Questions about strategy and "controlling squares"

Sort:
Pieohpah321

I watch a lot of game analysis and lectures, and people are always talking about controlling squares. I understand that this means you have more pieces/pawns attacking a square, and usually that an enemy pawn can not attack it, but how is this turned into an advantage? What is the objective? To put a piece on that square?

 

And what about when they say something like,"White wants to trade off the dark squared bishops andplay on the dark squares" I would think you'd want your dark square bishop to play on the dark squares... Does this mean you have pawns that control dark squares and your oponent doesn't so you want to put your pieces there? But doesn't the opponent have the same option on the light squares?

 

And I'll often see them talk about getting an outpost for a knight as if it's checkmate. "Ooh, now white has this outpost for his knight and it can never be kicked out....What can black do here?"

HomerunHitter28

Pretty much any book by Silman is a wonderful reference that can answer these questions for you. I'll try to give a short answer, while highly recommending those books... You are referring to creating imbalances and then devising strategies that take advantage of them. Often times you may want to create an imbalance because (a) it's part of an opening that strives to create imbalances, or (b) the current board position calls for it. Recognizing this situation can lead to long term, or short term gains. One way to do this is as you suggested. It IS logical to eliminate your opponent's strength on such squares by, for instance, capturing their dark squared bishop. By doing so, they have one less attacker/defender on these squares. It then can become a leverage point that can guide down the road tactical play as the game progresses. 

 

Key squares are similar, but aren't restricted to certain colors or squares. They depend on the current board situation -- What pieces are left, where they are located, and the pawn structure are significant in finding these squares.

 

Faith56

Go to lessons and search squares and you will see so many lessons on squares pop up that you won't know where to begin. There you will be able to learn all about squares. Weak squares, critical squares, color complex squares, the hollywood squares. Any kind of squares you ever heard of. Cheers! 🍷

Pieohpah321
Hey_Randi wrote:

Go to lessons and search squares and you will see so many lessons on squares pop up that you won't know where to begin. There you will be able to learn all about squares. Weak squares, critical squares, color complex squares, the hollywood squares. Any kind of squares you ever heard of. Cheers! 🍷

Thanks! I forget about lessons because I'mnot a member and it's frustrating to do one lesson and then have to stop.

gingerninja2003

here's a basic example of why to control squares.

 

omnipaul

Controlling squares is important because it means either that you can put a piece on those squares safely or because your opponent can't.

In reference to a knight that can't be kicked out (usually it is on some good central square like e5 or d4).  If it's a white knight on e5, for example, then he controls d7, f7, c6, and g6.  That means two main things:

1.) As an example, black's queen wouldn't be able to move onto those squares.  Limiting the queen's mobility (or the mobility of other black pieces) might mean that when you attack a weakness, your opponent may not be able to move their pieces to a good place to defend against that attack.

2.) Related, you can now put a piece onto one of those squares in order to attack.  Putting your rook on d7 when it is protect by your knight on e5 means that your opponent is going to have a hard time kicking your rook off the 7th rank.  Now that you have a knight on a good square and your rook on a good rank, they can work together with other pieces to attack a weakness, say a weakly defended c7 pawn.  Put your queen where it can also attack that c7 pawn and your attack may well be strong enough to make your opponent's position fall apart.

Faith56

2Q1C wrote:

I believe Fischer said to win some squares you gotta give some squares or something along those lines. Hope that helps dude. Good luck.

2Q1C wrote: I believe Fischer said to win some squares you gotta give some squares. That was quite clever Too Cute. 🌹

Faith56

Let me try to get it right this time.

Faith56
 

That was quite clever too cute! 🌹

Faith56

No that's not it either.

Faith56
2Q1C wrote:

I believe Fischer said to win some squares you gotta give some squares or something along those lines. Hope that helps dude. Good luck.

Alright this is for the Gripper:

That was quite clever too cute. 🌹

 

Faith56

Does the top one look like it's supposed to look?

Faith56

Dear Jesus this is going to keep me up all night.

Faith56

Why Thank you too cute. I will try it on a different thread because if I screw this one up just one more time the other members are going to be thinking that I've gone completely bonkers. Here you are too cute and thank you again. 🌹

I think I will open up a nice bottle of Pinot and play practice my blitz game.

Faith56
2Q1C wrote:

I believe Fischer said to win some squares you gotta give some squares or something along those lines. Hope that helps dude. Good luck.

Thank you too cute!

Faith56

Got it! 

I finally got it!

Dear God in heaven thank you!

Now I can go to bed.

Thanks too cute. 🌹

SAGM001

Study Silman Books