Forum

This topic is mainly for examples and comments how to win a drawish game. The first example is a tournament game of mine, which was to be a drawish opening; Slav Defense: Exchange Variation (D13). Here are some other players' notes about the opening: http://www.chess.com/opening/eco/D13_Slav_Defense_Exchange_Variation This game was played quite fast in two days, which I think is something between blitz and correspondence chess, perhaps the way I enjoy chess most right now. I included below a computer analysis (~2000) with some remarks. Black's eleventh move is 11.... 0-0 and the game is a drawish. White's next move 12. Nd2?! is passive and I think gives the opponent a false feeling of security. After couple of more moves white makes a mistake 14. Nd6?, which actually did it's purpose to get more pressure on the Black Queen. In fast games it is more of a rule than an exception to make a crucial mistake under pressure. The 15th move 15. Nxb7?! is marked as an inaccuracy, but my point of view is that these three white's moves mentioned above did actually the job in this game. The first of them gives tempo to the Black and two later "mistakes" are taking the tempo totally to the White. My opponent put it this way after the game: "I have a major weakness in my game in that it is based on reactive play rather than proactive."

I'm sure as most seasoned chess players know, some openings are more dangerous and exciting to play. Some can be dull and boring. I think that this is a good topic for anybody who wants to share an opening that they find interesting or dynamic. To start, I would to share an opening that I find quite intriguing. http://www.chess.com/article/view/an-introduction-to-the-halloween-gambit (An excellent article by user MagicMan01) I am referring to the Halloween Gambit. It was previously dubious, but new research and theory has ressurected it. The catch is that unlike a normal pawn gambit, it is a KNIGHT for a pawn! I would like to reference that article, and seriously, everything to learn about Halloween Gambit!

Here is the place that we can comment about our training games. How we can use them, analysis during the game, after the game, ideas on how to better the format...

Hi everybody, I think it would be a great idea if we had thematic games. By that I mean we challenge other groups to vote or team matches where we use that opening, OR we have a few thematic games amongst us. If you support this idea, then please say so and specify which opening you like. I myself am in the mood for something unorthodox...

I apologize for the false invitations I sent earlier today for the 3rd Speed Tournament (Speedy III). My intention was to great a group invitation for previous tournament winners, but on the invitation form was preset Central Command, so I needed to cancel that tournament to great a new one. Sorry about that - my mistake. This tournament topic might be useful otherwise too. Here you can give suggestions what kind of tournaments would you like to have in Central Command; do you prefer vacation option, 3 days / move, and if interested in thematic tournaments please mention which ones.

It has become abundantly clear to me lately that making the best chess moves in a game is not what is winning the games for me. It seems that my opponents oftentimes have a winning game over me but fail to capture the King. If anyone has followed or viewed my games lately (you are welcome to do so) you will see that what I am saying is true. I am starting to believe that my talent at swindling is better than my talent at chess. In his book "Chess for Tigers" Simon Webb provides five components that make up a successful swindler. 1- Be objective, 2- Don't be afraid of losing, 3- Play actively, 4- Use the process of elimination, 5- Star Quality The list is pretty self-explanatory, except for maybe the last component, 5- Star quality . Star quality, Webb says, is "Play-acting". Being able to understand your opponent's nature and playing them into your position instead of allowing your opponent to play you into theirs. For example, some things to look for when playing your opponent is whether they like to exchange pieces; if this is apparent then make sure they do not get the opportunity to do so. Many players exchange pieces because they cannot play well in complex positions, or prefer not to take the risk. Conversely, your opponent may be afraid to exchange pieces. This fear oftentimes causes them to retreat pieces when they need to exchange, providing you with the better position or opportunity to attack. Is your opponent reactive to your moves or do they force you to react to theirs? If it is the first, then try to make your moves force them to position their pieces badly. If it is the second, get them to think you are reacting, as best you can, without really doing so, while you are actually setting up your own plan (preferably in another area of the board). And then when they pulls the trigger, which usually leaves a weakness in their position somewhere, instead of reacting this time totally ignore his threat (as much as possible) and start your own attack. And lastly, whenever you blunder during an attack, never, never, ever let them think that it was not intentional and you are finished (unless of course it is evident). Provided with what appears to be a straightforward win, your opponent (I find) will very likely provide you with an opportunity to take the game back. This forum is dedicated to those games that can illustrate these qualities. Please see the following game, my most recent swindle, for the first example.

I thought of starting a new topic called Nimzo-Indian Defense, although I do not know it at all, hoping that perhaps someone could comment a game I played elsewhere, which was to be Nimzo-Indian Defense: Leningrad Variation. I have a feeling I could have handled it a lot better and let's see if someone could give a helping hand here.

This forum is a place where we can submit your games that you would like talk about and have analyzed by others and see how well you were in control of the center, or not. I will be submitting a game soon with my annotations and thoughts about how the center was controlled and how it affected the game. If you would like to submit yours now, feel free at anytime and we will do our best at analyzing it. Eric

Hi this topic is how to draw certain endgames and such, and games that would be won but a draw can be forced. Here is an example of this in one of my games where my opponent is in time trouble and a pawn down.

I have created this topic for traps that they have fallen for, have executed, or even well known classic traps. I will start by a humiliating defeat from last night OTB at my club. We had 1:30 minutes on the clock and I was white.

