Move 16 , difficulty to find a plan

Hi everyone,

As a beginner player, i am very often in a somewhat even  position (as far as i can analyze it at my level) . At this stage, i have no clue what is an appropriate strategy at this stage. Should i start to push pawns on the king side or is it too early and dangerous? Should i try to push queen side where white has more pawns than me?.

Thanks in advance for any tipsIn this game (i am black), my only "plan" was to try to make white bishop "useless" by trying to block his pawns on central white squares. Can someone give an advice in this position?

yeah u have a slight edge, e6-e5 push looks good here.  recapture with pawn if he captures.  later move ur f rook to d-file

the game was already over when i posted , next times i will post full game if it is required ( it is my first post, so i do not know). But i was only interested of this position

It was NOT still going, the game was over and only then did i start a post about it 

Reminds me of a Nimzo Indian Hubner type structure (after e5 and c5)  e5 is the move I was thinking of and for the same reason, so you're thinking correctly IMO.

In a structure like e5 c5 (for black) and white plays d5 I like black... but I don't know how much he can make of it.  Usually black seeks play on the kingside in a structure like this but here you don't have many pieces.  The endgame will probably be nice for you in that structure too (good bishop and white has doubled pawns).

Your weakness of course is the b pawn.  Sometimes you want to advance and trade off your weak pawns but here you can't do it (i.e. b5) so just hold steady on the queenside (keep b7 defended).

Another nimzo like structure change would be with d5 and c5, but you're not set up for it  here (d5 just loses a pawn).

I think it would be useful to post the whole game so we might be able to point out a time when black had more ambitious plans available.  Here I'd be thinking of e5 and an endgame.  Earlier you may have had kingside attacks available.  If this is a type of position you often face then for plans in general I recommend playing over some nimzo indian games.  Also to get an idea of what book moves look like because your structure looks really passive for it being move 26 in the game.  I would guess white had a very good position at some point and missed an opportunity.

Thanks for the two analysis, i posted the full game in a post above. In the game i indeed pushed the e-pawn, after first moving the rook to defend the b-pawn.

I later traded my white bishop because since my plan was to block pawns on white square, i guessed my white bishop would not be as usefull as his knight. 

I have no knowledge of "Nimzo Indian Hubner type structure"  so i will try to take a look.

Hey, I see it now :)

Never mind about white being better, the position didn't come about the way I imagined it.

The only reason I know about that variation is Fischer played it in his world championship match.  Here's the game: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044723

Hey, and you had a chance to play b5 and get rid of your weakness with 26...b5.  Winning some pawns instead wasn't so bad though.

You are far from alone. When the opening is done and the middle game is under way and there are no immediate threats to deal with what you need is a plan. Or three plans. In fact ten plans would also be good.

What do I mean by a plan? Well it is not a plan to deliver checkmate. If there were some splendid combination to be found forcing mate in three or four moves you would not be starting this thread. No I mean a plan to improve a piece, or to sort out some weakness in your pawns, or to induce a weakness in his pawns. Small stuff. But stuff which later you will be able to work with and turn into concrete advantage.

One technique that sometimes gets me started is to ask myself "if I could pick up one of my pieces (for me, for some reason, it is usualy a knight) which square would I put it on"? In this position it would be great to have the white bishop on b5 - attacking the over-extended pawn and happy to be exchanged. But can it get there? Answer (I think), no. So that didn't get us far. What about that hole on f6? Great place for my knight! Can it get there? Well there is a route (f1, e3, g4, f6) but it needs defending when it gets there. Is there any way to do that? Well perhaps not for now. But the knight has been improved already if it gets to e3. If I retreat the knight to f1 what opportunity does he have? Ah yes, I give up some control of b3 and his funny looking knight on a5 would happily jump in there. So can I do anything about that knight first? Well yes, if I attack the overadvanced a pawn the knight must retreat. So there is something I might do (Qd1 and Bc2). My plan would be to drive the enemy knight back and then advance my own knight to a better square.

Now it would take another few seconds or minutes (or days if you are as slow as me) to work out if that plan is good or bad. And, of course, it is not the only plan available in this position. If time allows and you find three possible plans you get to evaluate which to prefer. But you are in a different position to the one you describe - feeling blank.  And the starting point is to see where your pieces might be better placed and then use that to get specific.

Try the technique.

ok, thanks for the advice , i think i already saw a similar tip ( try to improve the position of your worse placed piece)

I often have a similar problem in long games.  I get through the opening with a equal or slightly winning position and then have no idea what to do.  I can see many possible tactics, but I almost always see how my opponent can refute them and gain a small advantage.  Because of this, I often end up playing useless moves without any sort of plan.  Maybe it's a good idea to just forget about your rating and take chances, but i always know there's a good move out there.  I think it's a problem with discerning the good from the not bad.          

Don't agree that there is always a good move out there.

Young Carlsen doesn't agree either. His particular genius is in playing move after move in equal positions which have no more merit than giving nothing away and making his opponent find the next move. Because he has phenomenal energy, confidence and application he keeps it up longest and finds an edge. Then there is a move out there and he finds it. His knack is not in always finding the move however sterile the position but rather in keeoing the game alive so that he maximises the chance that at some point the move will eventually appear.

So don't trouble yourself about the move. Find a move.

How to distinguish between the moves on offer? Well, again, it is not rocket science. I particularly like moves which have a threat. It limits my opponent's options and makes it a little bit easier for me to calculate where the move is taking me. I find really simple threats the best of all - "if I put that bishop there it attacks that undefended pawn". Unlikely to win you points on the tactics trainer. But it will help you see what move your opponent is likely to make in reply.

Maybe there are no threats to make (the likely case). Well when you come up with two or three candidate moves; look to see which seems the most natural. Be suspicious of moves that take a piece away from the centre. Only prefer that one if you can precisely calculate where it goes. If another move keeps your pieces co-ordinated incline to that one. Be very cautious about pawn moves. When, in the middle game, a plan comes readily to mind which requires pawn advances it is very likely to be a good plan. But in the case we are considering, where nothing comes readily to mind, pawn advances just to be doing something are almost always going to be bad.

There is much more that can be said. But not by me.

Good luck. :)