What are the common "non-blunder" mistakes non-beginners make?

Pawn storming in that position is basic chess strategy? I doubt it is, it seems opening specific to me.

The centre completely blocked, pawn chains pointing in different directions... this is something I learned a long time ago, and I'm hardly a chessplaying guru :)

OK I remember reading that from Silman a few years ago, he was calling it pawn pointing theory or something but I have to say, I never took that very seriously, I thought it was too general to apply to specific positions. And I thought pawn storming without opposite side castling is very radical (hence opening specific). Hmm. I'm adding another one to my personal list then.

castling at the wrong time

It's not exactly _basic_ chess theory, that you should pawn attack on the flank when the center is closed, but it is definitely part of intermediate chess theory, I'm afraid. The advanced part of that topic is knowing when to do a pawn storm when both kings are castled kingside, and the center is not closed. I'm afraid I haven't figured that one out yet.

One other point is that it's easier to do the pawn storm (less damaging to your king) when the closed pawn center is "closer to home". In the KID position above, it is perfectly safe for black to play ...f5, then play ...f4 after white's f3, and then play g5, h5, and play for the g4 pawn break. Note that both kings are castled kingside. But - look at the french advance, and let's say that both kings castle kingside. It may be that a white strategy of playing for f5 is more damaging to the king's safety because the base center pawn is on the fourth rank (d4) and not the third rank (d6 in the KID example).

Note that I don't know much about the French Advance, and specifically I don't know what white's typical plans are, where black typically castles, etc.

The problem is that authors make up fancy names for things which can often lead to scepticism like yours here. It is common sense if you break it down though.

1) the centre is completely blocked.

So, there's going to be no play in the centre, it must be on the flanks.

2) which side of the board do we want to play on?

The side of the board where we have more space to manouevre and bring our pieces to bear. Obvious right?

3) which side do we have more space on?

The side where our pawns mark out our territory. We can call it pawn pointing or whatever we like, but you can just look at the KID diagram and it's clear.

Interestingly, one of the times where it's most appropriate to play ...c6 for Black in these KID situations is when White plays a preemptive g4 trying to contain Black on the kingside. Then White's decision to make play on 'Black's' flank makes Black breaking in the centre with ...c6 much more logical.

Hi ozzie,

This sounds about right. Pawn advances like that from White in the advance French are much more risky because d4 is much more subject to attack. Almost all Black's moves in the opening are designed to target d4! Related to this is that it's easy for Black to open up the queenside / c file with ...cxd4. Whereas in the KID d6 is much, much more inaccessible and so a) White can't access the space on the kingside through it so easily and b) White can't open files on the queenside so quickly.

This must be the record length for a discussion about chess on here that's actually interesting (with no flaming!).

Thanks for making it more clear, but in my case, the side where I want to play on is not always obvious. For example, in the french I had difficulty of spotting the right time to play f6, if ever. Usually black wants to play on the queenside with c5, sometimes Qb6, a5 etc, but a time comes where I miss f6 and get into trouble. In the English too, usually both f4 AND Rb1 + b4 are solid plans for white.

I think a reason why I'm having problems understanding why pawn storm is the best plan for black here is that I had been playing symmetrical english almost my entire "chess career" (whenever black steps into it) where the center is almost completely blocked with pawns on c4 d3 e4 and c5 d6 and both sides have fianchetto with kingside castling, and although f4 for white and f5 for black are very natural moves to me in those setups, I never had any pawn storming (with h5&h4 + g5&g4) as the key strategic idea, although I remember facing it a couple of times. 

EDIT:

I'm talking about something like this:

Anyway, I feel like I have hijacked the thread by being difficult. I have started playing d4 recently and I'll at some point have to look into KID deeper,  this thread have raised helpful points for me, I'll try keeping an eye on those, so thanks.

If I were to research this general topic (now that I'm tired of getting beat) would I be best served to look for resources concerning chess strategies moreso than specific openings? Would anyone recommend something specific? I really have a hard time looking at openings when I have to spend so much energy trying to figure out what the purpose/strategy is behing them.

what the strategy is BEHIND them...sorry for type-o...another blunder

@jhattey: Learning a system/complex or how to play certain kinds of positions (the KID discussed heavily in the posts before) seem to offer more rewards than picking out one variation of one opening and then asking what the strategy is...especially if you're unable to invest a lot of time studying. This enables you to safely navigate an opening you are not familiar with or one that your opponent lures you into. 

