B

Co-ordination (again)

Left over from the summer, some examples with light notes from a session on Co-ordination
Click on the [...] to see the list of games.


[Event "Lessons from Capablanca (2): attacking"]
[Site "New York"]
[Date "1918.06.17"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Capablanca, JR."]
[Black "Funaroff, Marc"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C66"]
[PlyCount "45"]

1. e4 1... e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 3... d6 {The Scotch opening aims for open play,

Two weaknesses

The Principle of two weaknesses - one weakness or two?

One sick pawn can lose you the game, but you need two points of attack to win. How does this add up?

  Both are true. In order to win against one weakness you need to attack the weak point, gain an advantage in space or mobility through this, and use your mobility to force through on a second front. Then one or other point will crack because your opponent's pieces won't be able to cover both attacks. Chekhover-Rudakowsky is a nice example of this.

Bishop Endgames

Bishop endings are generally easier to win than rook endings because there is no way for the defending side to exclude the attacking King, and neither is there a perpetual check. But perhaps because they are less common, they may be neglected in a player's study.

General Advice for bishop endings

(1) The easiest endings to draw are those with opposite coloured bishops.

  (2) Do not place pawns on the colour of your bishop.

The Initiative [PGN4Web]

Currently I can get formatting or PGN tags correctly shown, but not both

Some things in chess are very concrete and visible -- checkmate, or a knight fork, perhaps, or as we get better, we can also see superior development or pawn weaknesses. There are more abstract features of a chess game which are less easy to see, at least at a glance, and you can appreciate best over a whole game or a part of a game. Annotators often talk about a player's 'feel for the initiative', which is at least a warning that this is not going to be an easy session.

The Initiative

20th_July_2010: Initiative

Half a story

Some things in chess are very concrete and visible -- checkmate, or a knight fork, perhaps, or as we get better, we can also see superior development or pawn weaknesses.  There are more abstract features of a chess game which are less easy to see, at least at a glance, and you can appreciate best over a whole game or a part of a game.  Annotators often talk about a player's 'feel for the initiative', which is

Weak squares

Chris Bellers, Exeter Chess Club

This session comes out of a remark by ex-World Champion Tigran Petrosian, to be found in an excellent book, 'Opening Preparation' by Mark Dvoretsky and Artur Yusupov. In the middle of annotations to a game by Henrique Mecking in 1972 the authors quote Petrosian:
"Mecking does not understand the significance of weak and strong squares. I have played him three times. In 1969 he lost to me owing to the weakness of his light squares. A year later

The Queen's-side attack

The King's-side attack is so exciting and pleasurable that it is sometime hard to remember that games can be won on the other side of the board. I can remember some youthful indignation when playing against the French Defence, when my ambitions on the King's-side came to nothing, while my opponent's pussyfooting manoeuvres snuck in for a touchdown on the neglected Queen's-side.

  What is there to aim for in a queen-side attack? The aim is not mate, but to win or weaken the opponent's pawns on that side. Queen's-side attacks are more modest but more safe than

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - B