Skip to main content

New answers tagged

2 votes

For a beginner focused on reducing blunders, should I study positional theory or tactics more?

You should train tactics more. Any positional move or longer strategy is useless if the position on the board allows you or your opponent to finish the game in a few moves by a forced continuation, so ...
MikeTrans's user avatar
2 votes
Accepted

When is it worth it to sacrifice a knight or bishop in order to force the opponent to move the king down a rank and lose castling rights?

This question requires concrete calculation. When you play moves like this, you lose material, but you force your opponent's king to move. Which is worth more? Well, forcing your opponent's king to ...
Allure's user avatar
  • 27.7k
2 votes

When is it worth it to sacrifice a knight or bishop in order to force the opponent to move the king down a rank and lose castling rights?

To voluntarily sacrifice a piece you need either a concrete tactical justification (regaining material or checkmating by force) or enough positional compensation. Here you have neither. True, Black ...
Noam D. Elkies's user avatar
4 votes
Accepted

What's the benefit to attacking f7 or f2 during the opening?

Thumbnail of really good video: Attacking f7 by thechesswebsite The point of attacking Black's f7 (and White's f2 respectively) is that only the king starts off defending that square! Every other ...
qwr's user avatar
  • 3,802
0 votes

Is it ever advantageous to make a trade that loses material for the sake a positional advantage?

You must show with what you call 'positional move' that you are winning the game or reaching a draw in a inferior position, and that's also why I don't like the term 'positional move' in particular ...
MikeTrans's user avatar
2 votes
Accepted

Is it ever advantageous to make a trade that loses material for the sake a positional advantage?

Yes! It is. One common example of giving up material for positional reasons is the exchange sacrifice. See Laszlo Szabo vs Tigran Petrosian. On move 14 Petrosian sacrifices the rook for the knight in ...
Awalrod's user avatar
  • 179
0 votes

Is it ever advantageous to make a trade that loses material for the sake a positional advantage?

White to play, I think this is a trade, but it doesn't lose material. However, it might be useful. There's a checkmate in two moves (3 plies). Starting from the position: Nb6+ axb6 2. Qxa4#
nirates biadenroc's user avatar
1 vote
Accepted

How do you systematically analyze an arbitrary chess position?

I am writing some sort of a booklet on middlegames. Accurate position evaluation is clearly the number one factor in finding correct plans and moves. I am advocating the idea that rather than asking ...
Behnam Esmayli's user avatar
-1 votes

How do you systematically analyze an arbitrary chess position?

By way of analogy, suppose you had read an article by an art critic titled "How to Look at a Painting" The critic would use words like "color", "tone", "hue", &...
Philip Roe's user avatar
  • 8,538
3 votes
Accepted

Who was the first player to state that bishops are more valuable than knights?

I think that this opinion has varied over time. In the nineteenth century, players in the gambit style generally preferred Knights. Tarrasch strongly preferred Bishops. I think he once humorously said ...
Philip Roe's user avatar
  • 8,538

Top 50 recent answers are included