Questions about Nimzowitsch's idea of overprotection.

I just read a little bit of Nimzowitsch's writings on overprotection. Previously I had heard the word "overprotection" used but I always assumed it was a bad thing. I was surprised to find out it's actually good, but I just wanted to make sure I understand the concept. Basically, you're just supposed to place all your pieces so that they control one of your central pawns, usually the furthest advanced one, and make sure you have one more defender of that pawn than your opponent has attackers? Then if you do this your pieces will automatically become well placed and good things will just seem to happen for you? Is this concept really so simple, and if you've tried it, how has it worked for you?

The concept as you laid it out (basically making overprotection the driving factor in your move decisions) does not hold water ;)...however, the concept of using overprotection on key points at key times as a transitory tool does work.  The idea of freeing defenders to move via overprotection is useful.  Note that it only takes 1 overprotecting piece to free all your defenders to take independent action.

P.S. This is the kind of thread chess.com forums should be full of, yet due to trolling threads this thread will probably fall off the first page within the next day.

Yes, I'd read that, and he writes also that the protected point gives something like a halo of power over all its defenders.

I have tried it in a few games today and seemed to have gotten good positions, but I don't know if its the power of the overprotection or the fact that it gives me some middlegame plan whereas before I just kind of floundered around. It just seems so simple, is this really all you have to do? Getting an overprotected central pawn can be seen as a positional accomplishment similar to getting a rook to the seventh/second rank or a good knight outpost?

Btickler, I hadn't read your comment when I last posted. Are you sure you can't make overprotecting a central pawn a driving factor in your middlegame plan and it must only be at key moments? Is this what Nimzowitsch said?