When do you "double step" a pawn?

Sort:
ThrillerFan
GambitShift wrote:

"Sheesh - I never said your game was a French or Caro-Kann. You asked about the concept of moving a pawn a single square twice early on."

 

Your words implied it. Don't want people to read it that way? Don't type French or Caro Kann.

 

"The fact that you game may have been a Reti is 100% irrelevant!"

Then that shows you have an agenda not to address the Reti game I asked about. If I went into a store and asked how to change the screen size and resolution of an android device, I wouldn't want the store to tell me how to do it on an iphone. Your advice might be relevant to how you read my question, but it is actually irrelevant when it pertains to my question even though we are answering the same question from different angles.

 

Like how I used your word against you? Bring it on!!!

 

"I answered the concept with a legitimate example."

With that logic, you should sell Aladdin DVDs to rug owners then.

 

"I explained that in the Caro-Kann, there was a legitimate reason to move c6 and then soon afterwards play c5."

"I never said your game was a French or Caro-Kann."

 

Do you always use other examples that don't pertain to the context of the question at hand? When I asked about e5, I wasn't asking about any situation. I gave the actual FEN position. If I wanted a general discussion, would I have inserted the FEN? (audience: No he wouldn't have!!)

 

"If you are just trying to do it for your health so that you can say you did it, you will get nowhere in chess."

I have no idea what that means. Asking about a position in a game is like doing something for my health? Please do expound.

 

"That is like saying I am going to put a Knight on the rim just to be cool!"

Well, the difference is that e6 is a (more) normal move. N to the a or h file early on is not a normal move. This is why I stated, "If this does not apply to all pawns, then I am specifically talking about the d and e pawns at least."

 

"If there is a legit time to move a pawn once and then move it again, do it."

Now you are hitting on the hot spot of the nail. Care to expound on that statement? 

(Interpreter: What he is asking is why e5 in the above position? He is not asking about the French, the Caro Kann, the Italian, the Sicilian, or the Annunaki. Can you explain the reasons without insulting this fine lad?)

 

"If you ever decide to play the Caro-Kann, you will do it a lot, but you will also see it in other openings."

Wow, you are bent on bringing up these openings aren't you? I wonder when the day will come that you realize I am not asking about the Caro Kann or the French. Let's wait and see.

 

"Read post two from a concept perspective, not a specific opening perspective."

Or, you could make a thread and title it "When to play e5 in the Caro Kann or the French". Do you want help with that?

 

This thread is about reading post 1 the way the OP intended it, by looking at the position and commenting on the position provided. Why does e5 in the position and subsequent positions show e5 as the top or one of the top moves.

 

Hey, I am not trying sell you crack. I don't want you to get hooked on anything, but give it a try. Why e5 in the position in the OP? 

 

NO, MY WORDS DID NOT IMPLY IT!  LEARN TO READ!

 

I QUOTE:   "A better example is in the Caro-Kann Defense, and the reason is self explanatory, and the key difference between the Caro-Kann and the French."

 

Where the bleep do you get that I thought your game was a French or Caro-Kann out of "A BETTER EXAMPLE IS"?

 

The answer is you don't.  The answer is either you are too lazy to read, or you like to put words in people's mouth.  Which is it?

 

 

NEXT, HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE, RE-READ YOUR ORIGINAL POST!!!   YOU DO NOT SAY ANYTHING SPECIFIC TO THE GAME.  THE FIRST SENTENCE YOU TALK ABOUT IS A CONCEPT!  THE CONCEPT OF MOVING THE SAME PAWN TWICE A SINGLE SQUARE EACH TIME EARLY ON IN THE GAME!  IF YOU WANT ONLY AN ANSWER SPECIFIC TO THE GAME, THEN YOU SHOULD BE ASKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THAT GAME, NOT THE CONCEPT AS A WHOLE!

