Dark Squares, Light Squares ???

Sort:
MisterBoneman

Since learning that there are books to help me learn Chess, and I think possibly every one of them that was any good, as well as a few that were not as important, all said something to the dark square/light square dominance. But, for the most part, we have been left to our own analysis of WHY that is important. At least, that's what it seemed.

Dark squares? yeah, there are 32 of them. Same as light squares. So? Are we expected to control ALL of the dark or light squares? Why are either important? The answer is simpler than you could imagine.

The main interest a player needs to concentrate on is avenues in and out of each other's areas. If Pawns are missing in the center, then that is likely an avenue of attack. The play will be around who can use that avenue.

If you are afraid of shots, and you have to go to the doctor's, and he wants to give you a shot...if you wore a leather jacket and won't take it off, then you are protecting your personal avenue. First...roll up your sleeve and get the shot. Your doctor isn't going to hurt a cash customer for years to come. Second, decide how to open or close an avenue, and do so at your need.

If your opponent has already staked a claim to an avenue of attack, then you need to assess what it is that opponent will bring to bear at you. Is the avenue a diagonal or rank or file? Paying attention to the movement of the troops behind the front is also a clue. If the Rook moves to the King file, even though it is on the back rank and even if the King file isn't open, the plan will be to OPEN it later...once forces are gathered to bring hail and brimstone down on your side of the board.

The color squares involved will be a clue for you to guard open lines and be in control of those lines if possible. OR, start deciding what counter measures you will be mounting after your opponent's attack is finished (hopefully finished) and how oyu can still open or close, or at the very least , restrict the open lines.

If there are many different open squares, but no long diagonals or files? Then look for Knights to lead the attacks, or defenses, and then utilize a sacrifice to open as you need it and reclaim your piece (maybe even luckily hanging on to any Pawn grabs you make on the way by) during your counter attack.

Now, on a more personal side, there are the squares around your King. Some of us wear the Emperor's clothes. That is to say, we will throw our Pawns into the fracas if we think we can get an advantage. That's easy to assess. Either color attacking piece is good.

On the other hand, study a fianchettoed King/Bishop corner. Like the kind you would find in a King's Indian, or Sicilian Dragon. With a Bishop at g7 and a King at g8, you have a specific weapon, and once used, leaves a dark square deficiency behind, so, use your weapon well. Get GOOD compensation for it. MAKE the good compensation happen, if you can. The moral is, the Bishop is in at g7, then the whole corner is strong. If the Bishop is gone...it's a glaring weakness. And one always attacks the opponent's weakest points.

If the Rook's Pawn is lifted to the third square, as in the Ruy Lopez Black Queenside, then Black must give extra attention before castling Queen side as the line of Pawns is weaker. Same as if the h Pawn is lifted to the third square and castles King side.

1. e4  e5

2. Nf3  Nc6

3. Bb5  Nf6

4. 0-0  Ng4 ?

5. h3  h5

 Which King position has more problems than the other? This is from the  Fishing Pole trap in the Berlin Defense. That isn't important. What IS important is that the Knight at g4 should not be taken by White, because a quick game will follow...

6. hxg4 ??  hxg4 !

and now there is no help for White after Black's charging  ...Qh5, via a dark diagonal leading to the open h file and coupled with his Rook, will end the game.

The h file was the key to that attack, but, given resistance, ....Bc5 opens the light squared diagonal.

These are blatant avenues to the King's position. Light squares and an h file.

OK, so NOT a big piece of information, but, worthwhile.

Why am I bringing this information forward? Because I've been a novice at the game for so long, I began questioning why. I mean, I'm slow, but, not THAT slow. How did I get the information?

Well, as I mentioned, any book worth its weight in paper talked about light and dark squares, but, it wasn't until I matched that information to Andrew Soltis's "The Art of Defense in Chess" that it started dawning on me... I didn't have to guard all 32 squares of either color.

And now you won't have to guard all 32 of either color square anymore, either, eh?

gpobernardo

Nice article on positional theory there; I agree with your insights on open positions and on weaknesses. However, I'd like to add a point or two there:

1. Since we are talking positions based on the color of the square, it would be useful to place our pieces and pawns on the opposite color to the opponent's bishop if he has one. If the opponent has two, then it would be wise to place our pieces on a color opposite to his active bishop.

2. In line with that, it then would also be good to block the activity of our opponent's bishop that is one the same color of the square on which most of our pieces and pawns are on by locking it up with pawn chains.

These two points are good preparations done in the middle game to prepare for an endgame.

These are nice theories, but we need to put them into practice for them to be worth something. Keep playing, and I'll meet you over the board, digitally or actually, one of these days.

Bobcat

Ther's lots of flaws in the chess theories from the past.  Undecided
and the future WILL tell us what we did wrong today.Frown
stop arguing and give me your best game.              Yell 

Bob Cat:                                                        Smile

costachess

<iframe border="0" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" width="574" height="519" src="http://www.chess.com/emboard?id=1130194"></iframe>

costachess

<iframe border="0" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" width="574" height="519" src="http://www.chess.com/emboard?id=1130194"></iframe>

MisterBoneman

http://www.chess.com/emboard?id=1130194

MisterBoneman

once more into the network, this address is from costachess, who gives excellent example on the matter. But, you have to go there.

http://www.chess.com/emboard?id=1130194

Well worth the look!

Thanx costachess, and gpobernardo, too  for those great ideas. As well as the Bustyness21, who left a few books to read on the matter. I hope it's OK to display them, here.

" You have taken on a subject akin to the black panther deep in the jungle. He's hard to find let alone describe.

For your reading pleasure I will leave you with 3 sources that I know of. The first comes from David Bronstein in his classic Zurich International Chess Tournament 1953. Just check out game 1, Szabo-Geller, for Cunning Deviks take. The 2nd is from Understanding the Sacrifice by Angus Dunnington. See Chapter 2, The Colour Complex. And finally you may be interested to read some Alex Yermolinsky in The Road to Chess Improvement. Check-out Back to the Exchanging Business - The New Liberated Approach from Part 3 (pg.176). Here you get to enjoy the paradoxical nature of our beautiful game. This book is superb to just read through even if you don't feel like setting-up positions by the way."

Well, I don't know about who else will read the post, but me? I'm going out to search those books ASAP

Thanx.

oidropdit

Chess is mental judo. If your style focuses more on offense, you probably choose to dominate squares of one color. Good defense must exploit the imbalance when given the chance to counter-punch.

costachess

I will post here a analize more deepest of my game. I hope in few days. I will post more to games of mine and possibily a ten top FIDE with my commentaries to discuss here.