Castling Structure (Which one do you prefer ?)

Buy the Kurogkug big book of strategy.

@TeraHammer : So the black bishop has more value than white bishop. Since losing the black bishop would give you more pressure to the King. Sometimes i use black castling but i forgot to keep my dark bishop, that's why i feel lots of pressure after that.

@bbracken : Thx a lot for your explanation, i think i get it. So in your opinion black castling is better ?

@all : Thx for your comments and shares, i should rethink about my castling structure. But atm i think white castling still suit me more, since i always play with it (except on Bird opening). If anyone has another opinion, please share it. I would be very appreciate it.

Of course the placement of the other pieces is relevant.Black's structure is the well known  fianketo.The fianketo structure can be a safe shelter for the king but can also be a target to attack.Important lines are based entirely on fianketo attacks(Yugoslav attack in Dragon), books have been written on how to attack fianketo.Fianketo , depending on the position can be an asset but can also be a liability.See the next position

  White can carry out a very strong attack on the fianketo with 9.h4! .In fact White will win only 8 moves later

Same castling formation for black.The attack with 14.h4? is now wrong.Black responds 14...c5! and wins only 9 moves later.

2 games , 2 identical "castling structures", 2 identical attacks but 2 totally different  results.

Yes. An International Master said, basically, that there must be context for the two structures you're deciding about, meaning it depends on how the rest of the pieces are positioned which should make the decision for you.

........and there is no such thing as "castling structure".The  decision of where  the bishop must be developed(fianchetto or not) has nothing to do with what "castling structure" I want.It has to do with the pawn structure, the placement of pieces and the cooperation I want to achieve.

For example 

 For black , the best way to continue is ...g6 and ...Bg7 but that is because the bishop will be very strong on e5 with the long dark diagonal widely open.

If I slightly change just one move......

Now black, usually, doesn't play g6 and Bg7 and prefers Be7 followed by a later Bg5.In both cases , Black's decision is based on  the pawn structure and not on the "castling structure". 

 I am saying that because your second "castling structure"(White's) has a bishop at g3 and a pawn at h3.If you try to "manufacture" this thing , most possibly you will play 2 or more bad moves.The bishop may needed elsewhere and the h3-pawn can easily become a target.

I think you are understanding the whole thing wrong.  

@trysts :Thx, i understood :D

@bbracken : Actually the knight and bishop are just complement. That 2 castling structure is the most commonly used in my experience. The first time i make the diagram there are only King, Rook, and 3 Pawns. But i think black castling need fianchettoed bishop. And it wouldn't fair if there is no white bishop. But i shouldn't put that bishop on g3, maybe it would be better on e2 or d3, so there will be no discussion about it. And for knights, they are really just complement. As you can see i just put them anywhere that make sense :D

@Michael-G : Thx for your shares. I agree that there is no such thing called "castling structure", i use this phrase to make it easier to understand. If i say "castling position" it would be ambiguous, is it castling to kingside or queenside.
About the bishop and knight, they are just complement (see @bbracken above).
So by your opinion if you want to castling like black you don't need a fianchettoed bishop ? Furthermore, even if you don't have any bishop you would still do black castling ? As TeraHammer has mentioned above on #21, on black castling the dark bishop is very important, and i agree with it.

"I think you are understanding the whole thing wrong."
I must say yes and no.
The first time i play chess is around 1993, but just for fun nothing serious. I don't play oftenly, and i just play again recently. I'm new to chess theory. Chess.com is my first online chess site. And if you check my profile, i just joined here. So yes i'm very new to chess theory, furthermore online chess.
Since we are in internet era nowadays, we can find anything including chess theory EASILY. That's why i'm asking something i don't understand here (now).
I do understand that castling is to protect the king. I do understand that when i castling it's depends on my pieces position. I do understand that the 2 "castling structure" in my first post is the most commonly used.
What i don't understand is the theory behind it, the advantages and disadvantages of each "castling structure". And since there is no such thing like "castling structure" theory or "castling structure" name (and advantages and disadvantages furthermore), so my question is completely wrong. And i think there is no need to discuss it anymore. Case closed.

@all : Thx for your shares and comments. Even it's a wrong question, at least i still learn something. Thx guys :D

Regards,

-DinneBolt~~

-Edited-
Misreading..

I like the fianchettoed bishop better. Each side has it's vulnerabilities. I tend to find it more difficult to invades black's shape.

@nameno1had : Thx for passing by :D

@bbracken : Thx. Learning chess theory is something i do recently. And i like to learn something i interested in. Maybe there will be fault here and there, but it's a process to be better :D

I have a hard time buying an IM or GM feeling the need to belittle anyone in a forum, unless of course they are either on the same level, and/or the other person is very condescending towards the IM or GM.

Sometimes I think about what it would be like to converse with an omniscient being.

I guess maybe a GM/IM might understand more what it is like, after trying to reason with someone who might know only half of what they do.

But then a GM/IM knows nothing compared to someone that thinks he knows everything.

Whatever he will tell him, it will be impossible to make that chess god think simply (let alone logically). He knows everything, he does not need any advice. It's just that his connection is bad, he constantly times out and so his rating is stuck at 1100.

Something else I find both curious and absurd, is when, an IM decides to drop in and give free advice and lessons, but the "underrated" decide to reprove the master in front of his class....maybe I should get some apples...

Then, would it be fair to assume you worded that wrong?

I missed what? That someone tries to form a generic defensive pattern by looking just at a small fraction of the board?

That one I did understand, but the OP still has not understood that such a way of thinking is fundamentally wrong and counterproductive. And then, follow monumental comments like the one on #21, which are probably referring to some other sort of game- but surely enough not chess.

The OP's question was very clear to me IM pfren. Perhaps you should refrain yourself from mocking other people too.

The way I see it is that the OP asked which structure do you like better. Of course it will feel different in different positions, but on a whole i prefer the fianchetto'd black bishop, rather than the white structure as the white structure feels slightly opened. 

That being said, everything could be the reverse in different positions.

actually it depends entirely on the board.

so actually, the answer is "it depends".

but the way you've posted the diagram, i prefer black.

xD

trollz.

THAT DIAGRAM IS MISLEADING PEOPLE TO THINK BLACK

On the diagram you prefer Black, why? Because he has the better draw?

bb bbracken, you called an IM a jerk, instant-ban please xD

no, cus i dont like white. not cus im racist, but because i dont like the bishop on g3 and the pawn on h3.

personally anyway

None is better of course, without putting the other pieces onboard. Whoever said "other pieces are irrelevant" has still to read lesson number two.

The above position is a boring draw, so it doesn't count for anything.

......................................................................................

This was the IMs first contribution to the OPs post. Nothing of course is wrong with his opinion.

Then he was attacked by this comment-

^ lazy answer. Ofcourse structures can be analysed without needing legal diagrams. For example, a knight on e5 is generally better placed than a knight on a1, because it has more moves.

...taking a jab at him, and asserting that his reply is "lazy".

...and of course it all went down hill from there.

It continues to amaze me how people can continually attack one another for no reason what-so-ever...in the cyber world yes, but moreso in the real world. We feel that only "our" opinion matters...and those who do not share this, we should disrespect.

It seems that stupidity is contagious, so I will refrain posting at this thread from now on.