Does every move have to count?
Sort:
But what about more towards the midgame, when you have things set up well? Is there anytime where you just want to hold off and let them fall into a trap or something to that effect?
There do exist rare cases where one side has a very firm position and essentially waits for the opponent to over extend himself. These are rare and in general it's better to play with an active plan. If you find yourself getting into positions where you don't know what to do other than wait for your opponent to make something happen, you should consider how you got into those positions and what you might do to avoid them in the future.
Yeah I've seen teaching games where they differentiate between when "wait and see" is a good policy and when it gets you killed. So I'm guessing there are times when conservative/noncommittal moves are ok.
So there are cases, but it's when you have an extremely good defense set up.
Interesting, can someone perhaps display a case like that here?
I'd like to see one as well. I've been in situations where it seemed like stalling was a good idea but I'm know I'm not good enough to know if that was the best way.
Miles_Deus wrote: Interesting, can someone perhaps display a case like that here?
There is an example of the hedgehog system analyzed here by Andrew Martin.
Gosh, I'm sorry I didn't do all the work for you. It would be just as easy for you to make a forum post with a playable board as it would for me.
No, HotFlow, that's not what I said at all. What is that you expect me to do for you? I assume translate that webpage into a forum post so everyone can see the game. Well, why don't you do that. Then everyone can see the game. The needs of the many are met if just one (you) set up the game here.
is there a time when you should stall and wait for something?
In some openings, the best strategy for Black is to delay developing some pieces until White has commited to a specific setup. In the Slav Black often plays ...a6 and in the Scandinavian Black often plays ...c6.
Also, in the endgame the ability to wait or pass is very important. If you wish you could pass (or play a waiting move) but you can't, you're in zugzwang.
"I couldn't care less if you choose to post it up or not."
This attitude certainly wasn't evident in your previous posts.
My guess is that this thread and the potential answers are most important to the original poster. I'm just trying to offer a little help. If that person isn't willing to go to click one link and look at the diagrams on that page, then honestly chess is not for them.
Way to change the topic.
At least you are here to decide how I should spend the hours of my day (making lengthy posts instead of providing a useful link to an already perfectly fine website).
getting back to the thread topic.
lasker and capablanca both said that if there were no tactics and no obvious plan that a player would do well to see which one or more of their pieces could be better positioned and to work out and implement a means to do that.
there are endgames where a player loses a move in order to win(ie triangulation).but more often than not i think that there needs to be reason and purpose to all moves in the opening and middlegame.
to sit back and hope your opponent over reaches themselves or blunders is not something that i want to rely on to win.
That hedgehog game, Gschnitzer-Lutz is very interesting. I play the English but I rarely encounter this defense. It took 15 minutes to play through some game and pick up some key ideas, and another 15 minutes to consider the most interesting sidelines (like 8...Nc6). It definitely reminds me of the Rumble in the Jungle.
"Your wasting your breath bar a few die-hards that may take the time to examine it closely."
Ignoring what I've written in the past and repeating the same statements you've already made. What can I do but repeat what I've said. I am answer the original poster, whom I assume is interested enough in his own question to click on a single link.
Your previous post was in fact off topic. It was not a response to material of what I wrote, it was a response to a sentence fragment. Look, All I did in this thread was try to help anyone interested in the kind of strategies that were the topic of the original post by providing a link to an analysis of the game. You suggested that I copy the entire analysis over to this thread. Of course you backtrack when I call you on the time it would take to do that, suggesting I just copy one diagram.
I'm not interested in having petty spats in these forums. I am interested in providing chess information to chess enthusiasts and sharing discussions of chess with them. I'm not interested in someone criticizing the way I do that simply because they are lazy.
Nov 7, 2007
0
#17
likesforests wrote:
is there a time when you should stall and wait for something?
In some openings, the best strategy for Black is to delay developing some pieces until White has commited to a specific setup. In the Slav Black often plays ...a6 and in the Scandinavian Black often plays ...c6.
Also, in the endgame the ability to wait or pass is very important. If you wish you could pass (or play a waiting move) but you can't, you're in zugzwang.
Try and bring this back to the original topic...This post said it best imop.
Never just do something because you don't know what to do. Also rarely should you wait just to "set a trap". If you are waiting then they don't have to take the trap in which case you are just waiting(while the other person gets to develop). If you are making good developing moves while allowing the other person to fall into a trap(if they so choose) that is fine. But, if you are trying to set a trap and using a move with no other purpose than(to let them fall into your trap) you are wasting your time.
In addition as has been said sometimes a waiting move is good though..This is just one very simple position. Have a look http://chess.about.com/library/weekly/aa04b07.htm. If you don't quite understand. After a6 if k takes knight the a pawn can not be caught.
Nov 7, 2007
0
#18
erikido23 wrote: likesforests wrote:
is there a time when you should stall and wait for something?
In some openings, the best strategy for Black is to delay developing some pieces until White has commited to a specific setup. In the Slav Black often plays ...a6 and in the Scandinavian Black often plays ...c6.
Also, in the endgame the ability to wait or pass is very important. If you wish you could pass (or play a waiting move) but you can't, you're in zugzwang.
Try and bring this back to the original topic...This post said it best imop.
Never just do something because you don't know what to do. Also rarely should you wait just to "set a trap". If you are waiting then they don't have to take the trap in which case you are just waiting(while the other person gets to develop). If you are making good developing moves while allowing the other person to fall into a trap(if they so choose) that is fine. But, if you are trying to set a trap and using a move with no other purpose than(to let them fall into your trap) you are wasting your time.
In addition as has been said sometimes a waiting move is good though..This is just one very simple position. Have a look http://chess.about.com/library/weekly/aa04b07.htm. If you don't quite understand. After a6 if k takes knight the a pawn can not be caught.
I found an analysis by an IM of a game he played which shows the importance of every move as well. Take a look
http://www.chessvideos.tv/forum/about1198.html
There are special cases where it is preferable to lose a move. This occasionally occurs in the middle-game, but much more often (and more clearly) in the endgame. The idea is to put your opponent in zugzwang, which means whatever move he makes will worsen his position. Most books that discuss endgames will have at least one example. I will post one:
Plain and simple, your suggestion sucked and you couldn't let it go. I made a webpage with very good annotation one click away to the people who piped up to say they were interested in such a thing. You, out of your own admitted laziness, thought I should have done a lot more work than that (anyone catching the irony here??). Later in the thread you backed down and said I should just copy one diagram.
This whole thing makes me laugh.
Does every move made really need to be calculated and count for something or is there a time when you should stall and wait for something?