Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

A Knight For Two Pawns


  • 10 months ago · Quote · #1

    FishGY

    A knight must be worth more than two pawns (in general) or the relative worth of the knight would be less than or equal to 2. But how do you carry on with a knight for two pawns. I have faced the opening below twice and won both times because of blunders in the middlegame.

    I know that 2 pawns in the endgame can be a handful for the knight so I doubt trading everything off is good. Is it best to try and trade the knight into a bishop so you have a bishop for two pawns instead? Please can someone (prefrably someone with a bit of experience and a decent rating) please give me a general idea to follow when having this material advantage.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #2

    chessmicky

    This line, which is called the Cochrane Gambit is probably not completely correct, but it makes for a fun game--at least for White. Since Topalov was willing to try it against Kramnik is a real tournament game, it can't be totally stupid. 

    As far as your question is concerned, White's compensation in this line depends more on his ability to build a powerful center than on any quick attack. In theory, any piece exchange is good for Black--the side with less space--but I wouldn't worry too much about exactly which minor piece you'll want in the endgame.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #3

    builderboss126

    yeah one thing I always wondered: if someone will give up a pawn in the opening why not give up minor piece for two pawns in the opening?

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #4

    Yaroslavl

    You are asking for answers about the 5 visualization pattern memory banks that you must acquire by practice so they they are automatic firing sequences in your brain. It would take you 3 years to acquire these 5 and be modestly proficient with them.

    From the opening, the name of which I will not use here given your rating, -- which I assume is the exchange in question -- stage of the game from your example, the best perspective is to concentrate on the pawns and pieces that remain on the board. With an exchange of 2 pawns for anN the the resulting pawn structure for the side that has gained a N with a minority on at least one of the flanks, Kside or Qside.

    In your specific example the Black position is saddled with a minority of 2 Black pawns vs. 3 White pawns. And, a minority of 4 Black pawns vs. 5 White pawns on Qside. From this we can deduce that White will formulate a plan of a flank attack that will produce at least one passed pawn either on the Kside or the Qside. White will try to blockade the center so that his flank attack cannot be counterattacked in the canter by Black, which would be particularly effective because Black has an extra N and 2 side-by-side half-open files to strengthen the counterattack on the f-file and e-file. White's half-free head pawn at e4 is restrained by a Black R at e8 and other pieces targeting the e5, e6, and e7 squares fortified by the R at e8. White's half-free head pawn at f2 would be restrained by a Black R at f8 and other Black pieces targeting f5, f6, and f7.fortified by the R at f8. This strategy is executed while simultaneous using some or all of the same Black pieces to gain control of the center (d4,d5'e4'e5). Notice that Black's pawn at d6 is already restraining White' half-free head pawn at e4 and at the same time using its power to control the ( central square) d5. Notice also that after 4...KxN Black must take some effort to secure the Black King from rapid piece development sometimes combined with check to the Black King for White to get ahead in piece development to compensate for being down a N. Black will have to spend several moves (tempii) in order to castle the hard way. As always White's flank attack with pieces and/or pawns on th Kside is fought against with a counterattack in the center. Notice also that White enjoys a central pawn 2vs 1 pawn majority (white pawns at d2 and e4) vs. ( Black's pawn at d6) this disadvantage for Black is fully compensated for by Black's half-open e-file.

    As you can see of the 6 characteristic pawn formations, the preceding opening play has resulted in the characteristic pawn formation known as the Half-open/Jump formation. Usually the best way to play this pawn formation has been described above.

    There is more concerning middle game plan(s) of attack against White's position and transposing into a winning endgame position.

    If you would like to know more please let me know.

    A final word of caution: Do not allow White to block the center as it will accentuate the likelihood tha White's chosen flank attack will succeed without Black being able to counter attack in the center.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #5

    csalami10

    This opening is just a crap.
    How do you play against it? You are up a piece, you only have to attack and you win. Sometimes such sacrifices are correct, but not when you have no pieces in the game. From that position it is 4 moves to castle for black, white has no attacking chances. And of course trades are better for black.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #6

    FishGY

    csalami10 this opening is not that bad. By stockfish analysis the Cochrane Gambit's defining move (Nxf7) is an innacuracy. So in that sense it is like the King's Gambit. However the Cochrane Gambit can't be declined and you're not really a piece up. Most gambits leave the opponent a pawn up which is theoretically one point and the Cochrane Gambit also leaves you one point up. And Yaroslavl I know the opening because I alway play the Petrov Defense in response to 1. e4 and 2. Nf3. But you're answer is detailed and I can give Rf8 a go. Thanks.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #7

    Aksyonov

    csalami10 wrote:

    This opening is just a crap.
    How do you play against it? You are up a piece, you only have to attack and you win. Sometimes such sacrifices are correct, but not when you have no pieces in the game. From that position it is 4 moves to castle for black, white has no attacking chances. And of course trades are better for black.

    Almost nothing about this post is correct.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #8

    Yaroslavl

    Aksyonov wrote:

    csalami10 wrote:

    This opening is just a crap.How do you play against it? You are up a piece, you only have to attack and you win. Sometimes such sacrifices are correct, but not when you have no pieces in the game. From that position it is 4 moves to castle for black, white has no attacking chances. And of course trades are better for black.

    Almost nothing about this post is correct.

    ______________________

    I would agree with you, if you were right!

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #9

    builderboss126

    FishGY wrote:

    csalami10 this opening is not that bad. By stockfish analysis the Cochrane Gambit's defining move (Nxf7) is an innacuracy. So in that sense it is like the King's Gambit. However the Cochrane Gambit can't be declined and you're not really a piece up. Most gambits leave the opponent a pawn up which is theoretically one point and the Cochrane Gambit also leaves you one point up. And Yaroslavl I know the opening because I alway play the Petrov Defense in response to 1. e4 and 2. Nf3. But you're answer is detailed and I can give Rf8 a go. Thanks.

    technically, the sicilian for black is also an inaccuracy so I can't be that bad.

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #10

    Kockknockov

    black cannot castle anyway, as KxN would surely be black's 4th move.... Looks like an intersting opening. I have looked at other openings where minor pieces have been sacrificed......


Back to Top

Post your reply: