Hanging v not hanging pieces
Sort:
As beginners do we avoid hanging pieces all the time or do we hang pieces when there is a good attack and see that the hanged piece is not left hanging a bit later?
The attack has to be really good enough to let a hanged piece stay hanging.
I meant moving a piece ahead which is not defended by any other piece. maybe the term for that is not hanging..
Jun 1, 2016
0
#4
Right - you got the term wrong.
A hanging piece, or in French "en prise", is a piece that can be taken for free on the next move.
Maybe it is undefended - and maybe it is actually defended once, but attacked twice - you get the picture.
Undefended pieces in themselves are a risk factor - but the hanging piece is simply the one that can be taken next move for nothing.
Also, don't let them capture your pawns for nothing - not even one. Pawns are very important too.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
On another note - "hanging pawns" is a different chess term, and an advanced one. It's not related to losing material without compensation.
So as a beginner do we go for undefended piece moves or avoid them?
I don't think moves could be categorised that way! u ll always hv undefended pieces sometime in the game while at times defended pieces may become more of a burden! Generally undefended pieces are targets for tactical moves, but not all tactical moves we make are correct! So when ur opponent has undefended pieces, u can look for tactics! Same when u leave one or more pieces undefended, calculate in advance that simple tactics won't work against them!! That way u can also lay a trap for ur opponent, which is hard to avoid in short format games! or as said above, the attack ll be too fast! Hanging pieces is just blunder! A piece offered during an attack, when taking it doesn't help, is not really a hanging piece!
