x
Chess - Play & Learn

Chess.com

FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store

VIEW

Semi-Slav, why f4? Other comments welcome too!!

  • #1

    Here is a game I just played as black. White messed up at the end, but I was surprised in the post-game analysis that the weird pawn "structure" (I don't think you can call it that) was not evaluated worse by Stockfish. Why is 7.f4 ok? To me it seemed like it completely opened up the king for attacking chances. Any other comments would be greatly appreciated.

     

     

     

  • #2
    ChiefBroccoli wrote:

    Why is 7.f4 ok? To me it seemed like it completely opened up the king for attacking chances.

     

    7. f4 is a perfectly normal move to support the knight outpost in e5.

    I suppose you've seen examples where weakening a king with a move like f4 before castling leads to a swift catastrophe but it is very wrong to think that such moves are always bad. The light weakness only matters if black can mount a quick and vigorous attack and here your pieces are far too passive for that. White has plenty of time for Bd3 + 0-0 + Kh1 (the last king move may be postponed or perhaps not needed at all) with perfectly normal castled king position.

  • #3

    "The light weakness only matters if black can mount a quick and vigorous attack and here your pieces are far too passive for that."

     

    Thank you for your concise and helpful advice on this. I put Stockfish through the position again, looking closely at what you mentioned about the Bd3 move. This is a usual developing move for white. Bd3 was at least delayed in my game and could have been delayed longer if white had played cxd5 instead of f4. However, f4 is right around the corner and the king seems to be even more exposed with that line.

     

    You mentioned light square weakness, but for whom? If you look at black's pawns, the central ones are on light squares. Does that mean white has the light square weakness? Or, looking at the bishop trapped on c8 and the space for white's bishop on f1 to develop, does that mean black has the light square weakness?

     

    Can you clarify what you mean by light square weakness in this position? I understand square weaknesses in other positions, but in this position it is hard to tell if one side has absolute weakness or if it is 50/50 square weakness depending on how you look at the position.

  • #4
    ChiefBroccoli wrote:

    "The light weakness only matters if black can mount a quick and vigorous attack and here your pieces are far too passive for that."

     

    Thank you for your concise and helpful advice on this. I put Stockfish through the position again, looking closely at what you mentioned about the Bd3 move. This is a usual developing move for white. Bd3 was at least delayed in my game and could have been delayed longer if white had played cxd5 instead of f4. However, f4 is right around the corner and the king seems to be even more exposed with that line.

     

    You mentioned light square weakness, but for whom? If you look at black's pawns, the central ones are on light squares. Does that mean white has the light square weakness? Or, looking at the bishop trapped on c8 and the space for white's bishop on f1 to develop, does that mean black has the light square weakness?

     

    Can you clarify what you mean by light square weakness in this position? I understand square weaknesses in other positions, but in this position it is hard to tell if one side has absolute weakness or if it is 50/50 square weakness depending on how you look at the position.

    Sorry, that was a typo perhaps caused by the fact that english is not my first language. I meant to write slight weakness meaning a small weakness. As I said it's totally insignificant in that particular position as other factors are much more important. Also, I don't think there are significantly weak squares in either player's position.

  • #5

    Ok, thanks. I think I will just write this one off as me as black overlooking the Bd3 move for white, and I maybe should have played Nbd7 instead of Qc7.

  • #6

    f4 (the stonewall attack) supports e5, and black can`t really attack whites king easily. also white can control the weak light squares with his minor pieces, so it seems perfectly fine to me.

  • #7

    "so it seems perfectly fine"

    Can you please define "it", and why is it "fine"? I am not a "fine" wine tea drinker. Please explain yourself. Thank you. I prefer beer.

  • #8
    ChiefBroccoli wrote:

    "so it seems perfectly fine"

    Can you please define "it", and why is it "fine"? I am not a "fine" wine tea drinker. Please explain yourself. Thank you. I prefer beer.

    I have no idea the heck your talking about, but fine. it gets control on the e5 square (the CENTER) and the weak light squares (i.e e4) can be covered by the knights and the light square bishop. and also, what CAN black do to attack the white king? what are YOUR thoughts? what is blacks plan?

  • #9

    "what are YOUR thoughts? what is blacks plan?"

    There is a great line from the movie, "The Winning Season". The coach is talking to his team, a girls' high school basketball team (kind of like the bad news bears).

     

    It went something like, "I didn't expect the other teams to play so well. I just thought they would all naturally suck."

     

    I guess if I want to get better I need to understand all the hoopla about LSB DSB. Is there a course I can take on this. I am completely confused when I read articles like this, https://www.chess.com/blog/QueenTakesKnightOOPS/the-stonewall-attack-ndash-basic-concepts-for-beginners

     

    Is there an NM or IM that would like to teach me on Skype this? I have the money, contact me.

     

Top

Online Now