| |
Main
Date: 16 Aug 2008 19:11:23
From: John Salerno
Subject: What to do when opponent doesn't play as expected in the opening?
|
I'm studying Giuoco Piano right now and I have a question about how to
play when Black doesn't follow the first few moves. For example:
1 e4 e5
2 Nf3
If, instead of 2...Nc3, Black plays something (other than 2...Nf6) that
does not protect his e5 pawn, should White play 3 Nxe5? I mean, this is
the reason you attack the pawn in the first place, but it also seems to
violate the rule of moving a piece twice in the opening (and it moves
the knight off a good square). Also, Black could probably attack the
knight with a pawn, forcing White to retreat (and thereby moving the
knight a third time).
So question #1: what should White do here? Continue to develop and
ignore the pawn, or take it?
And question #2: let's say Black plays 2...Nf6. Now White's pawn is
under attack. What should White do here? Take the e5 pawn anyway?
Continue his plans with 3 Bc4? Does Black then take the pawn on e4?
Or does White defend with Nc3? If so, this puts an end to the plan to
play 4 c3 and 5 d4.
Thanks.
|
|
| |
Date: 20 Aug 2008 06:15:26
From:
Subject: Re: What to do when opponent doesn't play as expected in the opening?
|
On Aug 16, 7:11=A0pm, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote:
> I'm studying Giuoco Piano right now and I have a question about how to
> play when Black doesn't follow the first few moves. For example:
>
> 1 e4 =A0e5
> 2 Nf3
>
> If, instead of 2...Nc3, Black plays something (other than 2...Nf6) that
> does not protect his e5 pawn, should White play 3 Nxe5? I mean, this is
> the reason you attack the pawn in the first place, but it also seems to
> violate the rule of moving a piece twice in the opening (and it moves
> the knight off a good square). Also, Black could probably attack the
> knight with a pawn, forcing White to retreat (and thereby moving the
> knight a third time).
John, as I noted earlier, what you're struggling with here are cases
where two or more chess principles conflict. Here's a link to Dan
Heisman's current column at ChessCafe.com:
http://www.chesscafe.com/heisman/heisman.htm
where he discusses that very thing. You may find it educational.
|
| | |
Date: 20 Aug 2008 09:28:04
From: John Salerno
Subject: Re: What to do when opponent doesn't play as expected in the opening?
|
<[email protected] > wrote in message
news:230e5ddc-2cfb-4581-adab-5de90ece586e@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
John, as I noted earlier, what you're struggling with here are cases
where two or more chess principles conflict. Here's a link to Dan
Heisman's current column at ChessCafe.com:
http://www.chesscafe.com/heisman/heisman.htm
where he discusses that very thing. You may find it educational.
Thanks! I'll read that now.
|
| |
Date: 17 Aug 2008 08:21:53
From:
Subject: Re: What to do when opponent doesn't play as expected in the opening?
|
On Aug 16, 7:11=A0pm, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote:
> I'm studying Giuoco Piano right now and I have a question about how to
> play when Black doesn't follow the first few moves.
John, you're getting into opening theory here, a very big subject. I
would recommend you get a good book with some title like "A Beginner's
Guide to Chess Openings." One that I recommended earlier is Reuben
Fine's "Ideas Behind the Chess Openings," though it's a bit dated in
parts. If, as you said, you're reading Chernev's "Logical Chess," you
will get a lot of good general advice on openings there.
The basic question you seem to be asking is "How many moves is a
pawn worth?" This question is the central issue in a lot of openings,
especially gambit lines. One side, usually White, gives up a pawn or
two for an advantage in development and concomitant attacking chances.
For example, in the Danish Gamibt, 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Bc4
cxb2 5.Bxb2, White has given up two pawns, but in return he has both
his bishops developed beautifully and aiming kingside, and superiority
in the center (the pawn at e4 vs. none of Black's). Black in contrast
has not moved a single piece, and will have to be very careful how he
proceeds, or White's better developed army may be able to strike a
telling blow.
Over the centuries, a rule of thumb arose, that a pawn is usually
worth three tempi. That is, a pawn sacrifice was justified if
capturing it involved making three non-productive moves. But like
almost all general principles in chess, you must not think of this as
an immutable law. It depends on the position, on the actual moves
possible on the board, not on an abstract rule. In one situation, a
single tempo may be important enough to justify a pawn sac; in
another, maybe four tempi aren't enough.
