A good position: but now what?

Main

Date: 28 Jan 2006 11:13:52
From: [email protected]
Subject: A good position: but now what?

1.e4 e5
2.d4 exd4
3.Qxd4 Nc6
4.Qe3 Nf6
5.Be2 Be7
6.Nc3 d5
7.exd5 Nxd5
8.Qg3 Nxc3
9.Bxc3 Bf6
10.Ne2 o-o
11.Bxf6 Qxf6
12.o-o Be6
13.Kb1 Rad8
14.Rxd8 Rxd8
15.Nc3

This is from a Center Game I'm playing as Black against Jester, a very
strong Java-based chess engine. (I know that the Center Game isn't the
strongest opening for White, but Jester plays a variety of openings
including this, and variations within each opening.)

I'm pretty pleased with my position here as Black, having fully
developed, castled my king to safety, dealt with early threats by
White, and seized the only open file with a rook, with material equal.
But now I just don't have any inspiration. I find I often get to this
point in a game, then end up pushing wood on the basis of vague,
half-formulated notions. The idea of getting my rook to the seventh
rank appeals to a chess reflex, but what is it going to do once there,
after 15...Rd2 16.f3, since 16...Qd1 doesn't create a battery: after
17.Bd3 the rook is isolated and vulnerable, and h7 is starting to look
like a focus of White attack.

I'm not looking for concrete move suggestions here: I'm looking for
strategic advice. White seems to have no weaknesses at the moment, so
I suppose I should try to create some, but I have a pawn hanging on c7
which needs immediate attention unless I can whip-up something to keep
White occupied with larger matters.

k Adkins
[email protected]

Date: 31 Jan 2006 13:21:03
From: Major Cat
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Major Cat wrote:
>
> I apologize for a recent post of mine that came across as something
> of a provokation. In fact, I was trying to be somewhat humoristic...
> Now, I understand.
>

"Provokation" is meant to mean "provocation". The former is an
example of the simplifying and uniformity-prone tendencies in-
herent in "International American English"! 8 >)

Date: 31 Jan 2006 13:15:03
From: Major Cat
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

[email protected] wrote:
> Does it strike you that way? The allusions seem fairly obvious to me,
> and I've never even been in the Navy. Or didn't you know, when you
> appropriated the account you're using from some long defunct user, that
> CeeBee is a handle used by a former Seabee, "cee" and "bee" being the
> phonetic spelling of the initial letters of "construction battalion"?
> And perhaps you thought that "Cookie" was some sort of computer file
> rather than a nickname for a military cook? And didn't recognise the
> term "mess" as military idiom for a meal, either?

Provided that the posts are reasonably well intended, the posters'
handles should be irrelevant. Having said this, a bit of well meant
humor never hurt anyone, especially on USENET...

>
> But as long as we're asking rhetorical questions, I'd like to know why
> some individuals (I won't dignify them with the term "people") put so
> much effort into provocations, followed up with slanderous nonsense
> when those provocations are responded to?

I have already apologized to Mr. M. Adkins for having misunder-
stood the reasons for his past commentary in regards to older posts
of mine. _That_ subject is closed, at least as far as I am concerned.
However, my posts regarding "International American English" and
"Cultural Imperialism" stand.

Date: 31 Jan 2006 12:55:30
From: Major Cat
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

I apologize for a recent post of mine that came across as something
of a provokation. In fact, I was trying to be somewhat humoristic...
Now, I understand.

[email protected] wrote:
>
> So, we find that because Adkins stood up on his hind legs and dared to
> speak out against the rude, moronic defectives, he is now characterized
> not as a Usenet user but as a Usenet "kook". He doesn't have varied
> interests and a strong sense of curiosity, but instead "wanders from
> group to group to satisfy his particular urges." Note that the phrase
> "particular urges" suggests that in its original context the phrase was
> used to describe some sort of sexual deviancy, which of course makes no
> sense in the present context, but the pseudo-sentients have no
> comprehension of this, and simply adapt it to smear their opponent
> because it sounds strongly insulting and no doubt gets a rise out of
> people.
>
> As for "From his responses you now know what they are." this is no
> doubt the tail-end of the original insult, mindlessly transplanted to
> the new context where it merely baffles.
>
> It all starts out harmless, because after all Adkins is just trying
> conduct what, with human beings, would be a perfectly ordinary,
> sensible, discourse, but then inevitably derails, due to the
> pathological compulsion of the pseudo-sentients to be gratuitously
> offensive, provocative, and deceitful. Note the use of the term
> "pathological" here: clearly imitative of my own idiom in describing
> them. (The pseudo-sentients are given to kinderspiel utterances along
> the lines of "I know you are but what am I".) Of course, all insults
> are incomprehensible to those without comprehension, but the use of the
> term "incomprehensible" above is merely an attempt to render obscure
> those matters which the pseudo-sentients would rather not be spoken of
> openly (e.g., their idiotic and offensive masquerade, their constant
> misbehavior and general defectiveness, and their perverse, hateful
> tendencies toward sentient beings).

Date: 31 Jan 2006 09:02:43
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

CeeBee wrote:

> Adkins is a well known usenet kook for years, wandering from group to group
> to satisfy his particular urges. From his responses you now know what they
> are.

Typical pseudo-sentient nonsense. To understand this, you have to
realize that they (a) have no originality and (b) have no genuine
comprehension, just a confused mess of defective adaptive routines.
So, in order to insult someone, they find something written by someone
else, in a completely different context, god knows how long ago, and
then inappropriately transplant it to a new context, in order to give
vent to their compulsive malice against sentient beings. And of
course, being cowards, they can never do this openly, so they must
contrive various excuses and camouflages for their wanton,
unjustifiable aggression.

So, we find that because Adkins stood up on his hind legs and dared to
speak out against the rude, moronic defectives, he is now characterized
not as a Usenet user but as a Usenet "kook". He doesn't have varied
interests and a strong sense of curiosity, but instead "wanders from
group to group to satisfy his particular urges." Note that the phrase
"particular urges" suggests that in its original context the phrase was
used to describe some sort of sexual deviancy, which of course makes no
sense in the present context, but the pseudo-sentients have no
comprehension of this, and simply adapt it to smear their opponent
because it sounds strongly insulting and no doubt gets a rise out of
people.

As for "From his responses you now know what they are." this is no
doubt the tail-end of the original insult, mindlessly transplanted to
the new context where it merely baffles.

>
> It all starts out harmless, but then inevitably derails, due to his
> pathological need to start flame wars and spout streams of incomprehensible
> insults.

It all starts out harmless, because after all Adkins is just trying
conduct what, with human beings, would be a perfectly ordinary,
sensible, discourse, but then inevitably derails, due to the
pathological compulsion of the pseudo-sentients to be gratuitously
offensive, provocative, and deceitful. Note the use of the term
"pathological" here: clearly imitative of my own idiom in describing
them. (The pseudo-sentients are given to kinderspiel utterances along
the lines of "I know you are but what am I".) Of course, all insults
are incomprehensible to those without comprehension, but the use of the
term "incomprehensible" above is merely an attempt to render obscure
those matters which the pseudo-sentients would rather not be spoken of
openly (e.g., their idiotic and offensive masquerade, their constant
misbehavior and general defectiveness, and their perverse, hateful
tendencies toward sentient beings).

>
> Recently he has found the chess newsgroups as his excuse for faking a Gilles
> de la Tourette syndrom. Best ignore, with a bit of compassion.

Talk about incomprehensible insults! (Note, also, the hateful
perversity.)

>
> --
> CeeBee
>
> *** The Cookie Has Spoken ***

Must have been a positive Wassermann.

k Adkins
[email protected]

Date: 31 Jan 2006 08:26:33
From:
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

CeeBee wrote:
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote in
> rec.games.chess.analysis:
>
>
> > Your name (and tagline) suggest that you are in the Navy. (I feel
> > certain that the term "mess" applies most accurately to the meals you
> > prepare.) So, doubtless when I suggest that you take a long walk on a
> > short pier, you will not be confused by the nomenclature. Wiedersehen.
>
>
> I wonder why some people put so much effort in confirming the outsider image
> of a chess player as someone with a behavioural disorder, mainly mumbling
> incoherent rants to people who made the mistake of paying attention to him.
>
>
> --
> CeeBee
>
> *** The Cookie Has Spoken ***

Does it strike you that way? The allusions seem fairly obvious to me,
and I've never even been in the Navy. Or didn't you know, when you
appropriated the account you're using from some long defunct user, that
CeeBee is a handle used by a former Seabee, "cee" and "bee" being the
phonetic spelling of the initial letters of "construction battalion"?
And perhaps you thought that "Cookie" was some sort of computer file
rather than a nickname for a military cook? And didn't recognise the
term "mess" as military idiom for a meal, either?

But as long as we're asking rhetorical questions, I'd like to know why
some individuals (I won't dignify them with the term "people") put so
much effort into provocations, followed up with slanderous nonsense
when those provocations are responded to?

Dr. Pepper
:p

Date: 30 Jan 2006 17:34:01
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Ron wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Maybe you can read? I deleted that message and posted a correction
> > within 60 seconds.
>
> Your correction has still not shown up on my server.
>
> Maybe you could be a little more polite to somebody who's donated a lot
> of time to helping you improve.
>
> -Ron

Maybe you can stop your deceitful, hypocritical whining, and get bent,
doofus.

k Adkins
[email protected]

Date: 30 Jan 2006 16:41:08
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Ron wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Here is how it played out: 15...Rd2 16.f3 Nb4 17.Qxc7 Nxc2 18.Qxa7 Rd7?
> > 19.Ne4 (forking Black's knight and queen). However, I still say that
> > the general line you have selected (of exposing the White king by
> > taking the c2 pawn this way) is quite promising. Perhaps the best idea
> > I have seen yet.
>
> Here 18.Qxa7 is an illegal move. Maybe you meant 18.Qb8+ Rd8 19.Qxa7? in
> which case 19.Qf5 (setting up the discovered attack) is strong.

Maybe you can read? I deleted that message and posted a correction
within 60 seconds.

>
> (Bear in mind, however, that this whole variation depends on the
> computer being weak enough to play f3, which is almost certainly not
> best).

Even assuming that there is a "best" move here, and that such a move is
not f3, it doesn't make the chess engine weak; otherwise, any chess
engine that failed to always play the "best" move in every position
would have to be described as weak. Since there is no chess engine
good enough to do this (and how would we confirm it?) the nomenclature
is itself weak (no quotation ks). Also, if you are not certain,
then why do you make such assertions? I seem to recall you saying, not
long ago, that you were not a strong enough player to decide "the
ultimate truth" of a certain position. Very well. Don't be
overbearing and obstinate here. It is frequently a mistake to be
polite with pseudo-sentients (such as yourself) because you do not
appreciate it and you often act as if politeness is a cue for rudeness
and other misbehavior and abuse.

Getting back to chess, 19...Qf5 20.Qa4, and now what? How strong is an
even position, if that's what this is?

>
> > >
> > > (Notice how, in some variations, the absence of the b-pawn is decisive.
> > > EG 23. ... Bf5+ 24.Qe4 Rb8+! - well, I guess that's not neccesary, but
> > > it illustrates the point. You didn't really "lose" the b-pawn so much as
> > > sacrifice it to create a highway to the white king).
> >
> > But notice how White may take the a-pawn instead, thus also covering
> > the a2 square.
>
> Yeah, but in so doing he puts his queen in a position where it doesn't
> influence things on the b1-h7 diagnal. It comes with a cost. I was
> mostly trying to point out how "winning" your queenside pawns is opening
> lines you can use to attack with. This is true of the a-pawn, as well.
> Sooner or later his queen is going to move away, and then a R move to
> the open file could be strong.

Maybe so. But it has yet to be demonstrated to me.

k Adkins
[email protected]

Date: 31 Jan 2006 01:27:04
From: Ron
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

In article <[email protected] >,
"[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:

> Maybe you can read? I deleted that message and posted a correction
> within 60 seconds.

Your correction has still not shown up on my server.

Maybe you could be a little more polite to somebody who's donated a lot
of time to helping you improve.

-Ron

Date: 31 Jan 2006 02:12:50
From: CeeBee
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Ron <[email protected] > wrote in rec.games.chess.analysis:

> Maybe you could be a little more polite to somebody who's donated a lot
> of time to helping you improve.

Adkins is a well known usenet kook for years, wandering from group to group
to satisfy his particular urges. From his responses you now know what they
are.

It all starts out harmless, but then inevitably derails, due to his
pathological need to start flame wars and spout streams of incomprehensible
insults.

Recently he has found the chess newsgroups as his excuse for faking a Gilles
de la Tourette syndrom. Best ignore, with a bit of compassion.

--
CeeBee

*** The Cookie Has Spoken ***

Date: 30 Jan 2006 16:20:35
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Ron wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hah. Amusing troll, whomever you are. Knowing the names of tactics
> > (pins, skewers, etc.) does not advance my strategic outlook or my
> > tactical calculations here, thank you. And your "strategic advice" to
> > study tactics is delightful.
>
> His advice here is actually completely valid.

Actually it's not. But thanks for sharing.

k Adkins
[email protected]

Date: 30 Jan 2006 16:19:26
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Ray Gordon wrote:
> >> There are some illegal moves here.
> >
> > Just typos. 5.Bd2 (not 5.Be2) and 12.o-o-o (not 12.o-o).
>
> Typos which caused me to waste all of the time I would have devoted to the
> analysis.

I suppose I should be profoundly grateful that this limits your verbal
flatulence to a one-liner.

k Adkins
[email protected]

Date: 30 Jan 2006 15:59:21
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Date: 30 Jan 2006 09:29:12
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

> 1.e4 e5
> 2.d4 exd4
> 3.Qxd4 Nc6
> 4.Qe3 Nf6
> 5.Be2 Be7

The White Bishop is on e2 now.

> 6.Nc3 d5
> 7.exd5 Nxd5
> 8.Qg3 Nxc3
> 9.Bxc3 Bf6
> 10.Ne2 o-o

How did White get a Knight to e2 without the Bishop having moved?

Date: 29 Jan 2006 14:04:22
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Ron wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

> There are some illegal moves here. Here's my best guess as to the
> correct gamescore. Changes lines have been starred.

