Chess Strategies

[Corcaigh]

Here's another game I just finished playing the King's Indian Defense (another Fischer favorite). The attack by tripled isolated pawns is just a sight to behold and makes this one of my favorite games played ever.

1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.d4 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Be2 O-O 6.Nf3 e5 7.O-O Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.b4 Nh5 10.Re1 f5 11.Ng5 Nf6 12.f3 Nh5 13.c5 Nf4 14.Bc4 Kh8 15.Rb1 dxc5 16.bxc5 Nexd5 17.Bxf4 exf4 18.Nb5 Qxg5 19.exd5 Qd8 20.d6 cxd6 21.cxd6 a6 22.Nc7 Ra7 23.Qd5 b5 24.Bb3 Qf6 25.Rbd1 Qc3 26.Re2 Bd7 27.Kh1 g5 28.Re7 Bc6 29.Qe6 g4 30.Rf7 Rd8 31.Qe7 Rg8 32.d7 Rxc7 33.d8=Q Rxe7 34.Rxe7 Rf8 35.Qd3 gxf3 36.Qxc3 Bxc3 37.Rc7 f2 38.Rf1 Re8 39.Rxc6 Re1 40.g3 f3 0-1

Moves 37 ... f2 and 40 ... f3 are just things of rare beauty.

[Elessar78]

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." :-)

Good advice, guys!

I took this advice and did some studying of that "e4" opening and Sicilian defense (c5). Man did I feel like my game improved from just one weekend of focused study on those two lines.

The "c5" opening for black was really fun. It created a bunch of different games that I've never played before and seemed to genuinely confuse my opponents.

[Corcaigh]

Good advice, guys!

I took this advice and did some studying of that "e4" opening and Sicilian defense (c5). Man did I feel like my game improved from just one weekend of focused study on those two lines.

The "c5" opening for black was really fun. It created a bunch of different games that I've never played before and seemed to genuinely confuse my opponents.

Too many people play the same old e4 e5, "get the knights and bishops out" openings over and over, and naturally they get bored with the same type of positions occurring again and again.

The Sicilian is a great opening to play without knowing too much theory as it allows you to immediately create imbalances, contest the center and develop your pieces according to your agenda.

My main defense to e4 is the Sicilian Najdorf (yes, another favorite of Fischer)

[Corcaigh]

Just a bump for this thread with a game I played as Black tonight with the one of my favorite openings, the Modern Benoni (another Fischer favorite). What's nice from my perspective is the quality of the play, given that the time control for the game was one minute with a bonus of two seconds per move, so the whole game took less than two minutes of my time.

[site "Chess.com"]

[Date "2009.07.02"]

[White "XXX"]

[black "Corcaigh"]

[Result "0-1"]

[TimeControl "1 in 0.00069444444444444 days"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.Bd3 Bg7 8.Nge2 O-O 9.O-O a6 10.a4 Re8 11.Qc2 Nbd7 12.f4 Nh5 13.Rb1 Nb6 14.b3 Bg4 15.Bd2 Bxe2 16.Bxe2 Nf6 17.Bd3 Rc8 18.Na2 Qc7 19.Ba5 c4 20.bxc4 Qc5+ 21.Kh1 Qxa5 22.Rb4 Rc7 23.Qb3 Nbd7 24.Nc3 Nc5 25.Qb1 Nxd3 26.Rxb7 Rxb7 27.Qxb7 Qxc3 28.Qxa6 Qd4 0-1

[techboy]

Funny you never post games with [black "Corcaigh"] [Result "1-0"].

You know, they say you learn more from a competetive loss than you do from a win...

[Corcaigh]

Funny you never post games with [black "Corcaigh"] [Result "1-0"].

You know, they say you learn more from a competetive loss than you do from a win...

Pearls before swine.

It's not as if you would understand the subtleties of a game where even the great Corcaigh lost the thread.

[Mad Mike]

Much of chess is not about looking ahead at move trees and evaluating them - that's what computers do and our brains aren't as strong at that. The process of finding the right move in chess involves looking at a position, recognizing patterns, and understanding what each side's strengths and weaknesses are. Having done that you can then formulate a general plan that will be backed up with specific ideas where you would look at a very limited set of moves. The human brain can do a decent job of 'pruning the tree' if it's a very small tree to begin with.

What is meant by a pattern? It's a particular set up of pieces where it's almost automatic what the best way to play is. Such positions require little analysis. Instead, they require knowledge acquired through study or experience so that you can recognize these positions and instantaneously know what the right plan is for such a position. For example, in the position below white has an obvious and easy forced checkmate.

Ng5+ Kh8; Nf7+ Kg8; Nh6+ Kh8; Qg8+ Rxg8; Nf7 checkmate.

Again, knowing that sequence of nine moves didn't require complex analysis, just the recognition of the pattern known as 'smothered mate' and then deciding which way to execute it.

For those who want to improve I'd recommend three things:

(1) get a book such as Logical Chess Move By Move by Irving Chernev. It provides annotated example games which are selected to cover the basic concepts such as how to open a game and what your objectives are, what to do once the two sides have got their pieces out (the middlegame) and how to close out the game and force your advantage (the endgame).

(2) get a book on tactics to understand pins, skewers, forks, discovered attacks etc, or if you prefer, try your hand at a chess tactics server. http://chess.emrald.net/

(3) play games at a pace where you have time to think, and record your moves so that you can analyze them later and see what you did wrong.

I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.

I'm not disagreeing with what you say but I think you missed the most important factor in any wargame including Chess. Initiative.

Initiative is being in position to force your opponent to react to you rather than the other way around. If you want to know what's coming three moves ahead, press your opponent and force him to do what you want him to do.

My problem with Chess it that beyond a certain level, either you can remember hundreds of pre-determined patterns of moves or you cant.

I used to play a lot of chess many years ago but once I hit that memory wall and I knew I would never be much better, I looked for more fluid, less rigid wargames.

Star Fleet Battles anyone?

http://www.starfleetgames.com/starfleetbattles.shtml

Edit: Baculus understands the concept of initiative.

Originally Posted by Baculus

Why learn every opening if you can redirect the game to your advantage?

[Corcaigh]

I'm not disagreeing with what you say but I think you missed the most important factor in any wargame including Chess. Initiative.

I bow before the expertise of the Tailgate.

I'll trade you the initiative in any game in return for material or positional weaknesses I think I can exploit.

And you can't play for the initiative if you don't understand tactics and positional concepts. It makes as much sense as telling a football team of complete beginners not to worry about systems or Xs and Os and just play with "heart".

And any initiative you have is subject to what your opponent does. Some of the systems we've mentioned in this thread are based on one side giving up something for counterplay. In openings such as the Najdorf Sicilian or the Modern Benoni both players make such choices throughout the different lines.

Here are the first moves of a line I play in the Najdorf Sicilian Poisoned Pawn. Who has the initiative?

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.e5 dxe5 11.fxe5 Nfd7 12.Bc4 Bb4 13.Rb3 Qa5 ..

[techboy]

Pearls before swine.

It's not as if you would understand the subtleties of a game where even the great Corcaigh lost the thread.

Possibly true. Just last week, I was reading Genius in Chess by Jonathan Levitt, and I realized why I'll probably never be better than the guy that can destroy anybody that doesn't actually know what he's doing.

I have always been terrible at spatial relations. I can't visualize anything for beans. In Calculus, when working on area under a curve in the three dimensional version, I had to memorize which formula to use in which situation, because I struggled with the visual trick the teacher taught us.

I also struggle, therefore, with visualizing the patterns that the better players must, since we are not computers able to calculate every possible line manually (well, except maybe Jumbo ).

[Mad Mike]

I bow before the expertise of the Tailgate.

I'll trade you the initiative in any game in return for material or positional weaknesses I think I can exploit.

And you can't play for the initiative if you don't understand tactics and positional concepts. It makes as much sense as telling a football team of complete beginners not to worry about systems or Xs and Os and just play with "heart".

And any initiative you have is subject to what your opponent does. Some of the systems we've mentioned in this thread are based on one side giving up something for counterplay. In openings such as the Najdorf Sicilian or the Modern Benoni both players make such choices throughout the different lines.

Here are the first moves of a line I play in the Najdorf Sicilian Poisoned Pawn. Who has the initiative?

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.e5 dxe5 11.fxe5 Nfd7 12.Bc4 Bb4 13.Rb3 Qa5 ..

Sensitive much?

I haven't played chess in years so I'm not going to pull out a chess set and set it up so I can answer your question. But at any given time in any conflict from boxing to chess to war, initiative is key. It's a general observation meant to add to what you were saying. But since you took it there...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initiative_(chess)

Initiative is often described as "the soul of chess."

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/288331/initiative

Morphy ( in chess (game): Morphy and the theory of attack )

...games, pawns and knights played minor roles. Pawns were often sacrificed so that the queen, rooks, and bishops could join the attack as soon as possible. The first priority for Morphy was the initiative, the ability to force matters. Superior development in a position with few centre pawns conferred the initiative on one player. In the games of lesser players the initiative might pass...

Soviet chess theory ( in chess (game): The Soviet school )

The Soviets valued the initiative—the ability to force matters—more than most positional considerations. While the Hypermoderns and Lasker often challenged their opponents to make the first aggressive moves, the Soviets regarded the initiative as vitally important. When defending, they rejected the solid if passive approach of Steinitz and Tarrasch and tried to generate a...

http://www.chessmaniac.com/2008/04/importance-of-initiative-in-chess.php

In chess, there are two basic principles that must be respected:

1.Without blunders, only the attacker can win the game. A game is always won by an attack. As long as your opponent is attacking you are occupied by parrying that attack.

2.Only the player with the initiative can successfully attack! The player that does not have the initiative can often bring forth a sortie, but in order to gin up a successful attack the player must have the initiative.

But hey, what do I know?

[Mad Mike]

Possibly true. Just last week, I was reading Genius in Chess by Jonathan Levitt, and I realized why I'll probably never be better than the guy that can destroy anybody that doesn't actually know what he's doing.

I have always been terrible at spatial relations. I can't visualize anything for beans. In Calculus, when working on area under a curve in the three dimensional version, I had to memorize which formula to use in which situation, because I struggled with the visual trick the teacher taught us.

I also struggle, therefore, with visualizing the patterns that the better players must, since we are not computers able to calculate every possible line manually (well, except maybe Jumbo ).

The mind is a funny thing. I'm the exact opposite. I can visualize almost anything. Formulas and numbers make my brain hurt. Fortunately I can use a sort of fuzzy logic to round things like probabilities out for poker and my margin of error works well to account for luck. :-)

Chess is a combination of the two sides though so we probably have the same amount of disadvantage for different reasons.

[Corcaigh]

Sensitive much?

Not at all - just trying to inform - hence the smilies.

Do I have to post "I beg to differ from the noble gentleman from Daytona Beach" in order not to appear sensitive in your eyes. I was just correcting you.

Most of the folks in this thread don't understand the fundamentals. Initiative is an abstract and an advanced concept to folks who don't understand the basic positional concepts that Baculus described, simple tactics and the basics of just not losing pieces.

The OP can't calculate or visualize simple tactics. Given that how should he go about seizing the initiative? And as shown by several others who have commented in this thread, weak players can't tell the difference between seizing the initiative and premature attack. Given that I think they should learn about proper piece development, and then how to analyze a position, and what then what tactics can support their strategy. Even a player who has the initiative can have it taken from them by a material or positional sacrifice.

:cool:

[Corcaigh]

I also struggle, therefore, with visualizing the patterns that the better players must, since we are not computers able to calculate every possible line manually

Practice, practice, practice gets you to recognize the patterns quickly.

Strong players immerse themselves in this by reviewing old games and nowadays use tools such as the tactics server I linked to in an earlier post.

[zoony]

corcaigh, out of curiosity, what is your rating?

[Mad Mike]

Most of the folks in this thread don't understand the fundamentals. Initiative is an abstract and an advanced concept to folks who don't understand the basic positional concepts that Baculus described, simple tactics and the basics of just not losing pieces.

Really? Elessar78 seemed to grasp the concept right away.

The OP can't calculate or visualize simple tactics. Given that how should he go about seizing the initiative? And as shown by several others who have commented in this thread, weak players can't tell the difference between seizing the initiative and premature attack. Given that I think they should learn about proper piece development, and then how to analyze a position, and what then what tactics can support their strategy. Even a player who has the initiative can have it taken from them by a material or positional sacrifice.

