Chess Strategies

[hokie4redskins]

Last year's chess tourney was fun, but a disaster. You had twenty people who signed up but refused to play. I lost just one game to Corcaigh, but it took him over an hour.

:cool:

Liberty's queen "strategy" explains a lot. I used to do that in third grade.

:laugh:

[Thinking Skins]

I like to start off with a fork (having the knight cheking the king and at the same time endangering the rook, or endangering both the queen and rook. Its normally a good move the first time I play somebody. But when they expect it, I normally lose the game.

[Corcaigh]

I go a5 (after 3. Nc3)... just leads to more open play which I enjoy.

Do you have one of those upgraded memberships on Chess.com? Is it worth it?

I'm not even sure what all the benefits are, but I like the no ads, and game storage.

[Corcaigh]

I go a5 (after 3. Nc3)... just leads to more open play which I enjoy.

I've played the Scandinavian Defense a little, on chess.com my record is 4 wins and two draws. But I cant say I'm excited by it. I seem to do better in unbalanced positions than the sort of the open positions it leads to.

[Thinking Skins]

Ok, here's a game I just lost. What's the best move for black here? Notice the Queen is putting me in check. I moved the knight to block (which turned out to be a HORRIBLE move) - had the game not been timed, I wouldn't have done that. I probably would've advanced a pawn (e6). Is that the best move though?

[Corcaigh]

Ok, here's a game I just lost. What's the best move for black here? Notice the Queen is putting me in check. I moved the knight to block (which turned out to be a HORRIBLE move) - had the game not been timed, I wouldn't have done that. I probably would've advanced a pawn (e6). Is that the best move though?

Nc6 is the best move in the position; it's not horrible at all. You are in check so you have to deal with that, and e6 doesn't.

The moves would follow the game and then

12. ... e6 instead of b5 would have been best. After Nxc6 the discovered check coming isn't bad. You can play Qg5, c6 and then you are on the attack again, and are material ahead.

As a general comment, before sending your knights up the board like that in an early attack you would be better off completing your development, i.e. getting your dark squared bishop out, castling etc.

[zoony]

"mountain bike defense" :rotflmao:

screw you guys, I'm going home

NERDS!!!

[techboy]

I have no idea what's your level, but here's a few basic principles. If you already know this, maybe someone else will find it useful.

I played some chess in high school (third board on the chess team, placed in a Washington Post tournament one year), although I'm really only good enough to trounce anyone that doesn't really know what they're doing, while losing to people like Corcaigh.

I do have 8 boards in my classroom and teach chess whenever I can get away with it (math classes after testing, basic skills class, etc.), which I generally justify by pointing out that along with critical thinking, the notation system teaches notetaking and graphing.

In any case, that list is very good for beginners, and is almost word for word what I teach under the basic strategies section, though I toss in "knights on the rim are dim" because it's easy to remember and the students think it's corny.

[Corcaigh]

A set of ten basic principals I used with beginner kids I coached was based on a book by Danny King.

Rule 1: Open with a Center Pawn

• Try to control the central squares
  
• Protect your pieces (Knights and Bishops) from other pawns
  
• Let your Bishops out
  
• Just move enough pawns to let your pieces have room; remember that pawns can't move backwards and as a pawn moves forward it weakens the squares around it.
  

Have the kids count the number of squares a knight on the edge can reach versus one in the center to illustrate the importance of central control ... yeah, kids like "a knight on the rim is dim".

Rule 2: Bring out your pieces

• Knights before Bishops. Normally it’s obvious the best square for each knight, but your bishops have more choice.
  
• Try to move each piece (Bishops, Knights, Queen or Rooks) just once at the beginning
  

Rule 3: Castle as quickly as possible

• Make your King safe, and bring your Rooks into play.
  

Rule 4: Look for captures

• Can I take anything?
  
• Can my opponent take anything?
  

Rule 5: Study your opponent’s last move carefully

• Think … why did he do that?
  
• What should I do in response?
  

