8485 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Is it better to get as many of your pieces established as you can, and then attack? or get some established and then start an attack before your opponent does? (Seems when I try to get established, my opponent starts an attack early, leaving me behind in establishment and position.)
I understand what you mean, but in chess we usually talk about "developing" our pieces, not "establishing" them. The language you used is perfectly sensible, but it's not standard chess usage, so you might not be clearly understood.
Your question is quite reasonable, but there is no simple answer: It's a kind of balancing act between being aggressive but also making sure you get all your pieces into the game, but in the opening, unless you can see a clear advantage in attacking, it's always smart to get all your pieces out and active.
But generalizations don't help that much: why don't you post a few games where you ran into trouble, and we can take a look.
Developing - i knew i wasn't using the right word, thanks Paul.
Okay, if i can just figure out how to post a game. . .
Chess is siege warfare in the form of a game. Humans have employed one form or another of siege warfare methodoly in wars throughout history. While there are many forms of siege warfare, there are 3 basic warfare strategies/tactics that are utilized in all forms of siege warfare. Those 3 are: restrain, blockade, and execute the enemy.
There are 3 publications written by Aaron Nimzowitsch. They are "Die Blockade", "Chess Praxis", and "My System." In these 3 publications GM Nimzowitsch illuminates for the reader the methodology of restrain, blockade and execute along with several other related principles, concepts and ideas.
The other book that is a must read for the question you have posed is "Pawn Power In Chess", by Hans Kmoch.
The overarching principle expounded in all of the above publications is:
Winning chess is the strategically/tactically correct advance of the pawn mass.
There are 2 theories of chess:
Classical Theory: Control the center by occupying it with pawns and pieces.
Hypermodern Theory: Control the center with the power of your pawns and pieces. With this method you do not create targets in the center for your oppnent to attack.
All of these concepts, ideas, principles, and theories are illustated in detail in the publications mentioned above.
Good Luck/Hard Study becoming a 'professional gunslinger' (a very strong player.)
Thanks, Transpo. . . sound similar to a book i just bought and have started to read, called Samurai Chess.
So control of the 4 center squares means attacking those 4 squares right? Not actually being ON them?
Develop first, then attack. That way you can involve the majority of your pieces in the attack
Okay, i'll be more specific. Sorry for the noob question, but i'm learning.
When are you well developed? Say your 2 knights, 1 bishop is out, maybe 2 or 3 pawns out, you've castled, but queen still hasn't moved, nor the other castle. Is that well enough developed?
This question has bothered me too. I always try to develop all my pieces before anything else, simply because players much better than me advise it, but by spending time bringing your pieces into the attack, aren't you also allowing your opponent to bring more pieces to their defense?
As Paulgottlieb said in post #2, it's difficult to generalise; and of course your ideal piece positioning cannot be considered independently of your opponents.
You're "well enough" developed if the pieces that you've developed already can achieve something if they act right now - win material or induce crippling positional weaknesses, such as trapping the king in the middle, or pieces on the rim or backrank. If opportunities arise that might go away if you develop one more piece, it's better to act on them.
However - we're talking about actual opportunities. If you don't have anything well and truly better to do, you aren't well enough developed unless you're fully developed. Even if you are fully developed, unless there are concrete strategical or tactical opportunities to exploit, you'll be constantly attempting to improve the position of your pieces even further.
And sometimes you do have a strong attack, but it requires preparation by additional development.
Knights are best developed to f3/f6 and c3/c6, where they control two central squares with just one move. Bishops are best developed where they can influence the center, directly or indirectly. It's a bad idea to move a bishop to e3, d3, e6, d6 if the center pawn in question hasn't moved yet.
Queens are best developed later, when the opposing pieces have developed or it's become clear that they can't gain tempi for their own development on the queen.
Rooks are usually developed last because they are easiest to develop into open files, and it may take some time until one appears.
By the way, "having pawns out" isn't development. Pawn moves assist in development by claiming space, usually in the center, so your pieces have more good spaces, and by clearing diagonals so the bishops can get out in the first place. Pawns themselves can't be developed.
Yes, "controlling the center" doesn't mean you have to be on the center squares, attacking them with pieces and pawns also helps control the center. Occupying a center square is also a way to control it, though, since it can block pawns, or the movement of a rook, queen or bishop through the center.
Posting a game is much easier than it looks.
First you get the game you want in pgn format
Second you start your post, and where you want to insert your game, you click on the icon that looks like a little chess board on the tool bar at the top of your post
This opens a little dialog that's pretty easy to follow.(A)Select "Game or Sequence of Moves" and click on "continue". (B) select "Use a PGN file" paste your PGN in the box, and click "Continue." (C) The next page allows you to insert comments and variations in your game. You will need to experiment on how to use that, but for now, just click "Next Step" (D) the next page allows you to edit the game information. Sometimes it's tactful to change the name of your opponent to "Anonymous." Then just click the "Insert" button and you're done.
It's as easy as A,B,C,D!
The simple answer is yes. The practical answer is it takes a combination of both, controlling with the power of the pawns and pieces, but at some point when you have established a majority control you have to occupy the center with your pawns and pieces in order to consolidate that majority control and convert it to total control to the exclusion of the enemy forces.
Guess that didn't work. i'm getting a headache. Will figure it out later.
To answer your question, Develop your pieces first . If your opponent makes a mistake then attacking is required to punish their error.
if your opponets are attacking you before you feel ready then there are two likely situations 1) the player is attacking prematurely and your defense isnt up to the task 2) your waiting too long to challenge your opponent and the attack is sound
Dont be overly defensive if your attacked. The best advice I heard I think in an article was to say anytime your opponent attacks you is say "BS!" and look for why it doesnt work. if you cannt see a refutation then respect it and only then defend but try to create a chance for active counterplay in your move. Post a few games that you are confused about and we can see what the problem might be
If you have a relative advantage in development, and other pre-conditions for an attack; you should attack immediately even if you are not fully developed yet. A lead in development is a fleeting thing. Steintiz would say if you have an advantage, you have an obligation to attack or your advantage will disappear.
BTW that certainly is not a noob question. I like your word established because it implies something more than developed. For instance a knight is a short range piece and can be developed, but not ready to occupy a staging square for an attack. While a bishop on its original square, if it has an attack lane available, could be considered established. For example, in the Kings Indian Defense the Black bishop on c8 often sacrifices itself on h3 as its first move in the game.
Maybe here it is. I'm black. Comments welcome. Long game, i found out how powerful 2 rooks can be.
Davy, Check out this link:
Here it is below. (only way i could figure out how to get it here) My Austrian opponent was a stand up guy and man about it. He didn't wimp out, but fought hard at the end and then conceded after he saw it was over, by giving me his pieces - unlike some players who will disconnect, hoping for who knows what.
Its better to develop faster and castle then attack. i only attack when my king is safe.
Aborting games with known poor sports
by madhacker a few minutes ago
Online Store Purchase Outside of US
by kohai 2 minutes ago
5/21/2013 - The Power of Imagination
by jay8209 8 minutes ago
by SecretOfMana 10 minutes ago
Should there be a Chess.com Championship Title?
by SecretOfMana 12 minutes ago
Very Early Queen exchange
by ponz111 16 minutes ago
Best Way to Spend Just $50 on Chess
by HotBoxRes 27 minutes ago
English opening defense
by pellik 27 minutes ago
Moving at Random, what you think?
by ConnorMacleod_151 32 minutes ago
by ponz111 34 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com