Oh, well if *YOU* think they should only learn piece development then by all means... :hysterical:

Seriously man, who the hell are you to tell people what they are capable of learning? It sounds to me like you think everyone is stupid and you are feeding your ego by talking down to people. Me, I believe you provide important information and concepts to people who want to learn and let them decide how much they can grasp. :doh:

Chess Sacrifice as a Chess Tactic: to seize initiative

http://www.mychessblog.com/chess-sacrifice-as-a-chess-tactics-to-seize-initiative/

Initiative is derived from initiate, which is to originate or start something. In chess, initiative means the ability to take control of the game. You are said to have the initiative when you force the opponent to follow your lead (passive play) rather than initiate something on his own (active play). In Chess Sacrifice as Chess Tactics, we included the use of chess sacrifice as a tool to gain initiative.

Initiative can be gained in several ways like:

making an active move that forces the opponent to react only in a certain way, restricting his choice

creating pressure on opponent’s position that keeps him busy resisting that pressure

playing with tempo i.e., creating a threat to win something

As initiative gives you advantage in play, your aim should be to gain and retain it. If you find that retreating a piece means loss of time, you can retain initiative by exchanging the piece. On the other hand, when you exchange your active piece with a passive piece of your opponent, you lose initiative.

To gain and retain initiative, you must play actively and making a sacrifice is a chess tactics that often constitutes such play. It is said that all sacrifices come about because of some weakness in your opposition’s position. But the presence of a weakness does not create any disadvantage for the opponent unless you are not only able to recognize it but can also make moves to exploit it to your own advantage and a sacrifice often helps you to seize the initiative immediately.

[Corcaigh]

Oh, well if *YOU* think they should only learn piece development then by all means... :hysterical:

Seriously man, who the hell are you to tell people what they are capable of learning? It sounds to me like you think everyone is stupid and you are feeding your ego by talking down to people. Me, I believe you provide important information and concepts to people who want to learn and let them decide how much they can grasp. :doh:

Mike - enough with the pissing match, I'm not interested.

My point is not that people can't or shouldn't learn about initiative, it's that most people will benefit from learning the fundamentals and mechanics such as piece development, tempo, making fewer errors, tactics and basic positional ideas.

Once they have grasped those basics they will do better when they study other aspects of the game.

Without knowledge of the basics first, an attempt to 'seize the initiative' will likely be no more than, to use terminology from war games, a 'n00b rush'.

And personally, I never think of who has the 'initiative' when playing. I'm focused on the strengths and weaknesses of the position and how they can be exploited and defended.

[Corcaigh]

corcaigh, out of curiosity, what is your rating?

I only play online these days, and such ratings are very suspect, but for what it's worth it fluctuates around 2300.

[Smoot Point Really]

I'm very streaky... I only play on RedhotPawn.com... I usually play guys rated between 1400-1600 and that's where I range myself. It seems when I approach 1600, that I go on a losing streak and now I'm sadly around 1400... Not sure how to get more consistent at this point. Maybe the people I play are as streaky as me though.

[Mad Mike]

Mike - enough with the pissing match, I'm not interested.

My point is not that people can't or shouldn't learn about initiative, it's that most people will benefit from learning the fundamentals and mechanics such as piece development, tempo, making fewer errors, tactics and basic positional ideas.

Once they have grasped those basics they will do better when they study other aspects of the game.

Without knowledge of the basics first, an attempt to 'seize the initiative' will likely be no more than, to use terminology from war games, a 'n00b rush'.

And personally, I never think of who has the 'initiative' when playing. I'm focused on the strengths and weaknesses of the position and how they can be exploited and defended.

Hey man, I didn't enter this thread to get into a pissing match. I did it because I love anything involving strategy and tactics, I used to love chess and I was just going to read. There is lots of good information here. But when I saw that the concept most chess masters consider to be the most important in chess missing, I tossed it in to try to add what I could, and you came at me for it and tried to act like I was wrong.

And for the record, this statement is an oxymoron:

any initiative you have is subject to what your opponent does.

By definition, if you have initiative, you are forcing your opponent to react to you - thus controlling what he does.

You say understanding initiative is nothing without material and positional concepts, I say understanding material and positional concepts without understanding initiative is like learning the mechanics of a sailboat without learning how to catch the wind and keep your sails full. WE ARE BOTH RIGHT. If you want to be good, both concepts come into play.