 

 

AS FAR AS READING THE POST AS YOU INTENDED IT - WHY DON'T YOU TRY LEARNING TO RE-READ WHAT YOU POST AND PRETEND YOU ARE AN OUTSIDER - HOW WOULD THEY INTERPRET IT?  IF YOU READ POST 5 AS WELL, CLEARLY I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT READ IT AS A CONCEPT WITH EXAMPLE AND NOT A QUESTION ABOUT A SPECIFIC POSITION.  MAYBE LEARN TO PROOFREAD AND MAKE SURE THAT YOUR QUESTIONS READ AS INTENDED!!!  YOU WANT ADVICE ON A SPECIFIC POSITION, SPECIFY THAT!

 

 

If you want answers on the specific position, you should never have put the first paragraph in the first post in there, and started with the second paragraph with maybe a couple of words late in the paragraph asking if the concept had a name or something.  Then it would be clear that you are asking specific to that position.

 

You put the concept before the position, you are getting answers to the concept.

You put the position before the concept, you are getting answers to the position.

 

ENGLISH 101!

 

 

YOU CANNOT TELL ME THAT THE FOLLOWING TWO STATEMENTS READ THE SAME THING!  (And this has NOTHING to do with your position in post 1 and all to do with your English in post 1):

 

Example A:  In the French McCutchen Main line, why should White recapture on move 7 with the b-pawn, creating doubled pawns, when he can take with the Bishop, maintaining a healthy pawn chain?  I thought doubled pawns were bad?


Example B:  Can someone explain to me why anybody would want doubled pawns when it can be avoided?  Why wouldn't you go out of the way to avoid doubled pawns?  Like look at the French McCutchen.  Everyone takes on c3 with the pawn instead of the Bishop!

 

 

You word it like example A, and you are getting answers on the French McCutchen.

You word it like example B, you are getting answers on doubled pawns with people interpreting your "EXAMPLE" as just that, an example to illustrate what you are asking IN GENERAL!

GambitShift

"The guy just wanted to get some help with the game and you start putting all the $hit in the world to this forum"

Thank you Tharuka123456 for your faithful support in the matter.

 

"NO, MY WORDS DID NOT IMPLY IT!  LEARN TO READ!"

Can you suggest a course, perhaps "SHOUTING MAKES WHAT YOU SAY MORE VALID!!!"? I haven't registered for that one yet.

 

"I QUOTE:   "A better example is in the Caro-Kann Defense, and the reason is self explanatory, and the key difference between the Caro-Kann and the French.""

You don't need to quote yourself. And you are on that French Caro Kann kick again. I was never asking about these two openings. You are on Day 2 of this current stint.

 

"Where the bleep do you get that I thought your game was a French or Caro-Kann out of "A BETTER EXAMPLE IS"?"

Where the bleep do you get that I thought my game was an example? It was THE game, not AN example. Maybe you need to learn to read and understand articles. You can sign up for my course now. 

 

"YOU DO NOT SAY ANYTHING SPECIFIC TO THE GAME."

Yea, I guess if you ignore the game and the move e5, I didn't. If construction workers put out a sign that says "DETOUR", I guess you don't take the detour. You just drive on through with your agenda.

 

"IF YOU WANT ONLY AN ANSWER SPECIFIC TO THE GAME, THEN YOU SHOULD BE ASKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THAT GAME, NOT THE CONCEPT AS A WHOLE!"

Sorry, next time I will post the game and highlight the move three times in the annotation that I want people to address in the future. You have now set me down the right path. I am so grateful for your patience and advice. The OP has been corrected to reflect ThrillerFan's wise words.

 

"CLEARLY I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT READ IT AS A CONCEPT WITH EXAMPLE"

You are also clearly not the only one to continue to force your reading instead of addressing e5 now that YOU have re-read the OP post and see no evidence of me claiming the game and moves were an example. Where did I state it was an example? You and others introduced that assumption and now you are hellbent on defending it rather than saying, "Oh, I thought it was an example. In your game, I would have ______ because _______."

