Take the 2-minute tour ×
Chess Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for serious players and enthusiasts of chess. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Can someone explain the x-ray tactical motif? I have looked at this example, but I still don't understand it fully. If you can provide other examples, that would be great too.

share|improve this question
    
Wiki has a pretty substantive article on it. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_(chess) –  Tony Ennis Jan 7 '13 at 23:27
add comment

3 Answers

up vote 6 down vote accepted

Basically, if a defending piece of your opponent has one of your pieces with the same movement "behind" it, then it's not really defending anything, as your piece standing behind also "attacks" what you want to capture through that defending piece of your opponent's.

In the following exampe, the ♞g6 is x-ray-attacked by the ♖b6, through the ♜d6, so once the other rook takes it, it is defended through the black rook by the ♖b6 (and the knight is lost).

[FEN "7k/4p3/1R1r2n1/P7/6R1/8/8/7K w - - 1 1"]

1. Rxg6
share|improve this answer
    
What is the difference between this and a Skewer? –  xaisoft Jan 7 '13 at 16:14
    
You x-ray through your own pieces, whereas you skewer through your opponent's pieces. Good question! –  chubbycantorset Jan 7 '13 at 17:55
    
    
So is this comment from chesstempo correct: Note that this is not the same as a skewer as the relative value of the piece being attacked through is irrelevant. –  xaisoft Jan 7 '13 at 20:33
    
@xaisoft: It is correct in the sense that there are 2 attack mechanisms with can be called differently with these 2 names. It is incorrect in the sense that people often mix the 2 terms to describe a skewer. The distinction between the two, if you make it, it that in a skewer, your opponent has to move the in-between piece not to lose it, thereby letting you attack the other one, whereas in an x-ray attack, the piece in the middle is genuinely irrelevant. –  Nikana Reklawyks Jan 7 '13 at 20:47
add comment

Basically, an x-ray attack is one where, even if one of your long range piece (queen, bishop, rook) is being blocked by another piece, then you should still look at the squares that your blocked piece can attack through the piece that's blocking it. Here's an example. Here, the queen's power is unleashed on the poor g4 pawn after the rook moves after which his majesty is thrown off the board. Always look out for tricks like this, and the one in the link that you posted in the question. An x-ray attack can be used synonymously with discovered attack. But the basic idea is that one of your pieces "sees" through another.

share|improve this answer
    
I don't agree with the example : you have to move your own rook (with check, and even this way your opponent gets to play a move) for it to "work". –  Nikana Reklawyks Jan 7 '13 at 20:13
    
I agree with Nikana, your example sounds more like a discovered attack than an x-ray. –  Andrew Jan 7 '13 at 20:19
add comment

In your example, when R x b7, your Queen on d5 is guarding the rook, even though it doesn't look like it. That's because if Black plays Q (c6) takes b7, your Q (d5) can take it back.

The reason "it doesn't look like it" is because the Black Q on c6 appears to be blocking the way to b7. That is, until the Black Q herself moves to b7. Thus, your Q d5 has "xray" power to b7 through the Black Q on c6.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.