> > 1.e4 e5
> > 2.d4 exd4
> > 3.Qxd4 Nc6
> > 4.Qe3 Nf6
> > 5.Bd2 Be7 *
> > 6.Nc3 d5
> > 7.exd5 Nxd5
> > 8.Qg3 Nxc3
> > 9.Bxc3 Bf6
> > 10.Ne2 o-o
> > 11.Bxf6 Qxf6
> > 12.o-o-o Be6 *
> > 13.Kb1 Rad8
> > 14.Rxd8 Rxd8
> > 15.Nc3

> > I'm pretty pleased with my position here as Black, having fully
> > developed, castled my king to safety, dealt with early threats by
> > White, and seized the only open file with a rook, with material equal.
> > But now I just don't have any inspiration. I find I often get to this
> > point in a game, then end up pushing wood on the basis of vague,
> > half-formulated notions. The idea of getting my rook to the seventh
> > rank appeals to a chess reflex, but what is it going to do once there,
> > after 15...Rd2 16.f3, since 16...Qd1 doesn't create a battery: after
> > 17.Bd3 the rook is isolated and vulnerable, and h7 is starting to look
> > like a focus of White attack.

> Don't jump at shadows. Sure, eventually, white's going to target h7. But
> can you keep him tied up with threats until then? In a position like
> this, it's not so much about grand strategic plans (neither side has
> obvious weaknesses) so much as finding things to attack and attacking
> them.

> 15. ... Rd2 16.f3 (maybe not best) Nb4 (mmm.... c2) 17.Qxc7 Nxc2

> You've traded some pawns, but notice what's happened here: you're
> exposing his king. And, heck, even the pawns he's grabbing are opening
> up potential avenues to his king.

This does indeed seem promising!

> An example of how quickly white's game can fall apart due to his exposed
> king:

> 18.Kc1 Rd7 19.Qb8+ Rd8 20.Qxb7 (let him eat pawns) Qd4 (Qg5+ may be even
> better) 21. Be2 (desperately trying to hold the back rank) Na3!
> (threatening mate on d2) 22.ba3 Qxc3+ 23.Kb1 Bf5+ winning.

Here is how it played out: 15...Rd2 16.f3 Nb4 17.Qxc7 Nxc2 18.Qb8+ Rd8
19.Qxa7, and now if 19...Rd7? then 20.Ne4 (forking Black's knight and
queen). However, I still say that the general line you have selected
(of exposing the White king by taking the c2 pawn this way) is quite
promising. Perhaps the best idea I have seen yet.

> (Notice how, in some variations, the absence of the b-pawn is decisive.
> EG 23. ... Bf5+ 24.Qe4 Rb8+! - well, I guess that's not neccesary, but
> it illustrates the point. You didn't really "lose" the b-pawn so much as
> sacrifice it to create a highway to the white king).

But notice how White may take the a-pawn instead, thus also covering
the a2 square. No doubt a combination involving discovered check
accounts for why Jester did not play the knight fork earlier.

> Okay, this isn't exactly what you were asking for, but it's hard to give
> general principles in an open position like the one you posted. Look for
> things you can attack which are hard for him to defend. Look for ways to
> make your pieces more active. Look for "trades," which, while materially
> even, are good for you - such as trading c-pawns here, which exposes his
> king.

> And if you can get three pieces swarming around his king, don't worry so
> much about dropping a pawn.

> -Ron

This has much to recommend it (especially the last line!)

k Adkins
[email protected]

Date: 29 Jan 2006 13:49:41
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Ron wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> There are some illegal moves here. Here's my best guess as to the
> correct gamescore. Changes lines have been starred.
>
> > 1.e4 e5
> > 2.d4 exd4
> > 3.Qxd4 Nc6
> > 4.Qe3 Nf6
> > 5.Bd2 Be7 *
> > 6.Nc3 d5
> > 7.exd5 Nxd5
> > 8.Qg3 Nxc3
> > 9.Bxc3 Bf6
> > 10.Ne2 o-o
> > 11.Bxf6 Qxf6
> > 12.o-o-o Be6 *
> > 13.Kb1 Rad8
> > 14.Rxd8 Rxd8
> > 15.Nc3
>
> > I'm pretty pleased with my position here as Black, having fully
> > developed, castled my king to safety, dealt with early threats by
> > White, and seized the only open file with a rook, with material equal.
> > But now I just don't have any inspiration. I find I often get to this
> > point in a game, then end up pushing wood on the basis of vague,
> > half-formulated notions. The idea of getting my rook to the seventh
> > rank appeals to a chess reflex, but what is it going to do once there,
> > after 15...Rd2 16.f3, since 16...Qd1 doesn't create a battery: after
> > 17.Bd3 the rook is isolated and vulnerable, and h7 is starting to look
> > like a focus of White attack.
>
> Don't jump at shadows. Sure, eventually, white's going to target h7. But
> can you keep him tied up with threats until then? In a position like
> this, it's not so much about grand strategic plans (neither side has
> obvious weaknesses) so much as finding things to attack and attacking
> them.
>
> 15. ... Rd2 16.f3 (maybe not best) Nb4 (mmm.... c2) 17.Qxc7 Nxc2
>
> You've traded some pawns, but notice what's happened here: you're
> exposing his king. And, heck, even the pawns he's grabbing are opening
> up potential avenues to his king.

