I'm just wondering ... is castling better or not to castle? I had always had the opinion that castling is better but something changed my mind....

Look at the diagram. White is gonna win soon.

But didn't this all happen cause black castled???

If black didn't castle this postion wouldn't appear right? So , i ask u , is castling better Or not to castle?

we can't play "what if" unless you give us the whole game...ovbiously the bishop on h6 would not be there with the king still on e8, so mabye the bishop would be on f1 protecting the knight..but then black looses his rook for a knight..

IN GENERAL however castling is good, but on the rarly it is safer in the center.

 

Ya , it depends on the situation you are in!!.But most of the games lost because of uncastled king.Also logically , if the king is at center it is easy to direct all our resources towards the uncastle king.

The center of the board is where most of the action takes place in the middle game. Because the center pawns are usually moved first, these will often be the "battering rams" that are used to open up the enemy position. The king is vulnerable when this happens. Castling gets the king out of harm's way and brings a rook toward the center of the board where it can take action.

 

Of course, just because the king is moved to safety away from the center doesn't mean you can ignore his defensive needs when the enemy pieces head in his direction. 

 

There are some exceptions, such as openings where the pawns in front of the king are not advanced and form a reasonable fortress (for example the Najdorf Poisoned Pawn). Often in those situations the flank pawns will move, making it unsafe for the king to move to the side, and the center becomes the best place for the king to find refuge.

 

In other situations where the queens and other pieces are exchanged quickly, the game can rapidly transition to an end game and the king may be best placed in the center. 

And also it is good to mention that castling can be a powerful offensie tool as it will activate a rook.

Situations like this happen to beginners quite often, and I'm pretty sure any master who first picked up a chess piece has fallen victim to quick attacks on the castled position. However, it is very important to castle and get your king out of the center where the majority of the action is. It is just too dangerous. As you become more proficient at the game you will begin to notice your opponents attempts to create situations similar to your diagram, and in time you will be able to defend appropriately to keep them from happening. This comes from practice. I too have fallen to many an infamous trap on my castled position, but I've learned from them as well.

This raises an interesting point about castling: Just the act of castling isn't good enough to ensure the King's safety. Here's my analogy:

Only castling and not paying attention to your King's long term defense is akin to spending $200,000.00 on a rare sports car, putting it in your garage, leaving the keys in the ignition and forgetting to lock the garage door. Simply going half way through the motions will not ensure that the car will be there the next morning (or the King will not be checkmated).

 

You have to keep a careful watch and a have at least a piece within range to ward off any potential attack. I know we're all taught to castle early to protect the king, but you have to think ahead: I always believe in castling since you get a nice wall or chain of pawns to ward off frontal or file attacks but you have remember the smoothered mate, attacks from the ranks, and those knights. In your above positional set up, and I say this after the fact since I wasn't playing the game, I might have kept one of my knights close by for defense if possible. However, without seeing how the game was played from the start, it's hard to offer anything concrete in the way of advice (not to mention I'm not the greatest chess player around). Thank you for posting this because it really got me thinking about castling and a proper defense situation once you've castled. Once again, I have learned something new. Thanks again!

Thanks guys for all the help on the castling situation!

Here is a really great article about King Safety:

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman56.pdf 

Good article, and well said.

It was a really good article! Now i'm convinced that i should castle! Thanks again guys!

Castling, tucking away the King and connecting the Rooks, is generally a good idea.  But one shouldn't become too rigid.  There are times when castling isn't important and may even be detrimental. Usually with the Queens off the board, the value of castling decreases and the value of central position of the King increases. Some openings, by their very nature, eschew castling.

 

One such opening is a line in the Berlin Defense of the Ruy Lopez

(Queens off the board)

 

 

 

 

Another is a line in the Cunningham Defense to the King's Gambit Accepted.

(Queens still on the board)

 

 

 

So, castle when you think it's appropriate, but don't be too dogmatic about.

Many times and if possible I'll force the person to move his/her king by sacrificing queen for queen just so they can't castle. just a opinion.

well i would say its really wise to castle early coz ive lost a lot of winning games in the past just bcoz i didnt castle early

Well, there are lots of comments on this post, but I would like to make a little contribution. I think that castling depends a lot on the opening that you are playing. For instance, in the English opening white performs a fianchetto and castles, being it its natural defense. In some other openings and variations you don't really need to castle unless you can't find any other effective way to activate your rook. Pawn structures here have a lot to say when making your decision. I'm playing a game with black where I haven't castled and my king is in a safe position.

A bit more about king security: Take into account that there are some patterns to destroy king's defense when it's castled. So you need to take attention to the moves of your opponent and distinguish when he is moving his pieces to prepare a decisive attack that could finish with a checkmate! It's hard to find general rules in chess, so maybe the best rule is the one your experience states.

If your going to castle do it early in the game, get your king to a "safer" position and then start to delvope your other pieces. Thats what i find works best. H.t Patterson had a very good point, don't just castle and stop thinking about your king.

Castling is a very important part of Chess. Its just like on a real battlefield, you're not going to have your general being right in the thick of action, and where a budgeoning cannon can hit him, would you? Same for Chess. A general guide is: Castle whenever you can provided there are no threats made, and when castling does not make your King's position even more precaurious! Surely it would be redundant and even absurd to move your general to a more open position where even mere rifle fire can hit him, don't you think?

You guys explain it good. thanks again!

I have a rather striking example of castling creating a lost position.   Don't take this as evidence against castling, but it pays to know some basic ideas

Qd4+, Kh1, Qxc3 and white is gonna lose soon.

Castle early in the game. Later in your chess career you'll pick up on the rare exceptions to this general rule. And don't give up just because you missed a trap.