positional conversation in the stonewall

Black seems better after trading the knight on e5 white really has no way to force e4 while black can play f6 e5.

Oh ok the mark agreees

Black doesn't trade the knight. That would be favorable to white. Instead, he wants white to pick up that knight.

Of course it won't. It's just something to consider. If positional play was half the game, and dynamic play was the other half, it would be absurd to ignore an entire half of the game when evaluating a position.

Most positions aren't really "Decided" by any one factor, anyways.

Something I would like to challenge you on: Why is black's bishop better than white's? Of course, the pawns are on the opposite colors, but if you look at it, the bishop is basically hemmed in by white's pawns. White has a possible plan of moving his bishop to d2, e1, and then h4, where it would be a good bishop. Why is black's bishop strong?

Black usually has great control over e4, and white e5. It isn't really "better", per se, for either side, but just a characteristic of the position, and whoever can use their hole better is usually the better player.

This is correct

Very good

Yes, it does seem quite slow, doesn't it? And here is the core of the issue: can black limit white's aggression while slowly inching away on the queenside? If there were only a pair of knights on the board, black would be almost winning. So at the same time, white should be aware that he IS allowed to build up his attack if he needs, because black's attack isn't quite there yet. 

The ideal way to play black in these positions is to try to have some of the bigger pieces multitask, for example, to have the queen guard some points on the kingside while also supporting the queenside. 

fair

it's not that it's strong but that it opens up the f file unnecessarily

@B1ZMArk how do you quote multiple people in the same comment box?

First, I type something. Usually "ok". Then I copy paste the entire thing, like this.

---

First, I type something. Usually "ok". Then I copy paste the entire thing, like this.

---

Then, I just cut the parts out one by one and repeat as necessary.

It either doesn't want to work or I'm doing something wrong. Oh well, thanks for trying. I suppose I probably wouldn't have used it often anyways. 😢

Test

OranegJuice wrote: It either doesn't want to work or I'm doing something wrong. Oh well, thanks for trying. I suppose I probably wouldn't have used it often anyways. 😢
Test

Nope, doesn't work for me

What if I try some Inspect Element stuff?

Test2

Test2

There we go! 

Of course it won't. It's just something to consider. If positional play was half the game, and dynamic play was the other half, it would be absurd to ignore an entire half of the game when evaluating a position.

Ya, I understand that but when I saw this I wasn't expecting a stonewall. The whole idea of the stonewall is ignoring the positional factors and throwing an attack (From white's side). The move f4 after d4 has been played is positionally disgusting but white has compensation in form of an attack. But I see where you're coming from. And my evaluation of the stonewall could be wrong anyways...

Something I would like to challenge you on: Why is black's bishop better than white's? Of course, the pawns are on the opposite colors, but if you look at it, the bishop is basically hemmed in by white's pawns. White has a possible plan of moving his bishop to d2, e1, and then h4, where it would be a good bishop. Why is black's bishop strong?

Ya, that makes sense. It's actually pretty obvious that black's dsb is shut down and I actually looked at the potential dsb maneuver for white.

The ideal way to play black in these positions is to try to have some of the bigger pieces multitask, for example, to have the queen guard some points on the kingside while also supporting the queenside.

Oooooooohhhhh, Now that I think about it, black will often do that when I'm playing the colle zuck. The black queen will be on c7 or somewhere on the seventh rank and will be defending f7 or g7 laterally while having influence on the other side of the board.

Thanks for responding that much in-depth! Definitely learned a lot. Top notch edumacational stuff right here

edumacational

indeed

this is an equal position in my eyes

Black has the doubled pawns...who cares? it's not as if black can't just play e6 to keep everything solid. White shouldn't take on c5 to prevent exposing the backwards e3 pawn. Inactive pieces from white but there'll be plenty of moves ahead to position the knight somewhere (DSB is permanently senile)

Realistically I think a potential game would continue with some knight trades in the center and a locked-pawns-fest with neither side able to get any attacking play due to the sucky nature of their pieces

Disclaimer: I haven't analyzed a chess board seriously in months so this is probably dead wrong

and bump

yeah it's about equal