This does indeed seem promising!

>
> An example of how quickly white's game can fall apart due to his exposed
> king:
>
> 18.Kc1 Rd7 19.Qb8+ Rd8 20.Qxb7 (let him eat pawns) Qd4 (Qg5+ may be even
> better) 21. Be2 (desperately trying to hold the back rank) Na3!
> (threatening mate on d2) 22.ba3 Qxc3+ 23.Kb1 Bf5+ winning.

Here is how it played out: 15...Rd2 16.f3 Nb4 17.Qxc7 Nxc2 18.Qxa7 Rd7?
19.Ne4 (forking Black's knight and queen). However, I still say that
the general line you have selected (of exposing the White king by
taking the c2 pawn this way) is quite promising. Perhaps the best idea
I have seen yet.

>
> (Notice how, in some variations, the absence of the b-pawn is decisive.
> EG 23. ... Bf5+ 24.Qe4 Rb8+! - well, I guess that's not neccesary, but
> it illustrates the point. You didn't really "lose" the b-pawn so much as
> sacrifice it to create a highway to the white king).

But notice how White may take the a-pawn instead, thus also covering
the a2 square.

>
> Okay, this isn't exactly what you were asking for, but it's hard to give
> general principles in an open position like the one you posted. Look for
> things you can attack which are hard for him to defend. Look for ways to
> make your pieces more active. Look for "trades," which, while materially
> even, are good for you - such as trading c-pawns here, which exposes his
> king.
>
> And if you can get three pieces swarming around his king, don't worry so
> much about dropping a pawn.
>
> -Ron

There is much to be said for this!

k Adkins
[email protected]

Date: 30 Jan 2006 19:08:47
From: Ron
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

In article <[email protected] >,
"[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:

> Here is how it played out: 15...Rd2 16.f3 Nb4 17.Qxc7 Nxc2 18.Qxa7 Rd7?
> 19.Ne4 (forking Black's knight and queen). However, I still say that
> the general line you have selected (of exposing the White king by
> taking the c2 pawn this way) is quite promising. Perhaps the best idea
> I have seen yet.

Here 18.Qxa7 is an illegal move. Maybe you meant 18.Qb8+ Rd8 19.Qxa7? in
which case 19.Qf5 (setting up the discovered attack) is strong.

(Bear in mind, however, that this whole variation depends on the
computer being weak enough to play f3, which is almost certainly not
best).

> >
> > (Notice how, in some variations, the absence of the b-pawn is decisive.
> > EG 23. ... Bf5+ 24.Qe4 Rb8+! - well, I guess that's not neccesary, but
> > it illustrates the point. You didn't really "lose" the b-pawn so much as
> > sacrifice it to create a highway to the white king).
>
> But notice how White may take the a-pawn instead, thus also covering
> the a2 square.

Yeah, but in so doing he puts his queen in a position where it doesn't
influence things on the b1-h7 diagnal. It comes with a cost. I was
mostly trying to point out how "winning" your queenside pawns is opening
lines you can use to attack with. This is true of the a-pawn, as well.
Sooner or later his queen is going to move away, and then a R move to
the open file could be strong.

Date: 29 Jan 2006 13:19:20
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Claus-J=FCrgen Heigl wrote:

[much useful analysis snipped]

> . . .
> My choice would be to centralize the knight 15...Ne5. This move has
> several benefits. First, it takes the white squares under better
> control. White's bishop is restricted to e2 and b5. Second, the knight
> blocks the white queen from attacking c7. Third, the pawns on the
> queenside can be moved towards the king

This is rather good (exactly what I solicited when asking for
"strategic advice").

>16. Bb5 would be questionable
> now because it allows Black the free tempo c6 at the minimum, which
> could be followed by a further advance on the queenside (b5). 16. Bd3 is
> met by 16...Nxd3 17. cxd3 c5 and d3 is becoming a weakness and an attack
> on the queenside is brewing (Qd4, Bf5 and c4). The drawback of Ne5 is it
> allows White to develop and trade the last pair of rooks. But you can't
> have it all. I think after 16. Be2 c5 17. Rd1 Rxd1 18. Nxd1 Qe7 19. Ne3
> g6 (directed against f2-f4-f5) Black has a good game. One idea is to get
> the queenside pawns rolling, also Black can move his queen to the
> d-file. Note that the Ne5 is protected by the discovered attack Bxa2+.
> If the knight is challenged by f4 it relocates to c6 aiming for d4.

The point about discovered attack is one which I almost certainly would
have overlooked. It was quite difficult to get Jester to replay the
game exactly as before, since in addition to different openings it also
plays variations, sometimes quite deep within a game, but I finally
did. (I also found that, in arriving at the position originally
described by me, I had inadvertently taken it out of book with an odd
move which I subsequently took back: in-book Jester plays 10.Bxf6
without variation, and there are subsequent differences.) Here is the
result after a few additional moves:

15...Ne5 16.Be2 c5 17.Ne4 Qe7 18.Re1 and things are playing out a
little differently, with (from my point of view) a rather complex
situation. But that is chess, and needn't be regarded as refuting your
comments.

k Adkins
[email protected]

Date: 29 Jan 2006 16:08:53
From: Major Cat
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

[email protected] wrote:

> Hah. Amusing troll, whomever you are.