Another general rule of thumb: after accepting a gambit, it is
usually unwise to cling to the material at all costs. Often the best
policy is to give back the extra pawn(s) at the right moment, in such
a way that the opponent's attack is defused, or one gains some
compensatiion in terms of development, position, king safety, etc.
I'll try to address some of your specific questions now.
> For example:
>
> 1 e4 =A0e5
> 2 Nf3
>
> If, instead of 2...Nc3, Black plays something (other than 2...Nf6) that
> does not protect his e5 pawn, should White play 3 Nxe5?
Impossible to answer definitely without reference to a specific
black move, but in most cases, yes. The central pawns, the e- and d-
pawns, are the most important, and if the opportunity arises to
capture one without obvious danger, it's usually a good idea.
> I mean, this is
> the reason you attack the pawn in the first place, but it also seems to
> violate the rule of moving a piece twice in the opening (and it moves
> the knight off a good square).
Again, you must not think of these general rules of thumb as
absolutes. They don't apply in all situations, and they are not all
equally important. The injunction against moving a piece twice in the
opening is actually one of the less important. We are also taught,
say, not to drive our cars into trees, but if that was the only way I
could avoid killing a child who suddenly ran into the road, I would do
it.
There's an old story illustrating how these general principles can
be ridiculously misapplied. Two guys are playing chess, and one plays
QxQf6, capturing his opponent's queen. The only possible recapture
is ...g7xf6, the obvious move and the only good move on the board, but
Black doesn't do it! He plays something else, allowing White to move
his queen back out danger. With this great material advantage, he wins
in short order. When the game is over, he asks his opponent why he
didn't recapture the queen. The reply: "What, you think I'm studid?
That would double my pawns in front of my castled king!"
> Also, Black could probably attack the
> knight with a pawn, forcing White to retreat (and thereby moving the
> knight a third time).
True, but what does that do for Black? After, say, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 a6
(one possible move that does not defend the e-pawn) 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3,
White is still better developed, he can get all his pieces out easily,
he has superiority in the center. So Black has nothing in return for
his pawn, or for the knight's having moved three times.
And if 3...f6??, Black is toast: 4.Qh5+ and either 4...Ke7 5. Qf7+
Kd6 6.Nc4+ Kc5 7. Qd5 mate, or 4...g6 5.Nxg6+ hxg6 6.Qxh8 with a
winning material advantage.
> So question #1: what should White do here? Continue to develop and
> ignore the pawn, or take it?
I put this question to Fritz8, going through every possible move
besides 2...Nf6, 2...f5, and those that defend the e-pawn. The only
one where it did not give 3.Nxe5 as its #1 reply was 2...Bb4, against
which it preferred 3.c3.
> And question #2: let's say Black plays 2...Nf6. Now White's pawn is
> under attack. What should White do here? Take the e5 pawn anyway?
> Continue his plans with 3 Bc4? Does Black then take the pawn on e4?
This is an old, established opening known as Petroff's (or Petrov's)
Defense, named for Alexander Dimitryevich Petroff (1794-1867), who
analyzed and played the line extensively when he was Russia's best
player in the first half of the 19th century. It is still popular
today. The main line is 3.Nxe6 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4, but White may also play
3.d4 and 3.Bc4. Or White can simply play 3.Nc3, defending his e-pawn.
One old trap Black must avoid: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 Nxe4? 4.Qe2
Nf6?? 5.Nc6+! winning the queen. That is why Black first plays 3...d6
before capturing on e4.
> Or does White defend with Nc3? If so, this puts an end to the plan to
> play 4 c3 and 5 d4.
Yes, White can simply play 3.Nc3, defending his e-pawn, in which
case the game will probably transpose into the Four Knights Game
(3...Nc6) or Petroff Three Knights Game (3...Bb4).
|
| | |
Date: 17 Aug 2008 13:15:02
From:
Subject: Re: What to do when opponent doesn't play as expected in the opening?
|
On Aug 17, 3:59=A0pm, "Andrew B." <[email protected] > wrote:
> On 17 Aug, 16:21, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > On Aug 16, 7:11=A0pm, John Salerno <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > So question #1: what should White do here? Continue to develop and
> > > ignore the pawn, or take it?
