris, I really appreciate the instruction and I’ll remember it.
Evan
From: Chris Ross
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2018 2:56 PM
To: usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [usbca_chess] Re: A couple of Chess facts!
Evan et al,
You can’t get paranoid about the knight-4 square (b4, g4, g5, b5). You need to
give every single square on the board due and equal consideration.
And you can’t concern yourself about a knight landing on that square, just
because it is near to your king. This can be equally the same for a
long-ranging bishop from afar. Aesthetically, it may not appear to be as
dangerous, but usually, it has more danger than a close-in knight.
If you have a defending knight of your own, say on the bishop-3 square (c3, f3,
f6, c6) then, this is actually defending the pawn on rook-2 (a2, h2, h7, a7),
and with the king too, this should be a sufficient enough defence. Indeed, the
attacking knight may look menacing, but is actually not doing very much at all.
You do need to be aware of sacrifices on the defending knight on bishop-3, but
with due diligence, this is not an issue.
Naturally, every single position needs to be assessed for its individual unique
characteristics. In some positions, the attacking knight on knight-5 may be
good, poor or just equal.
Essentially though, it comes down to your opening structure. What setup are you
attempting and what are your objectives. Where do you want to dominate and
which areas do you want to concentrate your forces. Balance those
considerations against to a knight/attacking force around the area of the board
(king/queen-side) and you can either prevent the intruding piece or totally
ignore it. Again, this is dependent on your endeavours and what your opponent’s
structure’s aims.
As an example, an opponent can push a pawn down your throat and even get it
down onto the 7th rank. As long as your positional play is good, your pieces
control certain squares for your structure and importantly, the queen-square,
the attacking menacing pawn may look impressive, but in reality, is only a
distraction for your opponent and a sheer waste of time and energy. I’ll try
and find my annotated game where I described such a game.
Cheers,
Chris
From: usbca_chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:usbca_chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Evan Reese
Sent: 02 September 2018 17:41
To: usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [usbca_chess] Re: A couple of Chess facts!
I really want to thank David, Chris, and Tyson for giving me a lot of food for
thought on the pawn to f3 issue.
But some of Tyson’s remarks below raise another question. He writes in part:
“Generally speaking the ideal castled position consists of King on Knight one
(b1, g1, b8, g8), the three Pawns directly in front of the King unmoved, and a
Knight on Bishop three (f3, c3, f6, c6). All these, of course, depend on
circumstances.”
My concern is with the g4-g5, b4-b5 squares. After Castling, it makes me uneasy
to have that square undefended, which pawn to h3-h6 a3-a6 fixes. I do not like
the thought of leaving that square open to my opponent’s Knight. It’s just too
close. If my Knight is on f3-f6, c3-c6, how do I defend that square? Is my
concern unfounded? If not, any advice would be welcome.
Thanks very much.
Evan
From: mordue andrew (Redacted sender "tyson.mordue" for DMARC)
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2018 8:29 AM
To: usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [usbca_chess] Re: A couple of Chess facts!
Hello everyone.
Apologies for being late to the party on this one.
The move f2-f3 does appear in some opening lines, particularly the Samisch
varaition of the King's Indian Defence (1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 Bg7 4 e4 d6 5
f3), the Grunfeld Defence (1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 d5 4 cxd5 Nxd5 5 e4 Nxc3 6
dxc3 Bg7 7 Bc4 c5 8 Ne2 0-0 9 Be3 Nc6 10 0-0 Bg4 11 f3), the Pirc/ Modern (1 e4
d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 f3) and also the French Defence (1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3
Nf6 4 f3.
If the sequence is 1 d4 d5 2 f3 then it suggests that White is going to play
the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit which is usually reached by the more direct 1 d4 d5
2 e4 dxe4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 exf3 5 Nxf3. This is playable but it is virtually
non-existent in Grandmaster praxis. My own praxis has one game given below. I
thought that I had a serious game where my 2200-rated opponent opened with 1 f3
but I seem to have been mistaken.
With White having played early moves witrh both the d and f Pawns then there is
the potential for the e3 square to become weak, but it is only potential. If
White chooses the Stonewall attack which includes both d2-d4 and f2-f4 then I
would opine that the e4 square is a definite weakness as it nearer to Black's
side of the board - 1 d4 Nf6 2 f4 Ne4 makes the point in direct fashion!
However, e3 is deeper into White's position and hence easier for him to defend.
Regardless, the exploitation of any weak square depends on the avaliibility of
attackers and defenders for occupation or simply control of said square.
Back to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, even if it wasn't mentioned by name in
previous posts. One point that I have to disagree with is the following made by
David: "With the Queenside already opened up from move 1, Queenside castling
will eventually prove to be a liability if played." This is not correct. 1 d4
is a central Pawn move. It does not weaken the Queenside and Queenside castling
is a regular feature of the Blackmar-Deimar.
By the same token after 1 e4 e5 2 f4 - the King's Gambit - White regularly
castless KIngside but it is not clear whether one could describe the KIngside
as weakened. However, if you play moves such as Pawn to Rook Three (h2-h3,
a2-a3, h7-h6, a7-a6) or Pawn to Knight Three (g2-g3, b2-b3, g7-g6, b7-b6)
without good reason then these may be regarded as weaknesses. Generally
speaking the ideal castled position consists of King on Knight one (b1, g1, b8,
g8), the three Pawns directly in front of the King unmoved, and a Knight on
Bishop three (f3, c3, f6, c6). All these, of course, depend on circumstances.
Fianchettoes, involving moving the Knight's Pawn forward one square, are
acceptable with the Bishop placed on Knight two.
