It' ironic that Thriller is now jumping all over me, even though he was the original commenter who said that d5 was the slam-dunk best move in that Four Knights position.
Chess Experts Getting It Wrong
Sort:
ipcress12 wrote:
A good answer from an honest expert IMO would go something like this:
d5? Well, that goes against my positional instincts. It resolves the central tension without much reason, it can be counterattacked by c6 and f5.
It's interesting that Stockfish gives consistently gives it a high evaluation over a couple days of processing, but the move is still tightly grouped with the other candidates and chess engines are weak when it comes to long-term considerations especially when viewed from early in the game.
It's possible there are tactical reasons which justify d5 or that it sheds light on some new understanding of positions like this one. Theory is always growing and changing.
Perhaps some enterprising player will investigate d5 and do well with it in tournament play. Time will tell. In the meanime it's still not a choice I'd make. It is playable of course though it probably allows Black to equalize more quickly than X or Y move.
Very nice answer!
Jan 6, 2016
0
#84
ipcress12:
While experts get things wrong, those things are usually quite complex and on the cutting edge side of things. But in contrast there are many basic things which experts and non-experts genuinely know, that aren't up for discussion.
For example at my mediocore level I can say with 100% certainty that 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6 is a bad move. I'd then expect a 1000 rated player to listen and learn, instead of "well that's just like, your opinion man". Or "fashions change".
The same can maybe be applied to pfren over the d5 discussion, or maybe not. But how are you in a position to make that judgement? This is a guy understanding chess at a level far beyond us. For all you know an international master having to argue about that move is as silly as my f6 example. In which case I can sympathise with Pfren. Having to put up every day with people 1000 points lower than him arguing about things which are basic from his perspective must be annoying, in which case I don't blame him for saying "shut up".
Jan 6, 2016
0
#85
Perhaps unfortunately, it's practically by definition that the understanding of experts is "light years ahead" of us non-experts. And so areas we believe or wish were grey, and subject to a revolution in ideas, may be very black and white, with definite conclusions.
Answering "my impression is that it's bad, but analysis may prove otherwise" would be disingenuous if they have already done analysis. d5 in that position is not a novel structure. There are plenty of reference positions IMO. For myself, as a ruy player, the steinitz deferred is a good example. Last year I actually sat with an engine for 3-4 hours straight trying to make it's #1 choice (d5) work. I even tried d5 in a game. I was very frustrated that all the endings were always draws, and in the middlegame black was under no pressure. All this in spite of a constant 0.4 from the engine. I finally realized (after that 4 hour session, reviewing my game) that I should turn off the engine, and it was not a good idea.
I'm not saying the engine is dumb, or you're dumb, or anyone who wanted to play d5 is dumb. But maybe you don't give experts enough credit. My peak rating may be 500 points below Pfren's (now 500 points is a revolution in ideas!) but even I had had analyzed that structure and had real game experience to draw upon.
And again, the new idea needs more to back it up than observing historically there have been intellectual revolutions. My idea with d5 was that I was getting a KID structure with what I believed was a suboptimal piece placement for my opponent. I kept all minor pieces on the board and so additionally believed that the space was useful for me. I answered f5 with exf with the idea of occupying e4 with a piece and grinding a game from there. Unfortunately my c5 break never happened and their play on the kingside and f file gave complete equality.
Jan 6, 2016
0
#86
ipcress12 wrote:
It' ironic that Thriller is now jumping all over me, even though he was the original commenter who said that d5 was the slam-dunk best move in that Four Knights position.
Eh - I'm just yanking your chain!
(Tongue in cheek) - Of course, I could also just go ahead and say "I'm the Expert, now you shut up!" -- LOL
In the above position.
I believe the move d5 or dxe4 are equally the best moves in that position.
I could see how the move d5 would be beneficial in such a position.
For example:
You can see how the knight not being on c3 can help white play a c4 pawn push which gains space.
The c4 pawn can help give extra support to the white center in an event of any c6 pawn breaks.
The development of the c4 pawn can also help white set up counter attacking chances on the queen side.
Thus, if black trys to do a g6 - f5 pawn similar to lines such as Kings Indian Defense.
White can respond with b4 c5 pawn breaks similar to that of the Bayonet Attack.
In the following thread:
The position in question people keep talking about is the below one:
It is unclear as to how the position ended up that way.
Furthermore, The insertion of the move Nc3 shows no reason has to why white would want to proceed with d5?
Lastly, I tryed to figure out a very logical way of reaching this position.
I came up with the following set of moves.
The above position starts off as the Pirc Defense.
At move 3 black plays e5 which is a very sneaky way of trying to get into the Philidor Defense while avoiding some of whites other responses.
At move 4 white has the option of taking the E pawn.
Many players playing white believe taking the E pawn is a very tough position.
Some believe white is slightly better due to the black king in the center.
Others believe there is no advantage at all.
Nevertheless many players believe the position is very tough to convert into a win.
Thus, White players play the move 4.Nf3 keeping the tension.
At which point players who like the philidor proceed with 4...Nbd7.
The knight on d7 + pawn on d6 = extra support to the e5 pawn.
White has the d4 + knight on f3 = attacking the e5 square.
Now the question one has to ask themselves is why is the knight on d7?
Surely, Black can play the knight to c6 and from c6 it can defend the e5 pawn just the same?
Grand Masters and Coaches all over the World say the most natural squares for the black knights are on the C6 and F6 square.
As white the most natural knight squares are the C3 and F3 squares.
So why are they playing the knight to the passive square d7?
It is not just any square. It is the passive for the knight.
Because normally the knight wants to go to the awesome c6 square.
These Grand Masters putting there pieces on a passive square?
What gives in this position!
I put the question to you lady's and gentlemen!
Maybe we can figure this out together!
White is attacking e5
Black is defending e5
So the knight placement on c6 vs d7 has to do with the e5 square!
It makes perfect logical sense!
How do we as white add more pressure to the e5 square!
By taking advantage of the knight placement!
We have got to take advantage of the knight placement that is the clue!
4...Nbd7 is the book move.
4...Nc6 is not the book move.
Now if we play the pawn push 5.d5
Does that add pressure to the e5 square?
No
All the pressure we had on e5 is now gone!
because the pawn has been pushed and it has released the tension!
We don't want to release the tension! We want to build the tension!
We have black in the oven right now.
We are turning it up a knotch.
We are adding more heat!
I will put it in a puzzle.
The trick we are attacking e5.
We want to add more attackers to e5
or
We want to reduce blacks defenders from e5
CLUE!!
I gave you clues!!
Find the move.
Hopefully you know the move.
You can see how by playing the move it reduces blacks control of the e5 square.
Which is why they play the knight to d7.
“The Pin is mightier than the sword”
―
Notice the pin in the below position!
It is reducing black's control of the e5 square.
White may even have idea's of taking out the knight than winning the e5 pawn if black is not careful!
Lets show an example:
Lets pretend black doesn't see any danger.
Lets say he plays a6 to kick the bishop. Black is totally unaware of the danger in his position.
Look at that position!
It is unplayable!
Black position is completely lost with perfect play!
Look at the horror of that position.
White is up 1 pawn
White has a double attack on c6 and f7!
The Black king is exposed to the elements in the center of the board!
The red highlights show the 2 pawns under attack.
The yellow highlights show the isolated pawn structure and the exposed black king.
The green highlights show how simple white plan is!
Look at all those juicy green squares.
Look how easy the position is!
A Chess engine says this position is +2.
A Grand Master says this position is +1,000
Forced mate in 102
If white plays perfect there is nothing black can do to win or draw!
It is a forced mate with perfect play from this position.
A Grand Master would not even play this position.
The engine doesn't see the forced mate because of its horizon.
It can only see an evaluate to a certain depth.
Its the engines horizon.
Now you might say how does playing the knight to d7 stop this idea?
Notice the black defensive resource they have if white trys to do the same plan!
You see the move c6 can be played which prevents the pin.
Why are we preventing the pin?
Because
“The Pin is mightier than the sword”
―
Thanks for enlightening us Fred.
They do not play 4...Nc6 in this position.
They play 4...Nbd7
If 4...Nc6 is played for what ever reason they continue with 5.Bb5.
Thus, the move 5.d5 is not played in this position.
A good answer from an honest expert IMO would go something like this:
d5? Well, that goes against my positional instincts. It resolves the central tension without much reason, it can be counterattacked by c6 and f5.
It's interesting that Stockfish gives consistently gives it a high evaluation over a couple days of processing, but the move is still tightly grouped with the other candidates and chess engines are weak when it comes to long-term considerations especially when viewed from early in the game.
It's possible there are tactical reasons which justify d5 or that it sheds light on some new understanding of positions like this one. Theory is always growing and changing.
Perhaps some enterprising player will investigate d5 and do well with it in tournament play. Time will tell. In the meanime it's still not a choice I'd make. It is playable of course though it probably allows Black to equalize more quickly than X or Y move.