Rule 6: Look for tactics

• Pins, forks, skewers, discovered attacks - know what they are and look for familiar patterns
  

Rule 7: Go for the king

• Use your pawns to open up the center to clear paths of attack for your pieces
  

Rule 8: Know the basic checkmates

• King and Queen versus King
  
• Two Rooks against a King
  
• King and Rook against a King
  

Rule 9: Make a new Queen

Rule 10: Use your King at the end

• Once most of the pieces have been taken you should use your king to join in the hunt for Pawns, to help get a new Queen and to trap the opponent’s King
  

It's a basic list, but Rule 5 is important at any level - every move your opponent will make will weaken some part of his position, while strengthening others. The question is how you exploit that.

[Elessar78]

Rule 3: Castle as quickly as possible.

So whenever I go up against players ranked higher than me (1400 and up) they seem to wait to castle. Sometimes until we are in the middle game.

But whenever I've studied Master games, like Bobby Fischer, he castles very early. Sometimes within the first 5 moves. Now I know I'd probably be better off emulating Fischer than any other player, but doesn't castling early make you predictable? Since your opponent knows how to focus his/her attack?

[Thinking Skins]

Nc6 is the best move in the position; it's not horrible at all. You are in check so you have to deal with that, and e6 doesn't.

The moves would follow the game and then

12. ... e6 instead of b5 would have been best. After Nxc6 the discovered check coming isn't bad. You can play Qg5, c6 and then you are on the attack again, and are material ahead.

As a general comment, before sending your knights up the board like that in an early attack you would be better off completing your development, i.e. getting your dark squared bishop out, castling etc.

Is Nc6 really the best move? It leaves my bishop open and (maybe I played some other positions incorrectly) I lost the game after that.

I didn't mean e6. I meant c6 instead - advancing the pawn to block the check. Right now my knight is dangling unprotected and the queen can take it. I kinda realize that under this setup, I've got to lose either a knight or a bishop, but the way the game was played I lost them both (and took their rook).

The other thing about "development" and castling, what does it mean to have control of the center tiles? I mean, I can have multiple pieces attacking those squares, and the way this game developed is that I was ready to defend/attack pieces in those squares, but can't this be taken advantage of?

For example, in our first game I took advantage of this "development" strategy by putting them into a situation where I had him in check with the knight and was also attacking the queenside rook with the same knight, and the bishop was defending the knight's square so they wouldn't want to take it with the queen (the only piece left to defend that square).

[Baculus]

So whenever I go up against players ranked higher than me (1400 and up) they seem to wait to castle. Sometimes until we are in the middle game.

But whenever I've studied Master games, like Bobby Fischer, he castles very early. Sometimes within the first 5 moves. Now I know I'd probably be better off emulating Fischer than any other player, but doesn't castling early make you predictable? Since your opponent knows how to focus his/her attack?

Unless there is a specific reason, such as an early exchange of material leading to an early end-game position or an opening which may lead to queen-side castling (just as two examples), it is a good idea to castle early. Otherwise, you may not get chance later as attacks are launched to disrupt your position, pieces are pinned, your middle-pawn structure is attacked with flank pawn breaks, etc.

Fischer played classical pawn openings in which castling early is part of the move order. He usually opened with e4 and favored the Ruy Lopez, and, as black, would play Indians (King's Indian in many instances), the Grunfeld, and Najdorf Sicilian, and generally avoided unclear, wacky openings and variations. If Fischer did delay in castling it was usually due to the opening, such as the Yugoslav attack in the Dragon (where white ultimately launches a king-side attack on black's position).

Here is what I used to do -- acquire books of grandmaster games (you can often find these books in used bookstores) and play them out on a board. I would also have a second reference book of openings so that I could see what variation the GM was using, why they were using it, in addition to helping you understand the move order of the particular opening.

[Baculus]

I played some chess in high school (third board on the chess team, placed in a Washington Post tournament one year), although I'm really only good enough to trounce anyone that doesn't really know what they're doing, while losing to people like Corcaigh.

I do have 8 boards in my classroom and teach chess whenever I can get away with it (math classes after testing, basic skills class, etc.), which I generally justify by pointing out that along with critical thinking, the notation system teaches notetaking and graphing.