I give the game below so that you can see what a Blackmar-Diemer gambit looks
like. At the time I wasn't playing the King's Indian Defence, indeed it was my
first full season of league chess, so i chose 2...d5 to stop White playing 3 e4
with a possible Pirc Defence after 2...d6 and 3 ...g6. However, my opponent
played 3 e4 anyway! I'm not annotating this game although anyone else is
welcome to. I'll merely point out that White's attack never really takes off
and the weak e5 Pawn needs constant attention. Swapping off so many pieces
didn't do White any favours either.
Salmon P v Mordue AT,
Bristol League Division 1
19/10/78
1. d4 Nf6
2. Nc3 d5
3. e4 Nxe4
4 Nxe4 dxe4
5. Bc4 Bf5
6. f3 exf3
7. Nxf3 e6
8. 0-0 Be7
9. Ne5 0-0
10. c3 Nd7
11. Qf3 Nxe5
12. dxe5 c6
13. Be3 Qc7
14. Qg3 Kh8
15. Rad1 Rad8
16. Kh1 Rxd1
17. Rxd1 Rf8
18 Rf1 Bf8
19. Qf4 Bd3
20. Bxd3 Rxd3
21. Bd4 c5
22. Bg1 Kg8
23. h3 b6
24. a3 Qb7
25. Kh2 Qd7
26. Be3 f5
27. g4 g6
28. gxf5 gxf5
29. Rg1+ Bg7
30. Qg3 Kh8
31 Qg2 Bxe5+
32 Kh1 Qd5
33. Qxd5 Rxd5
0-1
Regards,
Tyson,
On 31 August 2018 at 04:11 David Rosenkoetter <davidrosenkoetter260@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Evan and all,
What Chris points out is excellent advice. Contrary to what some will
say, there are good and bad opening systems, especially among the more
obscure ones. The trouble for us club level players to discern is what
is an early bad system or line and what's not.
Part of what makes the e3 square weak in this system beginning with
1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 is that, in part, the amount of pieces necessary to be
tied up defending it. Only the queen's bishop can defend it after
whites second move. Notice that either black is going to respond
2...e6, 2...g6, or occasionally 2...d6 which lead into very strong and
orthodox systems that, by themselves maximize the power of black's
bishop pair. When white has a liability from the get go, squares such
as e3 become weak and prone to assault.
Some tactics from black may include the Q sliding down to h4 for the
simple reason of pulling apart white's Kside supports. With the Qside
already opened up from move 1, Qside castling will eventually prove to
be a liability if played.
Much of the time when I've seen 2.f3 at the club level, I've run
something akin to the French or the Bogo or Old Indian against it with
good success.
The advantage of playing such openings is that they, along with the
King's Indian leave pawn breaks and attacks against white's arsenal
till every piece is pretty much developed and in them no one piece has
to move more than once or twice to get the opening job done.
Further thoughts from Chris, Jim, Tyson, Paul, Jeff et al correcting
my analysis would be helpful since you guys are a heck of a lot higher
rated and experienced than the average club level.
BTW: It's really helpful studying games from the IBCA tournaments or
the New in Chess sections in Chess Magazine to see the use and
analysis of various opening theory.
David
On 8/30/18, Evan Reese <mentat1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I thought I had posted this earlier, but perhaps it didn't go through.
I think I understand most of the below, the f3 square being taken away from
the Knight, and the d4 pawn being unsupported. But I do not follow how the
e3 square is weak. The f2 pawn is no longer covering it, but the Bishop is
still on c1.
Any help appreciated.
Evan
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Ross
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2018 6:58 PM
To: usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [usbca_chess] Re: A couple of Chess facts!
David,
Understanding basic positional principals will often guide you to beat such
stupid systems as 2. F3.
1.. D4 Nf6 2. F3?!
Leaves the e3, f2 and other king-side dark-squares weak. The d4-pawn is not
supported. The f3-square is taken away from the king's white knight.
So, both 2... d5 controlling the e4-square, preventing e2-e4 and more
importantly,
2... c5 attacking d4 and striking at the dark-squares is simply equalising
for black.
2... c5 3. Dxc5 e6 and black's already on the road to controlling the g1-a7
diagonal, where f3 is just a stupid move.
2... c5 3. D5
and black can consider 3... b5 and have an accelerated Benko or enter into a
Bennoni where f3 is not helpful at all.
One need not learn such theory to such stupid variations. Understand the
principals and it will turn out just fine for you, if not equalisation, but
maybe obtaining an advantage.
Cheers,
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: usbca_chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:usbca_chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Rosenkoetter
Sent: 28 August 2018 13:47
To: usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [usbca_chess] Re: A couple of Chess facts!
Tyson et al,
You're so right! If you go to www.chessgames.com, there's a great opening
explorer.
.
So when those of us who are not-so-masterly in our experience see the
line: 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3, it's no time for us to think our opponent's algebraic
notation is off. It's the pale-face attack and, if you're not ready for it,
that puppy can be a tough system to navigate.
There are lots of good subvariations with which to respond to it, though.
David
On 8/28/18, mordue andrew <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
All,
This is why it is important to learn your openings in case you meet a
Chinese opponent!
Tyson
On 28 August 2018 at 00:29 Alan Dicey <adicey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
A few Chess facts
There are 318,979,564,000 different ways of playing the first four
moves by each player in a game of chess.
There are 169,518,829,100,544,000,000,000,000,000 different ways of
playing the first ten moves by each player in a game of chess.
·
o
a.. -
There are over 200 million inhabitants of China that are keen chess
players.
a.. -
The word "Checkmate" comes from the Persian phrase "Shah Mat", which
means
"the king is dead".
a.. -
With best regards
God Bless
Alan
Plantation, Sunny South Florida
