Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Another dilema: the trade of the fianchetto bishop for the rook


  • 8 months ago · Quote · #21

    waffllemaster

    Oh, but I said "weigh the pieces" didn't I.

    Well if you want to be rigorous, of course just evaluate the position... the pieces are just part of the evaluation.

    But I also have a habit of looking at all my opponent's pieces and putting them on a scale in my mind so to speak.  The more active they are the "heavier" they are.  If I'm falling behind in this overall weight, I tend to avoid contact between the armies and work on improving my position.  If I'm getting well ahead I'll look for sacrifices.  Specifically sacrificing to activate my worst pieces or sacrifice to exchange off their best pieces.  Opening, middlegame, endgame, I think this is always useful.

    IMO strong players obsess over piece activity.  I feel like you almost have to be paranoid about it :)  The downside to this habit is sometimes I miss tactics if I'm feeling underweight (so to speak).  Very often tactics come from active pieces, but sometimes forcing sequences seem to appear from nowhere.

    Anyway, if I'm having trouble deciding on an exchange like the OP mentions, and I've evaluated the positions and thought about it and I'm still unsure, I do this weighing thing sort of like a blunder check.  Using the future position, all your non-pawns go on one end of the scale, and all my non-pawns on the other side.  That's what I meant by the using the term weighing.

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #22

    N3l50n

    Thanks for your help so far.

    There are a few games in the past that I did with sucesseful and terribles outcomes, due to this topic. There are things in chess that are clear cut: "don't do this, because it's bad" but the trade of the king side fianchetto bishop for the rook is very unclear, sometimes is awesome, sometimes it can be your doom. Even in some few master games I saw this happening!

    Cheers.Smile

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #23

    TheGreatOogieBoogie

    In the Leningrad it's usually a terrible idea, the queen will likely recapture on a1 leaving you with terribly weak squares around the king while bishops have open lines wheras the rooks don't. 

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #24

    thunder_tiger123

    TheGreatOogieBoogie wrote:

    In the Leningrad it's usually a terrible idea, the queen will likely recapture on a1 leaving you with terribly weak squares around the king while bishops have open lines wheras the rooks don't. 

    if your queen is on g7 (which it normally isn't)

    then you're ok, if your queen is guarding those squares. but then again, it always depends on the position *sight another generic answer*

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #25

    RybkaShredder

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #26

    oldschoolrunescape

    66joeydonut wrote:
    ponz111 wrote:

    It is almost always correct to trade your fianchetto bishop for a rook on a1.

     There are exceptions as with any chess rule.

    there are very few times when i would trade, all of these are red flags.  

    1. their rook is undeveloped

    2. they have their queen and bishop of same color and you will castle on the side where the bishop was

    also the bishop has amazing scope and is worth more than a rook, maybe even a queen

    maybe even a queen?  LOL

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #27

    Scottrf

    Yeah what nonsense.

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #28

    TheGreatOogieBoogie

    thunder_tiger123 wrote:
    TheGreatOogieBoogie wrote:

    In the Leningrad it's usually a terrible idea, the queen will likely recapture on a1 leaving you with terribly weak squares around the king while bishops have open lines wheras the rooks don't. 

    if your queen is on g7 (which it normally isn't)

    then you're ok, if your queen is guarding those squares. but then again, it always depends on the position *sight another generic answer*

    No I meant white's queen will recapture on a1.  If 20...Bxa1 then 21.Qxa1 for example.  The queen usually goes to e8 in the Leningrad to support an e5 push and white prevents such a push.  Or the push comes anyway, white captures en passant, and some minor pieces take on e6.

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #29

    N3l50n

    @RybkaShredder:

    That's it! That is the kind of position that I had in mind when I started to write here. Thanks for posting it.

     As you said: in optimal moves, this should be a draw. I also engine check this particular position and it is equal (0.00 with stockfish depth 27). 

    But what about playing this positions with our normal human moves? That's the thing that I trully don't know. For instance, sometimes the engine recomended to had played 2 squares the center pawn of the castled king. Sure, it would be a good move, the optimal. But we are humans, and we don't play that good. And in those positions we don't play like that. Right?

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #30

    thunder_tiger123

    yeah, but you just memorize engine moves so you don't need to play that well, just need a good memory.


Back to Top

Post your reply: