Piece Coordination: What, How, and Why?

Well, not sure what you're asking. I'm just gonna suggest the game Giri vs Svidler in the Chess World Cup 2015. Giri seems to coordinate his pieces well to attack Svidler's king, but black's pieces, especially his minor pieces, coordinates a sufficient defence. Svidler simultaneous launches a slow but fatal counter attack to the queenside. Another nice game of piece coordiantion is the famous "Immortal Blitz Game" So vs Kasparov in St.Louis. A very beautiful attack by So in which he sacrifices pawn/pieces to allow the rest of the army to coordinate in sync to break through Kasparov's lines. I'm sorry if I cant give you classical games, I've usually gone for checking out more recent one.

Well, not sure what you're asking. I'm just gonna suggest the game Giri vs Svidler in the Chess World Cup 2015. Giri seems to coordinate his pieces well to attack Svidler's king, but black's pieces, especially his minor pieces, coordinates a sufficient defence. Svidler simultaneous launches a slow but fatal counter attack to the queenside. Another nice game of piece coordiantion is the famous "Immortal Blitz Game" So vs Kasparov in St.Louis. A very beautiful attack by So in which he sacrifices pawn/pieces to allow the rest of the army to coordinate in sync to break through Kasparov's lines. I'm sorry if I cant give you classical games, I've usually gone for checking out more recent one.

www.chessmasterschool.com is your answer.

The core course, which covers exactly this, is 13 months, and then the other two are 12 months.

I'm currently on Month 11 of the Core course myself.

attacking chess for the club player by Herman grooten . done.

First you have to know what 'coordination' or 'piece harmony' means.

When playing chess the weaker player does not have a globalist, pluralistic, expansive view. He is more focused on small details such as a threat of mate or the loss \ gain of a pawn. Eventually the player learns combinations, the first concept of union, where he can see how two or more pieces can combine to perform a long-term task.

However, combination does not require all parts to work together and does not require them to be working together from the start. The combinations can arise spontaneously as if it were baroque art (ok, I will not extend much in this sense: art, otherwise it will be too complex\abstract).

Once the player gets stronger he learns to make more extensive combinations. Then in the opening he understands that the knight goes to f3 and attacks the pawn e5 while the bishop goes to b5 temporarily, but will return to b3 and then c2 while pawn d4 aims to deviate the pawn e5 so that d4 advances and the bishop in c2 shine, the knight will go to d2 and then f1-g3 and then f5 and the rook can go to e3 and then h3 and the a-rook can go to a3 and slide to g3 and the queen goes to h4, the bishop will be sacrificed in h6 then it waits in c1 and pawn c3 has supported d4 and ...

Everything connects in a global, logical and flexible plan, I have just described some combinatorial themes of the opening ruy lopez also known as 'ruy lopzes auto-pilot', the game seems to play alone and the black player looks like he can only watch the show.

This coordination of the pieces in a larger plane and not only in a mate attack combining some pieces is a skill that some players naturally have (he did not have to learn the plan in a book, such as the master plan of Ruy Lopez or Sicilian) .

For this to be possible we must connect our moves. When a beginner plays chess he thinks: "oh, I have to develop the bishop, there's e3 and g5, I think g5 is stronger", and he plays Bg5. When a strong player plays chess he thinks: "I must play the bishop for e3 now because I want to move my queen to c2 without losing the defense of the pawn d4 and also want to free the square c1 for my a-rook, the queen and the rook want to press the pawn c, and the bishop at e3 prevents a quick c5 and this prevents from quick exchanges in c-rank giving me time for to conquer c-rank or gain the c-pawn. etc..

From what I have read in several different places what allows this better understanding of the position is always to see the end first. The player must play the final position and go back to the current position. Capablanca said that studying endgame was important and probably because of this: we learn to do this when we studied endgame.

Considering a simple endgame R + K vs. K + P. Imagine that it is the f-pawn. You quickly understand: blacks will only draw if can leave your king on e2 or g2 or e1 or g1 and your pawn is on f2 and the white king DOES NOT control the promotion square along with rook. Then once you determine the end, you begin to calculate how to coordinate your pieces. Whether the black objective is reached (in case you are black) or how to prevent it from happening (if you are white). You will not deviate your attention, you will not say: oh, the rook has to be active in the end, so I'll play Rf8. It does not work that way, you play more concretely. And it is what must be done since the opening.

Does it seem simple? It is simple, but there is an obstacle that prevents us from doing this: time and mental stamina. It is not good to calculate, all players tend to look for ways for avoid calculate. Calculating leaves us tired, irritated, etc. etc. But this analytical view must be developed so that it is possible to understand where each piece wants to go in position and how to put obstacles to the adversary at the same time as you progress. The example of how this works is to study/understand the logic behind the openings. Although many bad written books just say: White develops the bishop at e3 and the knight at f3, the openings have something more concrete in each move. something like: "White plays the bishop at e3 to prevent ... and the knight at f3 allowing ..." and any change in the order of black moves may 1) ease your initial plan or 2) allow you to trace a better plan.

For example: White plays 1.e4 and black plays 1 ... e5. White now plays 2.c3. You, with black pieces, realize that e5-pawn was not attacked and also realizes that c3-pawn prevents the immediate Nc3, and realizes that he does not have a bishop in c4 preventing d5 and remember his initial plan was to play d5, the famous' move liberator ' for black in opening game (1.e4 e5). You then play d5 right away without worrying about whether you're going to take it with the queen because in that version there is no more Nc3. This is an example of how the moves are connected with something concrete from the beginning and how you always think in order to coordinate all the parts to according to a global plan.

Sorry about the amount of text, is that I wanted to be sure that I could be understood on such interesting topic as this.

1800 are not wining 2100. Not usual at least and not due to this

Positional (strategic) chess is important, but tactics, tactics, tactics are still the thing to know.

You want to understand opening principles and then, in the middlegame, you want to look for squares that can be key to a victory, especially including Knight Outposts.  Understanding that a Knight on the 6th rank can be devastating means you'll be less likely to exchange it than to keep it.

At the same time, good tactics knowledge means understanding that you can pin an opponent's piece to an empty but key square as well as pin it to a piece. So you have a blending of strategy and tactics when you play your best.