In any case, that list is very good for beginners, and is almost word for word what I teach under the basic strategies section, though I toss in "knights on the rim are dim" because it's easy to remember and the students think it's corny.

I figured you were probably a more advanced player, but I had fun typing up that list since I enjoy discussing chess!

I think it's fantastic that you teach chess in the classroom; If it was up to me, chess would be the part of EVERY grade's curriculum and a regular exercise for children. Studies have proven that "chess kids" perform better in school (due to improved critical thinking and study habits, as you mentioned) and exhibit better behavior compared to their non-playing peers.

It's funny how "corny" is sometimes ever so true. :-)

[Baculus]

Last year's chess tourney was fun, but a disaster. You had twenty people who signed up but refused to play. I lost just one game to Corcaigh, but it took him over an hour.

:cool:

Liberty's queen "strategy" explains a lot. I used to do that in third grade.

:laugh:

I wanted to participate, but I admit that, these days, computer gaming has pretty much killed my inspiration to play chess. I used to spend ten hours a day studying the game, but I never even pick up a piece anymore, as far as real live chess is concerned.

It's sad. My goal was to make Master, but my highest rating was high "A" class, and I quit tournament playing for a few silly reasons. Namely, the USCF losing some of my tourney results which would have put me into the 2000+ Expert rating; I would have been rated around 2100 or so; after that, I got pissed and left the organization. Heh.

Thanks USCF for killing my motivation to play organized chess!

[Corcaigh]

So whenever I go up against players ranked higher than me (1400 and up) they seem to wait to castle. Sometimes until we are in the middle game.

But whenever I've studied Master games, like Bobby Fischer, he castles very early. Sometimes within the first 5 moves. Now I know I'd probably be better off emulating Fischer than any other player, but doesn't castling early make you predictable? Since your opponent knows how to focus his/her attack?

It depends on the position.

Where the center is going to be opened up, as is often the case after 1. e4 by White is met by e5 (by Black) and White plays an early d4 you want to get the king out of the way and bring your rooks to bear on the open center files. If the position isn't open you often see castling later in the game.

But in other lines such as the Najdorf Sicilian Poisoned Pawn, in some lines Black plays on both flanks, and the king stays in the center behind solid pawns on e6 and d6.

[Corcaigh]

Is Nc6 really the best move? It leaves my bishop open and (maybe I played some other positions incorrectly) I lost the game after that.

I didn't mean e6. I meant c6 instead - advancing the pawn to block the check. Right now my knight is dangling unprotected and the queen can take it. I kinda realize that under this setup, I've got to lose either a knight or a bishop, but the way the game was played I lost them both (and took their rook).

Nc6 is better than c6. After Qxb4 White is threatening Qxb7 and then the pawn on c6. That line is pretty even. i.e. Qc7 Ke1

The other thing about "development" and castling, what does it mean to have control of the center tiles? I mean, I can have multiple pieces attacking those squares, and the way this game developed is that I was ready to defend/attack pieces in those squares, but can't this be taken advantage of?

If you at least contest, even if you don't control, the center, your pieces will likely have more space, more freedom to move and will be more effective.

Contrasting a knight on rook three versus one on bishop three. The first knight covers only four squares, none of which are in the center of the board. The knight on bishop three covers eight squares, two of which are in the very center.

[Corcaigh]

When I play as black and against less experienced opponents. One of my favorite defenses is

1. E4 -- D5

2. e4xd5-- Qxd5

getting my Queen out and watching white try to capture her, wasting time and not developing his pieces. It's made for some interesting games.

I just finished a game with the Scandinavian Defense:

[White "XXX"]

[black "Corcaigh"]

[Result "0-1"]

[WhiteElo "1952"]

[blackElo "2343"]

[Termination "Corcaigh won by resignation"]

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 c6 6.Ne5 Nbd7 7.Nc4 Qd8 8.Bg5 h6 9.Be3 Nb6 10.Ne5 Bf5 11.g4 Bh7 12.Bg2 e6 13.Qd2 Bb4 14.O-O-O Nbd5 15.Bxd5 Nxd5 16.Kb1 Bxc3 17.bxc3 Qa5 18.Kb2 Nb6 19.Rb1 f6 0-1

