Forums
Most Recent
- playing chess while high
- FACT: You can't improve at chess
- 1200 want to help beginners ☺
- Beating the Sicilian!
- I just plain suck
- Will computers ever solve chess?
- STOP CHALLENGING ME TO CHESS GAMES!!!
- Deep Blue decreased the number of chess players?
- Race to 100: Bishops VS Knights: Promotion
- Criticism of Chess.com University Prodigy Program
Forum Legend
- Following
- New Comments
- Locked Topic
- Pinned Topic
Is white's position Valid. I am a relative amatuer and have no engine and thought white's position looked rather formidable. I'm curious if anyone finds white' position to be sound, or is this just a nice to look at symmetrical assembly.
Typically, positions with the Bishops developed symmetrically... e3 and d3, f4 and c4, g5 and b5... are not particularly solid. An exception is the double-fianchetto with Bishops at g2 and b2, which can be quite resiliant given a good central formation.
Typically, positions with the Bishops developed symmetrically... e3 and d3, f4 and c4, g5 and b5... are not particularly solid. An exception is the double-fianchetto with Bishops at g2 and b2, which can be quite resiliant given a good central formation.
Although I don't personally think double-fianchetto is a good formation I confess I struggle againts it in play. The idea of commiting both the b and g pawn early and the extra step's to develop the bishop without a direct purpose doesn't do it for me.
There is a direct purpose... it gives you Bishop-control of e4, d4, e5 and d5. No other formation will offer that so early in the game.
Having said that... I don't often play the double-fianchetto either.
white will drown into a pusy , but black will win the game. all depends of if you are omosexual or not. <º))))<<( .I.