I played an OTB game last November against a 1900+ player and he tore apart my pathetic attempts at playing a c3 Sicilian, which I've been recently learning. When we were going over the game afterwards, he kept saying "I don't know the lines in this opening, but that piece really should go here, that move doesn't really look right in this kind of a position".  A lot of what he said was covered in the chapters I hadn't read yet ... from an opening my opponent will probably never read up on until he deems it necessary.  So yes, I felt really silly.

That guy didn't have/need to outbook me ... he just happened to have a better feel for these kinds of positions than I did. I think this is pretty much the case for any under-2000 struggle OTB.

The good books out there on pawn structure (Kmoch/Soltis/Baburin) would serve as excellent places to start.  When I first read Kmoch, I had quite a few "oh, so that's where that opening idea comes from" epiphanies.

Reuben Fine's "The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings" is a good place to start. Maybe you can find it on eBay.

Sounds very interesting! That's what I want to find out, ideas, not long variations! Do you know of a similar, more recent book?

I've heard Fine's book referred to and recommended enough times that I presumed it, like Nimzowitz's My System, was the defacto standard.  I've been meaning to pick it up.

Concerning pawn breaks, I have something I want to add, because I've commited this mistake a few times now. Even if you're pawns are pointing towards a certain side EVEN in a completely closed position, it's not ALWAYS good or always decisive to push your pawns in that area. For example, in a a7-b6-c5-d6-e5 structure versus a a3-b2-c4-d5-e4 pawn structure usually has white going on the queenside, since his central space is close to the queenside, while black tries for ...f5. But in a game I thought I was doing well (and I was but...) because I prevented ...f5 pretty well, and so I was preapring b4. However my opponent had forces building up on the c file (in fact I don't even think he thought he was "supposed" to play ...f5!). I decided I don't need to develop my c1 bishop to e3(but it's good on e3 to discourage ...cxb4 because then c5 will be played soon), because "he's obviously not going to take after b4, and destroy his chain". so I end up playing b4, he does take, at first I'm exited but then I realize my bishop has nowhere good to go (making connection of the rooks very hard) and c5 is prevented too well, meanwhile I'm tied down to the defense of c4. In fact he opens up the queenside himself with an eventual ...b5, and I'm the one being attacked there.

In a similar way if black has both his rooks on the b and c files, then he could easily play on the queenside himself with ...b5 IF white has nothing there (usually this would require inferior play though), after all he has plenty of weaknesses there.

So although more space helps, if you're outnumbered on that side of the board in pieces anyway you better at least prepare your pawn breaks with your own pieces, so that way you will be better placed on the queenside, but don't do it if none of your pieces are there, even if the position is closed sometimes.

My mind was completely prejudiced by Silman on that point, because he gave me the impression that if you have space and the center is closed then you automatically have a good pawn break.

And as ozzie said it can be hard to judge if/how you push your pawns on the kingside when the center isn't completely closed, because there are certainly good times to do it and bad, also which one? The g or f pawn for example, and it depends. I'm finally starting to get the hang of it, but I have no idea how to explain it because it's so confusing.

Here's something I've been wondering about, and this thread is a good place to bring it up:  Somewhere or other, can't remember where, I read that in the early stages if Black has played Nf6 and either e6 or e5 , White should not pin the Knight by playing Bg5 if Black has not yet castled.  Wherever I saw it, the advice was presented in a way that made it sound like it was general, not geared to a specific opening.

I've thought about this, and I don't see the reason.  Is it good general advice to wait until after Black castles before pinning the Knight, and if so, why?

--Cystem

EDIT:  I made a minor diagram screw-up-- obviously it's not white's move, I'm just concerned with the position.

Well, in that position, black can play ...h6 and if Bh4? then ...g5 picks up the e pawn, so Bxf6 is forced. Perhaps if black was castled maybe it would be too risky to do that, maybe that was what the book meant.

I guess it's because a part of the threat with those moves is capturing the knight and ruining black's kingside if they move the queen away to break the pin. If you have castled kingside and black has a chance to castle queenside, after Bxf6 gxf6, you have opened a file that a rook will enjoy to attack to your king.They will castle queenside, or sometimes leave the king in the middle (like Kramnik vs Anand in Bonn) and try to utilize the file.

Another point could be that usually black wouldn't want to play h6+g5 not to weaken the kingside, but if there are opposite side castlings involved, this would just kick the bishop away with tempo (or force capture).

OK, so it has to do with the fact that if Black hasn't yet castled, he doesn't mind messing up his pawns to chase the Bishop because he still has the option of castling Queenside?  But if he's already castled he has to be more conservative with his pawn structure?  Is that the idea?