 

Usually that is how people reply when they misread the intention of a post. It doesn't mean I wasn't vague in my OP(title?), but it doesn't mean we replace it with your Caro Kann/French diatribe either.

 

I still have the same question regardless if I used the word "example" or not. I still have the same question regardless of the fact the title does not state e6 to e5. You actually have to read the OP and understand the context of THE game I was referring to.

 

"If you want answers on the specific position, you should never have put the first paragraph in the first post in there"

Ok, please tell chess.com this rule so they can ban any user that types paragraphs. This will help remove those "paragraph intruders".

 

"and started with the second paragraph with maybe a couple of words late in the paragraph asking if the concept had a name or something."

OMG, I started a second paragraph. How will you forgive me? And then I asked a name for it? Sometimes I get carried away and also get greedy.

 

"YOU WANT ADVICE ON A SPECIFIC POSITION, SPECIFY THAT!"

Sorry, as stated before, next time I will post the game and highlight the move three times in the annotation that I want people to address in the future. 

 

"You put the concept before the position, you are getting answers to the concept. You put the position before the concept, you are getting answers to the position."

 

This has been enlightening, I have learned a lot from your scolding. Thank you.

Steven-ODonoghue

He is a complete and utter moron that when proven wrong just changes the subject. How did his words imply that he though your game was a French or CaroKann? He TOLD you that he was providing an example for when a pawn is moved one square and then again on another move. That is the question you asked.

"So, what new rules/guidelines can you use to break the beginner rule to not to play the same piece twice early on in a game?"

That is exactly what @ThrillerFan answered. 

"I was never asking about either of these two openings" No you were asking about when it is Ok to push the same pawn twice, and that is what he answered. 

In your past comment you go on about why he shouldn't quote himself and about why he is on the same French and caro-kann " kick", but you never actually a dress the quote that you placed. Because IT PROVES YOU WRONG. 

We know that you're embarrassed you write a poorly worded question, but that is no reason to attack everyone else in the thread relpying with reasonable answers.

GambitShift
Steven-ODonoghue wrote:

He is a complete and utter moron that when proven wrong just changes the subject. How did his words imply that he though your game was a French or CaroKann? He TOLD you that he was providing an example for when a pawn is moved one square and then again on another move. That is the question you asked.

"So, what new rules/guidelines can you use to break the beginner rule to not to play the same piece twice early on in a game?"

That is exactly what @ThrillerFan answered. 

"I was never asking about either of these two openings" No you were asking about when it is Ok to push the same pawn twice, and that is what he answered. 

In your past comment you go on about why he shouldn't quote himself and about why he is on the same French and caro-kann " kick", but you never actually a dress the quote that you placed. Because IT PROVES YOU WRONG. 

We know that you're embarrassed you write a poorly worded question, but that is no reason to attack everyone else in the thread relpying with reasonable answers.

 

I posted a game with examples of e5. I asked why e6 to e5 in the game. That has always been a constant. Either reply to that or I will block you from this thread.

sndeww
GambitShift wrote:

I am not sure if there is a name for this, but there should be. I'll call it a "double step". This is where you initially move a pawn one square in the beginning and soon after you move it again breaking the beginner's rule of not moving the same piece twice early on in a game. If this does not apply to all pawns, then I am specifically talking about the d and e pawns at least.

 

In the following position, Stockfish shows e6 is the best move. Then, it shows e5 later. So, what new rules/guidelines can you use to break the beginner rule to not to play the same piece twice early on in a game?

 

 

 

It shows e5 because that’s a thematic pawn break in those sort of structures. As you play more you’ll get to know different pawn structures. For example, usually in the Caro kann you’ll play c6 and c5 later. It’s unavoidable; you’ll have to “double step” if the position demands it.

hope it helps.

sndeww

Wow I just read the rest of the thread...

GambitShift

Thanks SNUDOO

ThrillerFan

Wow!

Steven-Odonoghue gets it, but clearly the OP still doesn't.

 

To add salt to the wound, SNUDOO gives the same Caro-Kann example that I gave, and he praised SNUDOO after knocking me for the same example.

