Well...my two cents is that an active King usually leads to death, unless you are in an endgame. One must also be aware of the opponents abilty to castle, occasionally done in the middlegame, which could put a monkey wrench into your plan if you're focused on e1 or e8.
Mobile King vs. Static King
Sort:
Hello All, I learned chess as a child but never learned chess theory. On the occasions when I did play over the years I never won a game...ever. I am now 40 and over the last 2-3 months I have begun to learn more of chess theory and have really been enjoying chess - and winning a few games!
My question is regarding the movement of kings. I have found that in the cases where my opponents leave their kings static I find much easier to mount an attack. In my last game my opponent had his king surrounded by rooks and pawns which led to his defeat. By the time he began moving his pieces it was way too late.
Conversely, when I get near endgame I get my ol' man moving. This has helped me win games even with a material deficit. This game a notable example...
I am interested in your thoughts on this. Am I on the right track? Pitfalls? Advantages?