It can be troublesome, certainly - especially when the other guy has a bishop of the same “colour” that can take advantage of the weakened squares around the King. In this instance, had you castled, I was thinking of playing …Bc8-h3 to kick the Rook around and gain time for an attack. However, the move actually played isn’t free of downsides either:
Lazlo Malacandra
e2-e4 e7-e5
Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6
Nb1-c3 Ng8-f6
g2-g3 Bf8-b4
Bf1-d3 d7-d6
a2-a3 Bb4-a5
Qd1-e2 Bc8-g4
This pins the f3 Knight and threatens to win it with Nc6-d4, when the Knight is attacked twice and defended only once. It takes advantage of the fact that after the g-pawn moved to g3, the square f3 wasn’t guarded by pawns. I’ll give you one hint: Playing 8. h2-h3 won’t save you… and I’ll leave it as an exercise for the student to tell me why.
In the game glee cites, it seems to me that both sides stand badly
I see exactly why, and unfortunately I didn’t see it before I made my move. All you need to do is Nc6-d4 and you’ll have forked both my queen and my horse (sorry, couldn’t resist). I can’t defend with Nf3-d4 because my queen will be taken.
I’ve pretty much put myself in a precarious situation. At this point, I’ll just consider my f3 knight lost. Perhaps I can delay the inevitable by pinning your c6 knight…
That actually bails the knight out for now, and just leaves you with a few strategic problems: instead of playing the bishop straight to b5, you’ve taken a move more than necessary by visiting d3 first; you now have a hole at g2 with nothing to fill it; and your f3 knight is stuck for now, and so is the queen, 'cos at present the knight has no other defender and isn’t going to get one in a hurry.
On the other hand the roof isn’t falling in yet, so I’ll just play:
Lazlo Malacandra
e2-e4 e7-e5
Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6
Nb1-c3 Ng8-f6
g2-g3 Bf8-b4
Bf1-d3 d7-d6
a2-a3 Bb4-a5
Qd1-e2 Bc8-g4
Bd3-b5 0-0
That releases the pin and reintroduces the threat to the white knight.
Oy vey. It looks like no matter what I do, I mess up my defensive structure even more. I probably should move my queen out of harm’s way, but right now I feel like I shouldn’t make a non-aggressive move and give you a free turn.
It’s no use trying to guess what my plan is and then circumvent it - the idea is to spot the possibilities inherent in the position on the board. That said, if you have prior knowledge that your opponent handles certain types of position well, it’s a good idea to avoid letting him create such, if you can do it without tying yourself in knots.
The whole J’adoube thing was just my little joke, as it’s meaningless in a postal game. glee has, of course, explained correctly what it means - although I read a chess-humour book once (they do exist, albeit for a necessarily limited market) which proposed the alternative theory that it’s a back-formation from “Shut up”, as in “You’ve touched that piece, you’ve got to move it”.
Anyway, back to our muttons. I can’t preserve the bishop from exchange, but while the knight’s away the pawns will play:
Lazlo Malacandra
e2-e4 e7-e5
Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6
Nb1-c3 Ng8-f6
g2-g3 Bf8-b4
Bf1-d3 d7-d6
a2-a3 Bb4-a5
Qd1-e2 Bc8-g4
Bd3-b5 0-0
Bb5xc6 b7xc6
b2-b4 Ba5-b6
Nc3-a4 d6-d5
Grabbing some space in the centre, threatening to win a pawn and/or open lines against the uncastled King, etc.
I would say that experienced players can see the opponent’s likely plans in a position, and will try to block them.
This is very difficult to do.
I remember watching Grandmaster Morozevitch (rated in the World top 10) playing for my club side. First game, he demolished an International Master with a sharp attack, culminating in a rook sacrifice. Next day, he beat a Grandmaster in an ending without using a single tactic. Genius.
Two anthropologists are living with neighbouring primitive tribes. They decide to play chess, sending each move by runner daily. One day nobody shows up. Next day, the worried anthropologist sees a runner staggering up with a message.
It says … J’adoube!
I may have expressed myself badly. I was trying to get across the idea that you try to see what the opponent can do, rather than second-guess what he means to do.
Yes, but I was thinking of how, say, someone like Nimzovitch would avoid getting into a tactical brawl with Spielmann, but beat him with strategy instead. Of course the better the player the more well-rounded his arsenal and the better at getting into the positions he likes. Spielmann himself said of Alekhine: “I could play any of his combinations, but I can’t get the positions from which the combinations come” - a worthy salute from a great player to a stellar one.
Heh. That’s the edited version. TCCA has two polar scientists, one at each pole, getting messages by dog sled every six months…
S’ok, it’s not a race, and I was out last night UK time, afternoon your time, in any case.
Your move would allow me to win a sound extra pawn by 11. … Bg4xf3; 12. Qe2xf3, Nf6xe4, but I think I’ll keep the bishop on the board for now and see what develops, as I quite like the way this position is going.
Here we go. I would have liked to play 13. … d5xe4, forking your Queen and Knight, but you have a get-out by way of 14. Qe3xd8, Ra1xd8; and though I’ve got an extra pawn and some initiative because you still have to do something about your attacked Knight, I’d rather keep the Queens on and see what more I can get out of this situation. I also thought about 13. … Bb6xf2+; 14. Ke1xf2, Nf6xe4+; but I don’t think I’m getting quite enough attack to justify giving a piece for two pawns. So I’ll just keep it simple and help myself to your e-pawn, incidentally parking my Knight on a really strong square. There’s a nice obvious threat against your f-pawn, for a start.
Lazlo Malacandra