 

SMH!  (And shaking it so hard my brain popped out of my right ear!)

GambitShift
ThrillerFan wrote:

To add salt to the wound, SNUDOO gives the same Caro-Kann example that I gave, and he praised SNUDOO after knocking me for the same example.

 

SMH!  (And shaking it so hard my brain popped out of my right ear!)

 

Let's start with this video before comparing what you communicated and what SNUDOO replied with.

 

You replied initially with, "That is a horrible example by the OP because Black's play sucks!"

 

This may turn away your readers.

 

Aside from the insulting, you also typed, "A better example is in the Caro-Kann Defense"

 

My OP was not an example. SNUDOO didn't treat the post like it was an example, they stated, "It shows e5 because that’s a thematic pawn break in those sort of structures."

 

They addressed the context of the game. Regardless if Caro Kann, the French, or the Sicilian was added to it, it is at least communicated that they recognized the position or positions I asked about. Maybe they are lying, and maybe they are just pretending to understand since they didn't give detailed explanations why it was a "thematic pawn break". punter99 brought up something about opening a diagonal which peaked my interest. Perhaps SNUDOO can elaborate and give examples of how there is or could be a pawn break in my game.

 

So, ask yourself, did you do anything to contribute to conflict or did you address the game and then provide other advice? In another thread I recently started I suggested people giving advice show another game and compare moves in my game with a game they chose. This might help get across your points too.

 

And in your case particularly, I know you from the past couple years on chess.com and that you are a very strong French player. You are even playing a Winawar game now that I am following. What I suggest you do is stop talking to people on these forums about the French or the Caro Kann (if you also are strong in that opening) and simply help weaker players in the games they played. Then, after you focus on their games and address moves or do the comparison contrast as I suggested, invite them to a French/Caro Kann club or whatever you want to call it. 

 

There, you can have a specialized group of people to share your knowledge with, and it will be appreciated by online users more than insulting them right off the bat. I hope this serves as a beginning of a truce, and my people will meet your people to sign the armistice papers tomorrow. 

GambitShift

Just trying to bring love to the world brutha!!!

 

sndeww
ThrillerFan wrote:

Wow!

Steven-Odonoghue gets it, but clearly the OP still doesn't.

 

To add salt to the wound, SNUDOO gives the same Caro-Kann example that I gave, and he praised SNUDOO after knocking me for the same example.

 

SMH!  (And shaking it so hard my brain popped out of my right ear!)

Lol,  I was just typing off the top of my head without reading all the comments, and Caro kann was something that popped into my head since that pawn structure is seen a lot in my games.

GambitShift
SNUDOO wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:

Wow!

Steven-Odonoghue gets it, but clearly the OP still doesn't.

 

To add salt to the wound, SNUDOO gives the same Caro-Kann example that I gave, and he praised SNUDOO after knocking me for the same example.

 

SMH!  (And shaking it so hard my brain popped out of my right ear!)

Lol,  I was just typing off the top of my head without reading all the comments, and Caro kann was something that popped into my head since that pawn structure is seen a lot in my games.

 

Caro Kann is an example of the thread title. You can't post the board game in the title of the thread. 

 

Perhaps this is the end of forums. Everyone is conditioned to communicate through Twitter short statements. When they read the title of a thread, they reply to that and not the actual post which includes the game. 

 

Maybe chess.com needs to find a way to post board images like they do with the game history. You can hover your mouse over a game and see the end position.

 

We could have forums where you simply ask "Is e5 good in this position as black?" and then next to it is the board image. People won't have to click anything to get to the board.

chron1cle

I think it's important to understand that a lot of us are beginners here and it's not good practice to respond with an immediate insult to the poster. I had this exact same question and i'm sure all of the people responding to this post have had their own when they were starting out as well. Although it was really funny reading the unnecessarily reactive and drawn out arguments this post elicited. I admit, only punter99 seemed to provide the answer I was looking for.