Chess Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for serious players and enthusiasts of chess. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
I'm not sure as to what constitutes as a logical move. Sometimes I hear that chess is a discussion using statements, arguments, questions and answers.
Can someone explain to me what a logical move would be given this context? A nice, practical example would also be of great help to me.
A move which is obviously not bad to play. It's a fuzzy word to describe and evaluate a move, so it's hard to explain (it's strongly opinion based). Maybe we can put a logical move in the middle of this list:
!! an excellent move
! a particularly good—and usually surprising—move
!? an interesting move that may not be best
>>> Logical move is here and contains above <<<
?! a dubious move – one which may turn out to be bad
? a bad move
?? a blunder
Although, ideally speaking, the logical move is the best move, but It may not the case in your question.
Consider this position between Anand.V vs. Carlsen.M - the World Championship match. For an average rated player there're many logical moves such as 1.R4c3, 1.Rd1 and even 1.Kg2. By playing those moves his coach will not criticize him and he will say OK you made a logical move. But..
r3b3/1kp5/1pn1P1p1/pN6/2R3Pr/1P6/5N2/2R3K1 w - - 1 35
In the world championship between two giants, the only logical move is 1.Ne4! which is played also. (Even my chess engine find it hard)
A hint from Karpov, exact calculation in a game is much preferred rather than general guidelines. Guidelines do not find the best or logical move, they will be used to find logical candidate moves and then a exact move calculation will find the best move from the list. See the example again, a general guideline says try to protect your pieces but a comprehensive calculation says another thing. Ne4!. Which one is logical for GMs ?!
I actually disagree with the accepted answer.
To say that a move is logical says nothing at all about whether it is good or bad. If a move is logical, it only means that it makes a lot of sense from a chess perspective. A logical move is the "obvious" move to make in the position.
To elaborate - the move might be logical because it fulfills a strategic purpose or is the pawn break that makes the most sense. Determining whether or not a move is logical involves no calculation.
As an incredibly contrived example:
In this position, the logical move is 1. f4 because it's the only pawn break for white that makes sense. However, this move happens to lose the queen because the pawn is pinned.
[FEN "r4rk1/2n2ppp/3p4/q1pPp2b/1pP1P3/pP1N1PP1/P5BP/3QRRK1 w - - 0 0"]
That's a vastly oversimplified example, but hopefully it illustrates the general idea: the logical move requires no calculation and depends only on general principles.
f4 in the example. It's bad and shouldn't be played, but there's a logic to it.
I believe I have a precise definition: a logical move is the one that comply with the principles of classic chess strategy.
In the context of "chess being a discussion", the move would be a reply to another one, both respecting the main principles. The "logic" is the whole set of principles. The arguments, statements, questions an answers derive from the analysis of whether the move respected some principles or not, and whether it would be disrespecting a principle to create advantages in the future.
Suppose my opponent makes a move that respects the principle of "control the center", and I respond with a move that sacrifices a piece "to create a weakness" (if this weakness was indeed created or not, we don't know yet). My opponent's move would be considered "logical", and my move could be considered a blunder or a "surprising" move, depending on how the game would progress from that. In this example, my move was not "logical" from the perspective of the principles of classic chess.
