Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

I Don't Understand Outposts


  • 13 months ago · Quote · #1

    TitanCG

    I got d5 in this game but I wasn't sure how to continue.

     



  • 13 months ago · Quote · #2

    Cnl_Duck

    In general, stick a piece on an outpost if it seems beneficial (i.e. square control, line blocking, etc.). Usually knights are best, but sometimes bishops, rooks, and in extremely rare cases even queens can benefit from one.

    In your case a rook on d5 would be better than a queen since it would not be able to be threatened by the black queen. That being said, it wouldn't be accomplishing much there anyway.

    EDIT: See my next post for the knight.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #3

    ItsEoin

    You recognized the weakness of d5, which is good. To make full use of it, you want to make sure that the Knight you plonk there will be there for a long time - so make sure nothing can dislodge it. The only pieces that can dislodge a protected Knight without loss of material are pawns, Knights and one Bishop (the square's color). At that point in the game, there were no Knights left on your opponents side, so an idea could have been to try to trade your LSB for his before posting your Knight on d5.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #4

    Cnl_Duck

    Your knight was immediately eliminated by a bishop; to avoid that make sure your piece can stay at the outpost first before moving it there. When that's done be sure to support it and exploit your "new squares" the best you can.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #5

    linuxblue1

    Ok. Outposts.

    Yes. A knight is the ideal piece to use as an outpost. Because its ability to jump gives it the most options. But other pieces can be useful.

    rook and queen can be outposts often when a rook pawn is pushed first to the seventh rank as a "goal hanger". Then the queen or rook can become an outpost on the opponent's back rank giving them the choice of evils of allowing the outpost to stay or to exhchange or sac off and give you a passed pawn or promoted pawn.

    A definition of an outpost = a piece supported by a pawn when the piece can not be attacked by an opposing pawn. This is distinct from a strong piece say at e5 that could be attacked by an enemy pawn [ say f7 to f6] but the pawn is bloacked from doing so; that is not an outpost.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #6

    blueemu

    Yeah, at move 13, if you intended to take full advantage of the d5 outpost then you would need to prevent Black from exchanging his c6-Bishop for it.

    That would require either B-d3-c2-a4 to trade off the c6-Bishop, or b2-b4-b5 to drive it out of there.

    Of course, another possible plan would be to play f3 and Nd5, and when he captures it with the c6-Bishop, retake with the e-Pawn and try to make something out of your 4-on-3 Queen's-side Pawn majority. Black will have a harder time making use of his own 4-on-3 King's-side Pawn majority, because the Kings are both on that flank.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #7

    blueemu

    linuxblue1 wrote:

    A definition of an outpost = a piece supported by a pawn when the piece can not be attacked by an opposing pawn. This is distinct from a strong piece say at e5 that could be attacked by an enemy pawn [ say f7 to f6] but the pawn is bloacked from doing so; that is not an outpost.

    Not true.

    An outpost is a strong square on an open file, guarded by a Pawn. If it is not on an open file, it is called an operations base, not an outpost.

    It is still classed as an outpost even if the opponent can bring up a Pawn to drive the outpost-Knight out. The reason is that this counter by Black also involves a positional concession... it leaves him with a backward Pawn on an open file, which is a serious weakness.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #8

    linuxblue1

    People read different books. I am going by the definitions that I learnt in John Love's Positional Ideas in chess in the 1980's . He had simple definitions. I guess that your more complex definitions are also valid.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #9

    blueemu

    I'm going by Nimzovitch (My System, Chess Praxis) and Kmoch (Pawn Power in Chess).

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #10

    linuxblue1

    OK. Can't argue with those I suppose. Regret to say that I haven't read either .

    You now have permission to flick your finger behind my ear and I go:

    "yOWWWWWWWWWWW!" Embarassed

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #11

    blueemu

    Flick!

    Pawn Power in particular is worth reading. His terminology is a bit cumbersome... Rams, Levers, Twins, Sealers and Sweepers, Chains, Head-Duos... but the book is a gold-mine of strategic ideas.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #12

    Ubik42

    blueemu wrote:
    linuxblue1 wrote:

    A definition of an outpost = a piece supported by a pawn when the piece can not be attacked by an opposing pawn. This is distinct from a strong piece say at e5 that could be attacked by an enemy pawn [ say f7 to f6] but the pawn is bloacked from doing so; that is not an outpost.

    Not true.

    An outpost is a strong square on an open file, guarded by a Pawn. If it is not on an open file, it is called an operations base, not an outpost.

    It is still classed as an outpost even if the opponent can bring up a Pawn to drive the outpost-Knight out. The reason is that this counter by Black also involves a positional concession... it leaves him with a backward Pawn on an open file, which is a serious weakness.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Hadn't though if it that way. I guess I will expand my definition of outpost to accomodate it.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #13

    blueemu

    For best results, the outpost should be on a half-open file (open only at your end), with an opposing half-open file adjacent to it... such as the d-file vs c-file given in my diagrams.

    Otherwise, the opponent isn't guaranteed to end up with a backwards Pawn on an open file if he uses a Pawn to chase out the outpost Knight.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #14

    linuxblue1

    blueemu wrote:

    Flick!

    Pawn Power in particular is worth reading. His terminology is a bit cumbersome... Rams, Levers, Twins, Sealers and Sweepers, Chains, Head-Duos... but the book is a gold-mine of strategic ideas.

    ********

    YOWWWWWWWWWW! Laughing

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #15

    TitanCG

    Thanks for all the help! So maybe 13.Bd3 is the best move trying to trade off the light-squared bishops?

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #16

    blueemu

    TitanCG wrote:

    Thanks for all the help! So maybe 13.Bd3 is the best move trying to trade off the light-squared bishops?

    ... or perhaps 13. Qd3 intending B-d1-a4. That might save a tempo.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #17

    tfulk

    Imagine if all chess forum threads were this well intentioned, and responses were this informative and everyone behaved themselves the way they have in this one. What a place to learn about chess the forums would be. I'm all warm and fuzzy right now. 

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #18

    ivandh

    Yeah it's nice to get something that isn't about knights or bishops. Well, at least it isn't about bishops anyway. Er... you know what I mean.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #19

    waffllemaster

    If that's the only plus it may not be enough to win.  i.e. pressure on the d pawn but all black's pieces can guard it.  I'd double/triple on the d file and try to wiggle in on the queenside with my queen.  / look for pawn sacs to activate my bishop or rooks in an advantageous way.  Other than that I guess it's a draw unless white can create another plus for himself.  Principal of two weaknesses.

    As blueemu said I was also looking at a Bd1-a4 maneuver for earlier in the position.


Back to Top

Post your reply: