20297 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
In chess what are the differences between planning and strategy?
If a plan is long term then it is strategy. There are short range plans too though. You might be planning a tactical sequence or you could be planning to improve a pieces position which will help your strategic goals. That's all off the top of my head though so I'm sure there is a more erudite and profound explanation.
Thanks for your reply baddogno. Could you provide an example of this so I might get a more clear understanding of this? I think this is an area I am sorely lacking in understanding and thus application in my attempts to play.
but how much of chess is really strategy and not just technique??
I'll try billlearns, but probably what we'll learn is just how shallow my knowledge is. In a typical Sicilian dragon where white has castled queenside, the strategy for both sides is pretty well defined. White launches a kingside attack (yugoslav) and black is coming queenside. I've heard this referred to as a race position because time is of the essence and a lost tempo can literally mean the difference between winning and losing. As TetsuoShima has pointed out here is where proper technique is critical. The position has been analyzed deeply for both sides so part of your strategy is to choose a particular plan and then implement it. Depending on your opponents responses however that plan may change over and over again as tactics determine the moves. Your overall strategy however remains intact. Best I can do guy, I'm sure there have been books written on this...
baddogno; so now I know that I have to modify my plans as the game progresses. Cool. How do I know which side of the board I'm supposed to attack on in any opening? Is there a general rule for this? Or maybe a solid rule? Thanks.
Tetsuo; I'm not really sure what "technique" means. Could you elaborate for me on this? Thanks.
Can't give you a general rule, sorry. As in so much of chess, it depends on the situation. There are probably a lot more guidelines than I'm aware of but I'll share what I can. In that dragon example I gave above and generally when castling is on opposite sides, the attacks usually come on opposite wings. If you've both castled the same side, and the center is locked up, you can "violate" the usual rule about moving pawns from in front of your king and launch a pawn storm. Generally speaking you want to attack in the same direction that your pawn chain is facing, but I imagine there are plenty of exceptions to this and of course pawn chains don't always stay fixed. Nope, no simple general rules I'm afraid. Each pawn chain presents its' own challenges. Not a bad idea to invest in something like van der Sterren's Fundamental Chess Openings to learn the typical plans for each side in the openings. Advanced players seem to despise that book because it doesn't go deep enough for them, exactly why it's so valuable for relative newcomers to chess. Sounds to me that with your interest in the game you should consider bumping up your membership to diamond and get serious about studying. The questions you ask are the kinds of things addressed in Chess Mentor and many of the videos, especially IM Danny Rensch's live session videos and his neverending pawn structure series. Hope that helped at least a little.
If you want to make a distinction, you could say that strategy defines the aim and planning the general means.
Example : my strategical idea is to simplify into a B vs. N endgame with pawns on both sides of the board. My plan is to sacrifice a pawn to distract the opponent's rooks of(f?) the only open file, than seize it, get my pawn back and trade a pair of rooks, thus reaching the endgame I'm aiming at.
Another interpretation is to say planning defines the objectives on the chessboard (like 'strategy' above) and that strategy is a higher level of planning, like pre-game choices (ie. : "I'll play an opening which leads to slow build-up and try to steer into the endgame ; if I have the opportunity, I'll trade queens", or "I don't push too much today, will be happy with a quick draw to get some rest for tomorrow").
Technique refers to positions where you know very well how to proceed, but the solution are not tactical in nature. Ex. K+P vs. K endgame.
So here's what I got: STRATEGY is the aim/goal/big picture. PLANNING is the general means of attainment/small picture. TECHNIQUE refers to positional use of the pieces.
I'll look for van der sterren's fundamental chess openings.
Thanks again for all your help men!!!
The idea of a PAWN STORM when castled same side and center locked is great. I'll try to look for an opportunity to use it in my games. Thanks.
OK I will weigh in.
It is strategy when you place your bishop on th elong diagonal, because thats a good place for a bishop. Tactics is when you stick your bishop off in th ecorner, but in doing so you skewer two rooks.
My Dad used to tell me (many years ago) that a good tactical move trumps a strategic one, and that a strategic move was one that you made when you couldn't figure out a good tactic. Healso said that difference between a Grandmaster and a regular old club player was that both fellows know what good strategic moves are, but the Grandmaster sees the move that breaks the accepted moves.
The way I expalined it to my son was that you play strategic moves, and if you do, somehow a great tactical move with suddenly appear. You get to see those moves when your pieces are well placed and coordinated. Strategy gets the peieces into position, and tactics pulls the trigger.
As far as what side to attack on, it should become obvious as the game unfolds. Don't rely too much on trying to develop a technique - choose th ebest move and plan for any situation. If you see an opening, attack like a madman. If you sre a pawn up and have a solid defensive structure, wait for the endgame and grind your opponant down. Play the openings that tickle your fancy, and don't worry overmuch about what the "best" moves are.
"2016 NORWAY CHESS RECAP! with GM Hansen and GM Sokolov!"
4/30/2016 - Caught In A Web
by Ed4ward a few minutes ago
who is the best Kings Indian Attack player
by SmyslovFan a few minutes ago
Invisible mate in 1 move never seen before on the face of this earth!!
by Arisktotle 2 minutes ago
Repertoire Help: Response to 1.e4
by troy7915 2 minutes ago
How is a 2000 different from a 1200?
by Bilbo21 2 minutes ago
by alex-rodriguez 7 minutes ago
1000 elo blitz why so strong
by Trebe 10 minutes ago
DGT E-boards - worth the money?
by Eyechess 12 minutes ago
4/29/2016 - Bird's Opening, From's Gambit Analysis
by bestpony 13 minutes ago
I'm stuck at 1200-1380. Any tips on how to become better?
by ufmgambit06 16 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!