[Elessar78]

I just finished a game with the Scandinavian Defense:

[White "XXX"]

[black "Corcaigh"]

[Result "0-1"]

[WhiteElo "1952"]

[blackElo "2343"]

[Termination "Corcaigh won by resignation"]

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 c6 6.Ne5 Nbd7 7.Nc4 Qd8 8.Bg5 h6 9.Be3 Nb6 10.Ne5 Bf5 11.g4 Bh7 12.Bg2 e6 13.Qd2 Bb4 14.O-O-O Nbd5 15.Bxd5 Nxd5 16.Kb1 Bxc3 17.bxc3 Qa5 18.Kb2 Nb6 19.Rb1 f6 0-1

Let me play this out and I'll get back to you... want to see how you played it.

[Corcaigh]

Let me play this out and I'll get back to you... want to see how you played it.

White does attempt to exploit Black's queen position in this line of the Scandinavian. It's been played in a number of top level games.

I diverged with 8. ... h6, but followed with Nb6 which is more common.

He resigned with equal material on the board but he's about to lose one piece and his position is falling apart in a big way.

[matty dread]

I used to be pretty decent at chess but man it's really something you have to keep up on. I'm trying to get back into it, I recently downloaded a chess app for my iPhone but I haven't been able to beat the computer yet. Ugh.

[Elessar78]

Corcaigh, what's your favorite opening (playing as white)? Do you ever play Ruy Lopez? Or is that too basic for you?

Ever since we started this thread, I really got back into studying the game and just wondering if "serious" player still use this opening.

[HailGreen28]

Ok, here's a game I just lost. What's the best move for black here? Notice the Queen is putting me in check. I moved the knight to block (which turned out to be a HORRIBLE move) - had the game not been timed, I wouldn't have done that. I probably would've advanced a pawn (e6). Is that the best move though?

How about this? Move your knight to block check. If he takes your bishop with his king, you fork his king and rook with your other knight.

[Baculus]

Corcaigh, what's your favorite opening (playing as white)? Do you ever play Ruy Lopez? Or is that too basic for you?

Ever since we started this thread, I really got back into studying the game and just wondering if "serious" player still use this opening.

If you are going to play e4, then yes, the Ruy Lopez would still be a played and recommended opening: You can still arrive at some very sharp positions for White.

The opening, though, is not for the faint of heart.

Some people play e4 but end up playing some gambit or irregular opening just to avoid the intricacies of the Ruy Lopez. Personally, I think this a bad idea -- if you are going to play e4, commit to the opening and put some work into its study.

My advice? Study Fischer's games. He has tons of games in this opening.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?pid=19233&playercomp=white&opening=C60-C99&title=Robert%20James%20Fischer%20playing%20the%20Ruy%20Lopez%20as%20White

[Corcaigh]

Corcaigh, what's your favorite opening (playing as white)? Do you ever play Ruy Lopez? Or is that too basic for you?

Ever since we started this thread, I really got back into studying the game and just wondering if "serious" player still use this opening.

I used to play e4 and played the Exchange variation of the Ruy Lopez, when Black allowed it, to avoid a lot of the complex theory. The Exchange Variation was good enough for Bobby Fischer too some times. There's nothing basic about the Ruy Lopez and it's played in many World Championship matches.

Since I started playing again I've mainly used the English opening and where possible play for Botvinnik-style Kings Indian Attacks.

[Baculus]

I used to play e4 and played the Exchange variation of the Ruy Lopez, when Black allowed it, to avoid a lot of the complex theory. The Exchange Variation was good enough for Bobby Fischer too some times. There's nothing basic about the Ruy Lopez and it's played in many World Championship matches.

Since I started playing again I've mainly used the English opening and where possible play for Botvinnik-style Kings Indian Attacks.

That's a good strategy as well -- concentrate on fewer opening lines which require less study and where you know the opening better than your opponent. That is very Fischer-like. That's why he focused on a small amount of openings: Why learn every opening if you can redirect the game to your advantage?

I also was going to suggest an English or Indian attack if a person doesn't want to learn "e4." :-)