|
|
| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
brianinpdx 05-Feb-13, 09:35 |
 A "general" learning question from a 14xx playerLet me give you some background. I'n terms of my play, I've been working center control development, looking at trades with position or pawn stacks in mind, and focusing on learning set openings like Qgambit, Kgambit, Evans, Fried Liver, Grand Prix. (yes I'll admit some of them are aggressive ones-- but I love fireworks play). Add to that mix-- discovered attacks, and forks... and thats about the extent of my tool bag of knowledge. My question is a compound one: How to get better with field Bishops. It seems that in many of my games, I fianchetto to gain scope, and back it up with the second bishop in the same corner, especially when I know they will be staring down the correct side of the board the king will castle into. Once the King castles, it seems like they cant pin pieces because the enemy pawn chains are 2 deep. I find they sit in their corner creating some pressure but are ineffective compared to placing them behind knights and creating discovered attacks or pushing them into enemy territory in a mid game spot they cannot easily be removed from. Is there something I can look for to make them more effective in the fianchetto? My second question and more puzzling to me is that once King castles, it seems like my games go the long long long distance. When the castle happens and we get into the middle game, should I shift my attack onto the rest of the board? Or, should I be focusing on directly attacking the castled king position. I know every game is infinitely different and there is probably no right or wrong answer here but I'd be curious to hear about some general guidance on "when" and why/or why not to formulate my attack. I'd appreciate anyones feedback on this.... It's something that has been on my mind for a long time. -Brian |
||
|
rmannstaedt 05-Feb-13, 10:10 |
But ... let me give it a go. First of all, it seems like you like "active" openings and play. So the first thing I would do, is to grab a book/chess database (book is better, I think, but that's just my personal preference) with annotated games by a GM-level chess player with the kind of playing style you yourself find interesting. As a completely off-beat suggestion: Paul Morphy. (the reason I suggest him: his games are short, full of fireworks, and contains a lot of very nice play involving light officers; things it sounds like you will appreciate). Study those games a bit. Play them. Read the annotations. Try to look at them and understand how the pieces interact. It is not only fun; you actually can't help learning something. Secondly, if you still feel like you need how to handle middle-game positions, there are a number of books on that, say, Euwe, Keres & Kotov, but ... personally, I haven't really studied middle-games at all. I studied end-games instead. You may want to try it. It will give you a wonderful feel for what you can actually achieve, and with relatively few pieces. I think you will find it amazingly useful. Thirdly, one of the books I am currently very fond of: Jeremy Silman's "How to Reassess your Chess". See if you can find it (at the library, for instance) and give it a go. As an alternative to Silman's book, try Nimzowitsch "My System". It is old, but his points are very valid still, especially as regards the power of blockading enemy pawns. |
||
|
tactical_abyss 05-Feb-13, 10:51 |
As to what you are doing with placing your Bishops together in one corner?That dosen't sound good to me,unless I misunderstand your writing."Backing it up in the same corner"?Sounds to me like a loss of tempo with unnecessary Bishop movements when NOT being necessary to move them from opponent attack.Generally,it is not good to keep Bishops paired together.Long attacks on both sides of the board is generally a better positional goal.Plus Bishops paired together can be open to fork attacks,Rook exray attacks and a sudden Queen thrust into your 2nd rank later in the game.So,in a sense,if the game "style"tends to end up as an open game from mid game onwards,then hold on to those Bishops and do not exchange.If the style tends to be closed and you are a better tactician than your opponent,then keep your knights and exchange your Bishops for your opponents Knights! As to your second question about shifting attack and when.... This cannot be answered in one swoop.It depends upon your opponents opening,how he defends,his style of play and more.Sometimes it is better to not attack and do nothing but build up a stronger defense and seek subtle weakness's from your opponent,before shooting both barrels! When you castle,are you castling within the general guidlines of 10 moves or less?This also is key. The Kings Gambit is usually full of fireworks,have you tried this opening? Perhaps more later.... Joe |
||
|
a mantra for Brian for me conjure up Savielly Tartakower, and his annotations of master games, explored in "500 Master Games of Chess," plus its sequel, "100 Master Games of Modern Chess." There you will discover his quotation of Sammy Reshevsky, ====> that to be active means to be violent. <===== (It is a trait Tartakower also finds in Blackburne.) And with his annotations to Rabar-Bajec (Sarajevo, 1951), Tartakower becomes one of the few masters to point out that sometimes it is a better strategy "to base the idea of attack on strong points rather than weak points." Yes, to be active in chess means to be violent. |
||
|
tactical_abyss 06-Feb-13, 09:51 |
brianinpdx... www.youtube.com But where is the weakest square's on the black and white side of the chessboard and why?I'm going to copy and paste a past forum post by me you might find interesting.Check out the links I posted as well.So your bishop placement does not have to involve anykind of fian.to be powerful! "The weakest squares on the chessboard".... I've had a few class C and D players contact me over the last few weeks and ask me about which openings I prefer or how to exploit your opponents weakeness,ect ect.These are big questions that I cannot easily answer.It all depends upon your personal set of skills and how your opponent plays,if he wants to trade down and a host of other factors. So the following info,while many of us know these basics,are still to be learned by the beginners and even C and D rated players: I personally prefer 1.d4 over 1.e4,simply because I have studied the d4 lines much more over the decades and prefer lines that move out of book quickly...like the Trompowski Attack,which of course,is a d4 opening,not an e4 opening. But there is alot of misunderstanding and misconceptions over central board control vs the weakest chess squares on the board.So what are the weakest squares on the chessboard in the opening and even sometimes in the middle game? They are the f7 square and the f2 square!Why?Because these are the only 2 squares that are not defended by a major piece in the opening and sometimes middlegame.Consider these 2 squares your "target"squares to attack directly or indirectly.So if your playing white,then attacking the light squares around the black King or attacking the dark squares around the white King is the key to success.This is where many a "fools mate"is also established. Consider the fact that correct tempo attack on those key f7-f2 squares can actually have a more devastating effect(sometimes)than actually controlling the center of the board with the e4,e4,d4,d5 squares! So,as to openings,in reality 1.e4 has a much BETTER attacking capability on blacks f7 square than 1.d4 openings....and the video in the first link I provided will illustrate this.I would simply suggest that lower rated opponents learn the art of f7 or f2 attack and using 1.e4 as their primary learning tool until they do a good job in mastering these "target"squares before proceeding into 1.d4 openings. I've included 2 links below,to better describe these 2 key squares on the board,including an offshoot g7 square.Diagrams and a few words from the "bughouse champs"with the USCF link and the other link with a nice video should prove valuable to those just learning about these main target squares.Keep in mind again,that keeping pressure in and/OR around the f7 or f2 squares has many times been the turning point in a game for the winning advantage! www.thechesswebsite.com main.uschess.org Integrate and burn this post and the links into your mind.....its important. TA |
||
|
brianinpdx 06-Feb-13, 10:26 |
|