The concept of initiative is there in every game you play. recognizing that concept and learning how to best use it will make any player better, from noob to master. It's there in the fist move at the most basic level. White always starts with an advantage (as small as it may be). For black to win, he must take the initiative from white and keep it.

In chess, there are two basic principles that must be respected:

1.Without blunders, only the attacker can win the game. A game is always won by an attack. As long as your opponent is attacking you are occupied by parrying that attack.

2.Only the player with the initiative can successfully attack! The player that does not have the initiative can often bring forth a sortie, but in order to gin up a successful attack the player must have the initiative.

Anyone who has ever been pressed by an opponent and found themselves unable to mount a counter attack, understands this principle.

The concept is so fundamental to the game that it is in play in every single move. It's not an advanced concept. It's basic. It's the why to the positional/material how, and it is really not hard to learn. Teach it early and use it as a foundation to build on and I believe you will get a better, more creative player.

And with that I will leave this thread.

[zoony]

I only play online these days, and such ratings are very suspect, but for what it's worth it fluctuates around 2300.

WOW- you are one huge dork. :geek:

j/k bro, that is really impressive!

[Baculus]

Good advice, guys!

I took this advice and did some studying of that "e4" opening and Sicilian defense (c5). Man did I feel like my game improved from just one weekend of focused study on those two lines.

The "c5" opening for black was really fun. It created a bunch of different games that I've never played before and seemed to genuinely confuse my opponents.

It's good to hear that the advice has produced results for you. It sounds like you may prefer the hypermodern systems, which avoids early e4-e5/d4-d5 center pawn positions combined with flank and wing attacks.

As you study the Sicilian, also observe how White tends to attack the opening, because you will also know how to pry apart its defense. I tend to prefer Bc4 sort of attacks as White (Fischer-Sozin, Richter-Rauzer, various Dragons, etc.), because it allows sharp play against c5.

You will also want to learn a defense against d4, which is where the study of the various Indian systems will come into play. As Black, against d4 (I rarely open with it as White), I tend to play the King's Indian, plus the Benoni and the Grunfeld: I like those sort of systems where bishops are Fianchettoed on g7 or b7. (Even against e4 I used to play the Pirc, which results in a similiar Indian-style setup.)

Once again, studying Fischer's games are invaluable in learning the King's Indian.

Also, if you like the Sicilian as Black, you may want to try your hand at the English, where White opens with c4.

BTW, I just found this nifty video which explores Fischer's play in the King's Indian. It's pretty cool!

A Wiki primer on the opening:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King%27s_Indian_Defence

[Baculus]

I'm very streaky... I only play on RedhotPawn.com... I usually play guys rated between 1400-1600 and that's where I range myself. It seems when I approach 1600, that I go on a losing streak and now I'm sadly around 1400... Not sure how to get more consistent at this point. Maybe the people I play are as streaky as me though.

Like anything, practice and study. Also, over time you will discover what opening(s) suites your chess personality (your style), which will then allow for more efficient and focused study. Work on your middle game, tactics, and end game: these are all part of your fundamental building blocks.

Chess is much like Mixed Martial Arts -- you have to know when an opening may be transitioning (ex: from the Najdorf to the Scheveningen variation), or when an opening transitions to the middle or end game. A developed awareness will help further guide your actions, such as when to exchange down.

In particular, the study of master games is key in this effort. Continually playing lower rated players without the study of advanced games isn't necessarily going to improve your chess. The use of a chess program will further allow you the opportunity to gauge your ability against stronger competition.

Incidentally, I just found this Youtube channel which has some wonderful videos which examine various chess themes, such as opening and tactical play:

http://www.youtube.com/user/jrobichess

[Baculus]

Just a bump.

[Corcaigh]

I'm playing in a 'Fischer 960' tournament on Chess.com at the moment.

To avoid reliance on opening theory, in each game the starting positions of the pieces are rearranged to one of 960 different possibilities.

[Baculus]

I'm playing in a 'Fischer 960' tournament on Chess.com at the moment.

To avoid reliance on opening theory, in each game the starting positions of the pieces are rearranged to one of 960 different possibilities.

Is this the same as Fischer chess?

I remember reading how one of the Polgar sisters used to spend time playing Fischer in this chess variation. I would have liked to have seen some of those games.