A reason for double-checking captures in the middle-game

Sort:
digispin

#1: White to move, what's the trick? Don't look at the next board because it gives it away!

 

Select the text after #1 for the answer:

#1 -> Rd6 (you'd have to know the answer to #2 to understand the purpose of this move)

 


 

#2 Should black take the Rook?

 

Select the text after #2 for the answer:

#2 -> White offers a rook for a knight. Yay! But when white recaptures the knight, the pawn is attacking the queen. You can take the pawn or move the queen to a handful of safe squares. It depends on your playstyle, but all choices lose. Qxd6 or Qb8, Qd6, Qd7, etc because white plays Qxg7++. The only other option at this point is to give up your queen in order to prevent the checkmate.



White was playing for tricks here, nothing was forced after Rd6. White was desperate to get his e5 pawn out of the way to free the battering ram of the queen and bishop. Those pieces were also placed in a far away corner of the board, easy to miss.

To reiterate the title of this post, check once, twice, thrice when making a significant capture. Especially if it the prior move looks dubious, as in "Why is white allowing the knight to capture the rook"? 

Note: This is my first post to show a simple study. Please send me any feedback. Thanks.

--
Asher

 

RAU4ever
digispin wrote:

White was playing for tricks here, nothing was forced after Rd6. 

I really disagree with this statement. To me, this is a wonderful example of how tactics merge with strategic goals. You often see that players at the lower levels play moves they don't want to play just in the hope that the opponent won't see that they're threatening a tactic. Moves like putting the knight on the edge of the board, just in the hope the opponent won't see the double attack you're threatening. That's bad chess. However, this position shows good chess. White plays a move he really wants to make with Rd6, cause he wants the control over the d-file. After a move like Rfd8 white will just play Rad1 and control the only open file on the board, improving white's position and improving his worst piece. Of course white will have to see what to do after a move like ...f6, which forces the retreat of the rook (Rxe6 is bad in view of Bf7 winning the exchange). But when white does simply retreat black will have a poor pawn structure with a weak e6 pawn. 

As feedback, I like the 'find the best move' format better than find the trick. It simulates a game a little bit better and will involve looking for the trick anyway. 

digispin
RAU4ever wrote:
digispin wrote:

White was playing for tricks here, nothing was forced after Rd6. 

I really disagree with this statement. To me, this is a wonderful example of how tactics merge with strategic goals. You often see that players at the lower levels play moves they don't want to play just in the hope that the opponent won't see that they're threatening a tactic. Moves like putting the knight on the edge of the board, just in the hope the opponent won't see the double attack you're threatening. That's bad chess. However, this position shows good chess. White plays a move he really wants to make with Rd6, cause he wants the control over the d-file. After a move like Rfd8 white will just play Rad1 and control the only open file on the board, improving white's position and improving his worst piece. Of course white will have to see what to do after a move like ...f6, which forces the retreat of the rook (Rxe6 is bad in view of Bf7 winning the exchange). But when white does simply retreat black will have a poor pawn structure with a weak e6 pawn. 

As feedback, I like the 'find the best move' format better than find the trick. It simulates a game a little bit better and will involve looking for the trick anyway. 

 

I know I'm coming back to this rather late, but I appreciate your comments explaining why this shouldn't be called a "trick". Perhaps it shows some unknown tactical skills I have happy.png,