Why this conclusion?

> Knowing the names of tactics
> (pins, skewers, etc.) does not advance my strategic outlook or my
> tactical calculations here, thank you. And your "strategic advice" to
> study tactics is delightful.

The implicit advice _is_ of a critical nature for most of
us! 8 >)

>
> Your name (and tagline) suggest that you are in the Navy. (I feel
> certain that the term "mess" applies most accurately to the meals you
> prepare.) So, doubtless when I suggest that you take a long walk on a
> short pier, you will not be confused by the nomenclature. Wiedersehen.

Why this fascination with things military? I recently dealt
with an unpleasant thread that veered off into issues concern-
ing...imperialism and the role of the military. Although such
digressions may shed light on way weightier subjects than the
game of chess, if they become sufficiently frequent and ad-
versarial, they will destroy the fabric of good will that is
necessary for the impersonal exchange of ideas and opinions
pertaining to chess as per the communication medium's inherent
limitations.

In the future, I will explicitly split my posts in two parts.
The first one will be entitled "Chess Musings". The second one
"Off-Topic Digressions". Hopefully, I will not be forced to
enter too too much under the second heading... 8 >)

Date: 29 Jan 2006 12:15:17
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

CeeBee wrote:
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote in
> rec.games.chess.analysis:
>
> > This is from a Center Game I'm playing as Black against Jester, a very
> > strong Java-based chess engine. (I know that the Center Game isn't the
> > strongest opening for White, but Jester plays a variety of openings
> > including this, and variations within each opening.)
>
> <snip>
>
> > I'm not looking for concrete move suggestions here: I'm looking for
> > strategic advice.
>
> It shows once again that one should know the name of all _tactical
> situations_ you can get into instead of knowing opening names, varieties and
> moves by heart.
>
> Strategic advice: study tactics.
>
> --
> CeeBee
>
> *** The Cookie Has Spoken ***

Hah. Amusing troll, whomever you are. Knowing the names of tactics
(pins, skewers, etc.) does not advance my strategic outlook or my
tactical calculations here, thank you. And your "strategic advice" to
study tactics is delightful.

Your name (and tagline) suggest that you are in the Navy. (I feel
certain that the term "mess" applies most accurately to the meals you
prepare.) So, doubtless when I suggest that you take a long walk on a
short pier, you will not be confused by the nomenclature. Wiedersehen.

k Adkins
[email protected]

Date: 30 Jan 2006 18:57:48
From: Ron
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

In article <[email protected] >,
"[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:

> Hah. Amusing troll, whomever you are. Knowing the names of tactics
> (pins, skewers, etc.) does not advance my strategic outlook or my
> tactical calculations here, thank you. And your "strategic advice" to
> study tactics is delightful.

His advice here is actually completely valid.

The more familiar you are with tactics, the easier it'll be for you to
imagine ways to set them up.

The first stage of studying tactics is just recognizing them when
they're in front of you. Then you recognize them before they appear,
and create opportunities. The stronger you are tactically, the better
you'll be in positions like the one you posted.

-Ron

Date: 30 Jan 2006 15:13:07
From: CeeBee
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

"[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote in
rec.games.chess.analysis:

> Your name (and tagline) suggest that you are in the Navy. (I feel
> certain that the term "mess" applies most accurately to the meals you
> prepare.) So, doubtless when I suggest that you take a long walk on a
> short pier, you will not be confused by the nomenclature. Wiedersehen.

I wonder why some people put so much effort in confirming the outsider image
of a chess player as someone with a behavioural disorder, mainly mumbling
incoherent rants to people who made the mistake of paying attention to him.

--
CeeBee

*** The Cookie Has Spoken ***

Date: 29 Jan 2006 12:00:53
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Ron wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> There are some illegal moves here.

Just typos. 5.Bd2 (not 5.Be2) and 12.o-o-o (not 12.o-o).

I'll be looking over the rest of your reply (ditto to Antonio and
Claus) shortly, and thanks to you all for the feedback!

k Adkins
[email protected]

Date: 30 Jan 2006 09:29:54
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

>> There are some illegal moves here.
>
> Just typos. 5.Bd2 (not 5.Be2) and 12.o-o-o (not 12.o-o).

Typos which caused me to waste all of the time I would have devoted to the
analysis.

Date: 31 Jan 2006 12:30:20
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

Ray Gordon <[email protected] > wrote:
>>> There are some illegal moves here.
>>
>> Just typos. 5.Bd2 (not 5.Be2) and 12.o-o-o (not 12.o-o).
>
> Typos which caused me to waste all of the time I would have devoted
> to the analysis.

I guess you weren't going to spend very long on the analysis, then.
The game score wasn't exactly hard to fix...

Dave.

--
David Richerby Simple Tool (TM): it's like a hammer
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ but it has no moving parts!

Date: 29 Jan 2006 05:04:36
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Claus-J=FCrgen_Heigl?=
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

[email protected] wrote:

> I'm pretty pleased with my position here as Black, having fully
> developed, castled my king to safety, dealt with early threats by
> White, and seized the only open file with a rook, with material equal.

3r2k1/ppp2ppp/2n1bq2/8/8/2N3Q1/PPP2PPP/1K3B1R b - -

The main difference in this position is two tempi up in development for
Black. The threat to c7 is equalized by the threat to f2. The question
is if the development advantage can be converted to something else. The
first thing to look for is a direct attack since the defender might not
be able to bring in his full force to the defense.

One obvious move is your suggestion 15...Rd2 which is attacking both f2
and c2. Unfortunately White can defend by developing his pieces with 16.
Bd3 putting up the threat of Ne4. Then 16...Qxf2 is practically forced
but 17. Qxc7 puts the black queenside and back rank under attack. Also
White still threatens Ne4. After 17...Qxg2 18. Re1 White is fully
developed and threatens both Qxb7 and Qc8+/Re8 mate. This is definitely
not what Black wanted.

Another try is 15...Bf5. This aims for c2 with the idea Nb4 or Rd2. It
also has the benefit of preventing Bd3. The disadvantage is that the
queen is blocked from threatening f2, so Qxc7 no more can be answered by
Qxf2. So 16. Qxc7 has to be checked first: 16...Nb4 17. Bd3 Bxd3 18.
cxd3 Nxd3 19. Rd1 h6 20. Rd2. It looks like the black initiative has
vaporized mostly. White may oust the black knight with Nc3-e2-c1.

Moving in the knight for attack at b4 or d4 leaves the rook unprotected,
again White can answer Qxc7. If 15...Nb4 16. Qxc7 Black can win it back
(Bf5, see above), if 15...Nd4 16. Qxc7 Bf5 (16...Nxc2 17. Kxc2 Qxf2+ 18.
Be2 Rc8 19. Qe5 is probably not sound) 17. Qg3 White may be justified to
keep it.

It seems like White can withstand a direct assault. Next thing to look
for is if Black can improve his pieces. We have seen that the back rank
could be a problem for Black, so creating some breathing space wouldn't
be bad. After 15...h6 White naturally would want to finish his
development. Immediately going after the queenside with 16. Qxc7 is not
recommendable, as after 16...Qxf2 17. Bb5 Rd7 18. Qc8+ Kh7 (already the
breathing space is put to good use) 19. Bxc6 (else Black gobbles up the
kingside for nothing) 19...bxc6 20. Qxc6 Rd2 White has problems on both
wings. This is certainly good for Black. But 16. Bd3 seems playable.
16...Nb4 17. Rd1 Nxd3 18. Rxd3 Rxd3 19. cxd3 slightly worsens the pawn
structure of White but queen and knight are a better piece combination
than queen and bishop. I don't think Black has an advantage here.

My choice would be to centralize the knight 15...Ne5. This move has
several benefits. First, it takes the white squares under better
control. White's bishop is restricted to e2 and b5. Second, the knight
blocks the white queen from attacking c7. Third, the pawns on the
queenside can be moved towards the king. 16. Bb5 would be questionable
now because it allows Black the free tempo c6 at the minimum, which
could be followed by a further advance on the queenside (b5). 16. Bd3 is
met by 16...Nxd3 17. cxd3 c5 and d3 is becoming a weakness and an attack
on the queenside is brewing (Qd4, Bf5 and c4). The drawback of Ne5 is it
allows White to develop and trade the last pair of rooks. But you can't
have it all. I think after 16. Be2 c5 17. Rd1 Rxd1 18. Nxd1 Qe7 19. Ne3
g6 (directed against f2-f4-f5) Black has a good game. One idea is to get
the queenside pawns rolling, also Black can move his queen to the
d-file. Note that the Ne5 is protected by the discovered attack Bxa2+.
If the knight is challenged by f4 it relocates to c6 aiming for d4.

If White challenges the knight immediately with 16. f4 Ng6 is a good
continuation. White has a problem to protect f4. If 17. Bd3 with the
idea 17...Nxf4 18. Rf1 g5 19. h4 Black can play 17...Qxf4 18. Bxg6 Qxg3
19. Bxh7+ Kxh7 20. hxg3+ Kg6 with a better endgame.

Admittedly Ne5 is not a death blow to White. But Black still has
conserved a little initiative.

Claus-Juergen

Date: 28 Jan 2006 22:15:03
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

En/na [email protected] ha escrit:
> 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Qxd4 Nc6 4.Qe3 Nf6 5.Bd2 Be7
> 6.Nc3 d5 7.exd5 Nxd5 8.Qg3 Nxc3 9.Bxc3 Bf6
> 10.Ne2 o-o 11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.o-o-o Be6 13.Kb1 Rad8
> 14.Rxd8 Rxd8 15.Nc3
>
> (...)
> I'm pretty pleased with my position here as Black, having fully
> developed, castled my king to safety, dealt with early threats by
> White, and seized the only open file with a rook, with material equal.
> But now I just don't have any inspiration. I find I often get to this
> point in a game, then end up pushing wood on the basis of vague,
> half-formulated notions. The idea of getting my rook to the seventh
> rank appeals to a chess reflex, but what is it going to do once there,
> after 15...Rd2 16.f3, since 16...Qd1 doesn't create a battery: after
> 17.Bd3 the rook is isolated and vulnerable, and h7 is starting to look
> like a focus of White attack.
>
> I'm not looking for concrete move suggestions here: I'm looking for
> strategic advice. White seems to have no weaknesses at the moment, so
> I suppose I should try to create some, but I have a pawn hanging on c7
> which needs immediate attention unless I can whip-up something to keep
> White occupied with larger matters.
>
> k Adkins
> [email protected]

In that kind of positions (open center and black having temporaryly a
little advantage in development) the strategic advice is "analize all
tactics".

For example in the line you suggested 15...Rd2 16.f3 Qd8 17.Bd3 black
can play 17...Nb4 being main idea 18.Qf4 Rxd3! 19.cxd3?? Qxd3 and mate.

In that kind of positions strategic main element is pure calculation.

AT

Date: 28 Jan 2006 20:29:23
From: CeeBee
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

"[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote in
rec.games.chess.analysis:

> This is from a Center Game I'm playing as Black against Jester, a very
> strong Java-based chess engine. (I know that the Center Game isn't the
> strongest opening for White, but Jester plays a variety of openings
> including this, and variations within each opening.)

<snip >

> I'm not looking for concrete move suggestions here: I'm looking for
> strategic advice.

It shows once again that one should know the name of all _tactical
situations_ you can get into instead of knowing opening names, varieties and
moves by heart.

Strategic advice: study tactics.

--
CeeBee

*** The Cookie Has Spoken ***

Date: 28 Jan 2006 20:29:39
From: Ron
Subject: Re: A good position: but now what?

In article <[email protected] >,
"[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:

There are some illegal moves here. Here's my best guess as to the
correct gamescore. Changes lines have been starred.

> 1.e4 e5
> 2.d4 exd4
> 3.Qxd4 Nc6
> 4.Qe3 Nf6
> 5.Bd2 Be7 *
> 6.Nc3 d5
> 7.exd5 Nxd5
> 8.Qg3 Nxc3
> 9.Bxc3 Bf6
> 10.Ne2 o-o
> 11.Bxf6 Qxf6
> 12.o-o-o Be6 *
> 13.Kb1 Rad8
> 14.Rxd8 Rxd8
> 15.Nc3

> I'm pretty pleased with my position here as Black, having fully
> developed, castled my king to safety, dealt with early threats by
> White, and seized the only open file with a rook, with material equal.
> But now I just don't have any inspiration. I find I often get to this
> point in a game, then end up pushing wood on the basis of vague,
> half-formulated notions. The idea of getting my rook to the seventh
> rank appeals to a chess reflex, but what is it going to do once there,
> after 15...Rd2 16.f3, since 16...Qd1 doesn't create a battery: after
> 17.Bd3 the rook is isolated and vulnerable, and h7 is starting to look
> like a focus of White attack.

Don't jump at shadows. Sure, eventually, white's going to target h7. But
can you keep him tied up with threats until then? In a position like
this, it's not so much about grand strategic plans (neither side has
obvious weaknesses) so much as finding things to attack and attacking
them.

15. ... Rd2 16.f3 (maybe not best) Nb4 (mmm.... c2) 17.Qxc7 Nxc2

You've traded some pawns, but notice what's happened here: you're
exposing his king. And, heck, even the pawns he's grabbing are opening
up potential avenues to his king.

An example of how quickly white's game can fall apart due to his exposed
king:

18.Kc1 Rd7 19.Qb8+ Rd8 20.Qxb7 (let him eat pawns) Qd4 (Qg5+ may be even
better) 21. Be2 (desperately trying to hold the back rank) Na3!
(threatening mate on d2) 22.ba3 Qxc3+ 23.Kb1 Bf5+ winning.

(Notice how, in some variations, the absence of the b-pawn is decisive.
EG 23. ... Bf5+ 24.Qe4 Rb8+! - well, I guess that's not neccesary, but
it illustrates the point. You didn't really "lose" the b-pawn so much as
sacrifice it to create a highway to the white king).

Okay, this isn't exactly what you were asking for, but it's hard to give
general principles in an open position like the one you posted. Look for
things you can attack which are hard for him to defend. Look for ways to
make your pieces more active. Look for "trades," which, while materially
even, are good for you - such as trading c-pawns here, which exposes his
king.

And if you can get three pieces swarming around his king, don't worry so
much about dropping a pawn.

-Ron