Lack Experience? or Not the right way of Thinking? - Chess Forums

shanomm

Jul 9, 2024

0

#1

I have a problem I couldn't describe specifically but I hypothesise that it's the reason why I'm not improving and I'm very sure this question will benefit people in my rating range also.

It sounds weird but in this tacticless position I spent over a minute deciding on a move. My pawn is under attack in this position. How should I deal with it? The most sensible way to continue is by playing Be3, developing a piece. My mind was afraid of Nb4. I sat there for 1 minute just starring blank on the screen hoping I would see something new then played d5 (Nb4 is still possible).

We have all been taught of the Bishop > Knight principle but never taught when it is okay to make that trade. Some people say they know from their experience but in this particular opening and this specific position I'm pretty sure not many people have reached it.

1) I wonder if there is any good way of thinking or any priority in this position and how I could use that in other positions I have never seen before

2) Is there any other ways of evaluating positional decisions(Bishop for Knight, Delaying castling, Pushing pawns) than just using experience? Because what should I do if I'm in a tournament and I have to make decisions I have never seen before.

MaetsNori

Jul 9, 2024

0

#2

It's a good question, and it shows that you're thinking deeply about your positions.

Here, though, I wouldn't worry too much about ...Nb4. The obvious need is defending your d-pawn in this moment. So that's the main necessity to deal with, first.

For example. Yes, Black can win the bishop pair ... but just how good is his queen bishop afterward?

Many of his pawns are on light squares, and he's also behind in development.

Also, on a personal note - I don't worry too much about knights versus bishops. I view them as mostly equal, with their value depending on the needs of the position.

In this position, White's bishop on d3 wasn't exactly doing much. It's movement and options were very limited ... while Black's knight on c6 was doing a lot - pressuring White's center. So from my perspective, Black chose to exchange his more-valuable knight for White's less-valuable bishop.

I'd say, that example line, White received nice compensation for the exchange.

Hope any of this helps.

BaphometsChess

Jul 9, 2024

0

#3

I’m inexperienced

shanomm

Jul 9, 2024

0

#4

MaetsNori wrote:

It's a good question, and it shows that you're thinking deeply about your positions.

Here, though, I wouldn't worry too much about ...Nb4. The obvious need is defending your d-pawn in this moment. So that's the main necessity to deal with, first.

For example. Yes, Black can win the bishop pair ... but just how good is his queen bishop afterward?

Many of his pawns are on light squares, and he's also behind in development.

Also, on a personal note - I don't worry too much about knights versus bishops. I view them as mostly equal, with their value depending on the needs of the position.

In this position, White's bishop on d3 wasn't exactly doing much. It's movement and options were very limited ... while Black's knight on c6 was doing a lot - pressuring White's center. So from my perspective, Black chose to exchange his more-valuable knight for White's less-valuable bishop.

I'd say, that example line, White received nice compensation for the exchange.

Hope any of this helps.

I've never thought in that way actually. Thanks!

shanomm

Jul 9, 2024

0

#5

llama_l wrote:

shanomm wrote:

I sat there for 1 minute just starring blank on the screen hoping I would see something new then played d5

IMO this is a more interesting and important issue i.e. how people calculate. I think it's common to basically calculate whatever you feel like, and if that reveals something good, then you play it, but if it doesn't reveal something good... what do you do then? I think most people do what you said... they just sort of stare blankly and make a move anyway hoping something will happen later that they'll like.

Instead of that, if you give yourself guidelines... for example, if you tell yourself "I have to look at moves that don't allow black to win a pawn" now you've given yourself a way to generate alternative moves that your intuition didn't immediately calculate... and then during engine analysis, if it creates a candidate move you didn't realize worked, you can update either your guideline or the types of defensive moves you look at (maybe you skew too much in favor of direct defense or counter attack).

Yes 100%. My thought process isn't really good right now. I'll have to create my own system of thinking.