Make a blog and I'll happily take black. Not a chance is white better here.
I'll play Bc5.
Can black win
Sort:
"This diagram shown is the epitome of crippled pawns destroying a position's flexibility and handing all the good plans to the player with the knight "
The good plans are:
1. Simplification.
2. Creating a passed pawn.
No prizes for guessing which player has these plans.
you noob named Rajipuut: You have no plan of chess, simply put the position in a decent engine and it will say black is completly winning! Shut up with your wrong mathmatic skills...
Let's begin by switching the board to its normal orientation. We'd need to put the board in its standard position with White at the bottom. Your move Bc5 has some merits. Threats are often crucially important. Can we put a responsive board into this forum?
Go.
Let's say a responsive board and 36 hours a move . . .
Rajipuut you will lose whatever you play you noob...
36 hours? There are about 2 candidate moves.
Nice!!! Well with 400+ rating points on me . . . I'm shocked you haven't read Pawn Power. After this confrontation, I believe you'll look at both Pawn Power and Point Count Chess. Notice that your plan after Bc5 requires you to trade off the knight for the Bishop which admits you consider the Knight more valuable in this position . . . why? Because the crippled pawns make the Bishop less versatile than usually. White has two plans here: keep the Knight on the board or simplify to an endgame with only Kings and Pawns.
For Bc5, f3 is a good answer, then Re8 and finally Re1 forcing rook swap with white still threathning Nf5, b4. This game is most likely drawn, and that's it.
Who says I'm trading? Simplifying wouldn't mean I consider the knight more powerful. It doesn't matter what comes off the board, just what is left on. I would trade a queen for a rook if it left a winning pawn endgame. It doesn't mean I consider the rook more powerful.
How about you give advice and reading lists after you win?
Your turn to move.
The board is NOT responsive, I could NOT make my move! Since the probable result is a draw after total simplification removes 8 points of force from both sides, I believe the thematic move for White is counterattack with Nb3 which gives him some winning chances. By the way, total simplification has the merit (for Black) of slightly weakening White's Queenside pawns. Please either show me how I can make the move for myself, or make it for me. Thanks.
what a stupid troll. Dont feed the troll!
I don't think Madness20's idea is a bad idea, but rather that keeping the knight on the board is better.
"For Bc5, f3 is a good answer, then Re8 and finally Re1 forcing rook swap with white still threathning Nf5, b4. This game is most likely drawn, and that's it."
. . . It just allows Black to escape the Rook trade too easily or make it strongly getting his King active in the center. More crucially it eventually allows the B for N swap that makes it easier for Black
if i had a pawns set at a2, b2, c2 and my opponents had 3 pawns on a7,a6,and a5, it would be very easy for me to prevent from creating a passed pawn. However, my c2 pawn is already passed because there is no other pawn than can prevent it from moving forward.
Q.E.D.
f3 simply fails tactically to Rh4 when Rxh2 and Bxd4 are threatened. Nb3 afterwards would fail to Rxh2 which threatens a skewer. Kg1 doesnt save because of Bd6.
Nb3 isn't a correct move, the knight becomes restricted and will waste movements to get into play, also, Nb3 takes away the option of Nf5 which in my opinion will be crucial for white defense.
Trading the bishop for the knight in d4 won't work well for black, and forcing rook swap makes the white king able to come into queen side and take back the pawn advantage.
f3 is really the best answer since it has priority for threathning the rook, displacing it from e4, and Rf4? then Nb3 comes at use to open the way for Re1 and black will face alot of trouble in tempos because of the rook bad positioning.
AAAAAARGH!
Reading all these claims that "a pawn is a pawn" weakened or not makes me want to vomit. True ignorance . . . and yet the writers are proud of being ignorant. I think we ought to ask the ten highest-ranked players on the site to comment on the position. I believe they'll agree with me at least 90%. As an example of what I mean: one of the key concepts in Kmoch's Pawn Power is that of "the monster." which is a series of three, four or even five pawns in a file that wind up being worth about half-a-pawn in some positions because they cannot defend themselves. I've won a good 9-10 games based upon sacrifice to make a 3 or 4-pawn monster that obstructs someone's otherwise winning game and let's me queen my own pawns quickly. Besides Pawn Power you might also want to read Point-Count Chess.
Not only have I read the books I've recommended from time to time, but I use their ideas. I challenge any of these folks who have NOT read Pawn Power to play out the position with me having the Knight -- you having the Bishop and the three weakened pawns and you having the move. IF, after displaying your ignorance in print, you put your ignorance into action, you'll probably lose but certainly will get no more than a draw. I REPEAT: Black's positional minus with the three bad pawns is the equivalent of a -1.5 material deficit (expected +3 points actually is valued at +1.5 points) and an overall -0.5 material deficit. This diagram shown is the epitome of crippled pawns destroying a position's flexibility and handing all the good plans to the player with the knight despite the pawns being on both sides of the board which is normally a big plus for the player with the Bishop.
Good luck!