In Aron Nimzovich's book MY SYSTEM, he defines positional play as a necessary element of a player's strategy and that Controlling the Center is a necessary part of Positional play. The following example and excerpt from Nimzovich's book, My System are excellent concepts to understanding both positional play as well as controlling the center. I plan on expounding upon the concepts that Nimzovich developed during his chess career in future forum topics like this. I hope we can all learn how to better Control our Center through them. The following example and excerpt are direct quotations. Another erroneous conception may be found among Masters. Many of these and numbers of strong amateurs are under the impression that position play above all is concerned with the accumulation of small advantages, in order to exploit them in the end game....And so we here note the fact that there are quite other matters to which the attention of the positional player must be directed, and which place this "accumulation" wholly in the shade. What are these things, and in what do I see the idea of true position play? The answer is short and to the point:--in a "prophylactic." (Nimzovich, Aron (1930). My System, p. 160-61, Harcourt; McKay)

I wrote this blog on my home page but I thought I'd post it here at Central Command. Controlling the center is essential, yet it's surprising how many people leave such a vital square like e4 unprotected. If the knight gets to e4 the result can be disasterous for the other player. In this game my opponent concentrated on developing a strong line of pawns without developing any pieces. I saw the hole on the board and set my knight to attack. My opponent hung in there for awhile but after 12 checks, white had had enough and quit ... what's two more checks? I'm irritated that I had so many checks but this is still a beautiful game. Constructive criticism is appreciated. Thx.

Hello everyone! This forum is for your games in which you have successfully created and utilized a central or advanced outpost for one of your pieces. This technique or tactic is very important to advancing in your knowledge of chess. However it can be tough to create an effective outpost as the pieces may be easy to chase away. What are some important concepts to keep in mind when creting an outpost? This is a game I just finished that has my King's Knight at a central outpost at e5. Black finds an outpost for his light Bishop on e4! The battle to oust these pieces from their outposts by the opponant, as well as keeping them in place by their owner is a central theme of the game. After my opponant gets my Knight out of the outpost the knight swings over to the Queenside and finds another beautiful outpost as well as performing the role as a blocker for an important pawn. Please note that this is analyzed by the computer and those lines are also given for your learning benefit. Please comment on any flaws, especially where the analysis shows a mistake on my part. What would you have done different? Do you agree with the computer's suggestion? Lastly, Everyone can have a game analyzed by the computer here. Let's use them. Once a week from everyone would be great. I for one would love to go over your games. If you need some help getting it analyzed and set up on this forum format please let me or someone else here know and we can help.

Have you ever played a game where your opponent had you completely on the defensive until finally your position crumbles and checkmate is emanate? As the saying goes, "The best defense is a good offense". This saying represents an important concept in chess; always develop your pieces in a way that presents your opponent with a threat to contend with. The idea here is to keep your opponent making reactive moves rather than letting them set their plan into play. Another important thing to remember during chess games is that players tend to play less accurately when they believe they have the game won. "In a won game there are a thousand ways to lose!" The following game is a great example of counter-play and counterattacks. In this game I had a position that was completely lost and my only hope was for quick counter-play. Defensive or passive moves would lead to fairly quick death for my King. It is interesting to note that there were eight blunders in this game found by the computer. Four were mine; grasping for a counterattack lifeline--thus there was a reason--I had no choice. However Four blunders were made by my opponent, (proof of the truisms in the aforementioned saying) which I was counting on if the counter-play was to succeed. For your learning benefit, make sure that you click on the "MOVE LIST" button on the bottom right corner of the diagram and go through the alternate positions that the computer gave during the analysis. It is fun to see if you can figure out why they were better moves. Enjoy, knightLite

It has taken a lot of courage to talk about a chess tactical device that has cost me countless won games. I am talking about the dreaded back rank mate. That is generally a position like this, where the castled king is trapped behind his pawns: Though back rank mates can be easily prevented with a pawn push, what makes them deadly is that they can happen with just a simple slip of the mind. I'm sure that almost everybody can say that they have kingside castled and then moved the rook off the defending rank only to be mated. In blitz they happen to good players all the time. Stuffing up is very easy to do!

There are at least two methods of controlling the center or gaining control of the center. The first is to occupy the center with pawns or pieces and the second is to control the center from a distance with bishops, rooks, queen and knights. The later is known as hypermodern systems, where you let your opponent have the center and through a solid position, slowly chip away at it until you evetually own it. What is your favorite style or opening?

Hello, My name is Eric Hamby and reside in Greenville SC, USA. I love to talk and play chess and life's lessons learned by chess. I believe that chess principles and consequences are analogous with life in general and can teach us many things if we want to look. Similar to controlling our own center in life it is equally important to control the center of the battlefield (chessboard). It is also one of the hardest things for me to keep in mind as I make my moves. I am not alone in this thought. An interesting coincidence happened to me on this subject. The first paper I wrote for college was a paper on life's lessons that chess provides and for a graduation present a friend of mine gave me (unaware of my paper but had probably heard me rant on the subject) a book by Gary Kasparov, How Life Imitates Chess: Making the Right Moves from the Board to the Boardroom. I welcome and encourage anyone with like thoughts to join and participate with our group. Who knows...you may learn more than just strategies for the board!!!

We have all probably played a game where we became so affixed on attacking the opponents Queen that we lose focus on the strategy that we have chosen for the particular game. Keeping an eye out for a trap in which the queen may fall into is a great idea! However, making specific moves that only serve to attack the Queen instead of developing the position towards the game-plan or strategic goal may prove to be fatal for you instead of your opponent! The following game is (I believe) an example of such strategy gone astray.