>
> > =A0 I put this question to Fritz8, going through every possible move
> > besides 2...Nf6, 2...f5, and those that defend the e-pawn. The only
> > one where it did not give 3.Nxe5 as its #1 reply was 2...Bb4, against
> > which it preferred 3.c3.
>
> I guess you didn't count Ba3 and Qh4 as possible :-)
Possible, yes, but not relevant to the issue of taking the black e-
pawn. I guess I should have said something "all moves that don't
defend the pawn or put a piece en prise."
> More seriously, John might find it helpful to have the sort of book
> with very thorough comments for the early moves, along the lines of:
>
> "2. ... Nc6 - Black defends his pawn while developing a piece. Other
> ways to defend the pawn are less good:
> (a) Qe7/Qf6 - the queen blocks the minor pieces, making development
> difficult,
> (b) Bd6 - blocks the d-pawn, hampering queen-side development,
> (c) f6 - seriously weakens Black's king-side,
> (d) d6 - playable, but blocks Black's KB.
> Nf6, counter-attacking White's pawn, is also OK (see Petroff Defence
> on p.29), while the counter-gambits d5 and f5 are sometimes played,
> but not recommended for beginners. Other moves are poor, as White can
> easily afford a tempo or two to gain an important centre pawn."
That's exactly what you get in Chernev's "Logical Chess" Move by
Move."
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Aug 2008 17:59:48
From: John Salerno
Subject: Re: What to do when opponent doesn't play as expected in the opening?
|
[email protected] wrote:
>> More seriously, John might find it helpful to have the sort of book
>> with very thorough comments for the early moves, along the lines of:
>>
>> "2. ... Nc6 - Black defends his pawn while developing a piece. Other
>> ways to defend the pawn are less good:
>> (a) Qe7/Qf6 - the queen blocks the minor pieces, making development
>> difficult,
>> (b) Bd6 - blocks the d-pawn, hampering queen-side development,
>> (c) f6 - seriously weakens Black's king-side,
>> (d) d6 - playable, but blocks Black's KB.
>> Nf6, counter-attacking White's pawn, is also OK (see Petroff Defence
>> on p.29), while the counter-gambits d5 and f5 are sometimes played,
>> but not recommended for beginners. Other moves are poor, as White can
>> easily afford a tempo or two to gain an important centre pawn."
>
> That's exactly what you get in Chernev's "Logical Chess" Move by
> Move."
Yep, that's what I'm reading right now. I read through the first game
twice already and it's very enlightening. Because I already know it's
madness to memorize moves, so I'm trying to learn as much about *why*
the moves are made instead of *which* moves are made.
|
| | |
Date: 17 Aug 2008 12:59:00
From: Andrew B.
Subject: Re: What to do when opponent doesn't play as expected in the opening?
|
On 17 Aug, 16:21, [email protected] wrote:
> On Aug 16, 7:11=A0pm, John Salerno <[email protected]> wrote:
> > So question #1: what should White do here? Continue to develop and
> > ignore the pawn, or take it?
>
> =A0 I put this question to Fritz8, going through every possible move
> besides 2...Nf6, 2...f5, and those that defend the e-pawn. The only
> one where it did not give 3.Nxe5 as its #1 reply was 2...Bb4, against
> which it preferred 3.c3.
I guess you didn't count Ba3 and Qh4 as possible :-)
More seriously, John might find it helpful to have the sort of book
with very thorough comments for the early moves, along the lines of:
"2. ... Nc6 - Black defends his pawn while developing a piece. Other
ways to defend the pawn are less good:
(a) Qe7/Qf6 - the queen blocks the minor pieces, making development
difficult,
(b) Bd6 - blocks the d-pawn, hampering queen-side development,
(c) f6 - seriously weakens Black's king-side,
(d) d6 - playable, but blocks Black's KB.
Nf6, counter-attacking White's pawn, is also OK (see Petroff Defence
on p.29), while the counter-gambits d5 and f5 are sometimes played,
but not recommended for beginners. Other moves are poor, as White can
easily afford a tempo or two to gain an important centre pawn."
|
| |
Date: 16 Aug 2008 23:20:15
From: Sanny
Subject: Thats a big Question
|
When your opponent do not play opening moves then it is very difficult
situation.
1. May be your Opponent has studied the new variation for hours and
you cannot play the correct moves in 3 min.
