Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

A position from Pachman's book


  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1

    phmilet

    I've been reading Pachman's classic "Modern Chess Strategy", and stumbled upon this position (diagram 26 @ page 25):

     Pachman says that the black bishop is superior to the white knight, since we have an open position and mobile pawns on both wings. White has, though, all the other advantages - and extra tempo and a nicely placed knight.

    I've tried to work this position out - both with my teacher and with my computer, but it looks like it's a draw. Can anyone find a win? (or at least a winning idea?) Thanks.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #2

    Nytik

    Is it definitely white to move? If so, I agree that this is almost certainly a draw (unless it's one of those irritating studies! Wink). Perhaps it was a printing error and it's actually black to move... in which case, something like 1... a5 would probably be a good start.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #3

    phmilet

    It's white to move. I think Pachman meant to say "well even though white has everything going for him in the short run, the knight is still inferior to the bishop in this position". He makes his point, since white appears to have no winning chances at any point; but also appears to draw without much trouble.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #4

    richie_and_oprah

    Pachman states the the Black player managed to win from the diagramed position. 

    He does not claim a forced win.

    What he does state is:

    " ...the bishop is superior. It needs only an additional small advantage, such as a Mobile King, to disturb the balance sufficiently for the win."

     

    This is a great book, but you really need to study it.  It is nuanced and not always direct, but it is all there.  It has dense information in the notes that needs to be unpacked and really studied.  Posting this diagram and having a good discussion is good example as to how to go about unpacking the and understanding the subtleties of chess.


Back to Top

Post your reply: