You have answered your own question.
What does a strong chess move in chess imply?
Sort:
Mar 13, 2018
0
#3
Lagomorph wrote:
You have answered your own question.
How and when and where?
TeachMeOpeningPlease wrote:
Lagomorph wrote:
You have answered your own question.
How and when and where?
You wrote only 4 paragraphs. They contain 5 sentences. Perhaps in one of those ?
Maybe chess isn't for you.
Mar 13, 2018
0
#6
Lagomorph wrote:
TeachMeOpeningPlease wrote:
Lagomorph wrote:
You have answered your own question.
How and when and where?
You wrote only 4 paragraphs. They contain 5 sentences. Perhaps in one of those ?
So what you're saying is I had the answer this entire time and didn't realize it?
Mar 13, 2018
0
#7
Lagomorph wrote:
Maybe chess isn't for you.
But what do ya mean?
Mar 13, 2018
0
#8
Strong moves are moves that make something else happen. They are not passive moves that just defend a piece or recapture. Strong moves shape the action of the game itself. Always look for strong moves, moves that make your opponent react. Sometimes, if you look hard enough, a move can simultaneously defend, attack and improve your position. Now that’s a strong move!
Mar 13, 2018
0
#9
LouStule wrote:
Strong moves are moves that make something else happen. They are not passive moves that just defend a piece or recapture. Strong moves shape the action of the game itself. Always look for strong moves, moves that make your opponent react. Sometimes, if you look hard enough, a move can simultaneously defend, attack and improve your position. Now that’s a strong move!
You sound like walter white. It just feels like whenevr I play, every move i decide to play causes some kind of reaction. So..
When people say whether a move is either good or bad doesn't help me understand why they are good or bad. but what makes a move a strong move?
Right off the bat I can assume a good move is a move that wins material or it gains positional advantage over the board but I could be completely wrong.
I've watched naka explained his games on his stream to see if i can pick up his techniques but I can't seem to understand how he comes to those conclusions. It just seems like naka can calculate like a machine and calls out moves and stuff but it's not anywhere near how we normal people think.
Can someone put some knowledge up in here?