In such cases play most stable move. Do not go for risky moves that
what should be done.
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
In one game at GetClub "help bot" changed from opening and gain
arround 1 extra pawn by playing a move that was not in the GetClubs
opening move.
What I did was that taught GetClub the new opening. everytime someone
plays a new opening I teach that to GetClub Chess. So next time he
plays the same moves and find himself drown in the ocean.
GetClub Chess was improved yesterday so I think now Help Bot will have
to struggle a lot to make a draw. And to win a lot of fight is needed.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| | |
Date: 17 Aug 2008 02:33:00
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Thats a big Question
|
On Aug 17, 2:00=A0pm, help bot <[email protected] > wrote:
> Sanny wrote:
> > When your opponent do not play opening moves then it is very difficult
> > situation.
>
> > 1. May be your Opponent has studied the new variation for hours and
> > you cannot play the correct moves in 3 min.
>
> > In such cases play most stable move. Do not go for risky moves that
> > what should be done.
>
> > Play Chess at:http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
>
> > In one game at GetClub "help bot" changed from opening and gain
> > arround 1 extra pawn by playing a move that was not in the GetClubs
> > opening move.
>
> > What I did was that taught GetClub the new opening. everytime someone
> > plays a new opening I teach that to GetClub Chess. So next time he
> > plays the same moves and find himself drown in the ocean.
>
> =A0 LOL! =A0 I think the approach Sanny describes
> is hopeless (due to math) as well as ludicrous
> (due to logic). =A0A chess engine needs to be
> shown *how to fish*, not given a fish in a
> relative few positions. =A0This kind of weakness
> is shared (albeit to a much smaller degree) by
> even the best chess programs, as seen when
> the rote openings book is not installed or is
> disabled.
>
> > GetClub Chess was improved yesterday so I think now Help Bot will have
> > to struggle a lot to make a draw. And to win a lot of fight is needed.
>
> =A0 Right now, help bot is beating GetClub like
> carrots! =A0I was impressed with the first few
> opening moves, and even felt uncomfortable
> with my positional weakness (doubled pawns),
> until the program simply gave me a pawn for
> no good reason. =A0The difference in our
> respective understanding of positional chess
> is hard to gauge, since the program keeps
> blundering when it comes to simple tactics.
>
> =A0 This is the exact reverse of what ought to
> be happening when a human plays a chess
> machine; I ought to be struggling to close
> the position, so that I can outmaneuver the
> program and slowly build up an attack that
> cannot be stopped. =A0Instead, I am just
> gobbling up material that the program hangs.
>
> =A0 The program seems unwilling to move now,
> though earlier it was chugging along very
> well. =A0I'm two pawns up against the Master
> level-- a fairly easy win for me.
Never play with Master level as it takes 3-4 days to complete a game
against Master Level.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| | |
Date: 17 Aug 2008 02:00:53
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Thats a big Question
|
Sanny wrote:
> When your opponent do not play opening moves then it is very difficult
> situation.
>
> 1. May be your Opponent has studied the new variation for hours and
> you cannot play the correct moves in 3 min.
>
> In such cases play most stable move. Do not go for risky moves that
> what should be done.
>
> Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
>
> In one game at GetClub "help bot" changed from opening and gain
> arround 1 extra pawn by playing a move that was not in the GetClubs
> opening move.
>
> What I did was that taught GetClub the new opening. everytime someone
> plays a new opening I teach that to GetClub Chess. So next time he
> plays the same moves and find himself drown in the ocean.
LOL! I think the approach Sanny describes
is hopeless (due to math) as well as ludicrous
(due to logic). A chess engine needs to be
shown *how to fish*, not given a fish in a
relative few positions. This kind of weakness
is shared (albeit to a much smaller degree) by
even the best chess programs, as seen when
the rote openings book is not installed or is
disabled.
> GetClub Chess was improved yesterday so I think now Help Bot will have
> to struggle a lot to make a draw. And to win a lot of fight is needed.
Right now, help bot is beating GetClub like
carrots! I was impressed with the first few
opening moves, and even felt uncomfortable
with my positional weakness (doubled pawns),
until the program simply gave me a pawn for
no good reason. The difference in our
respective understanding of positional chess
is hard to gauge, since the program keeps
blundering when it comes to simple tactics.
This is the exact reverse of what ought to
be happening when a human plays a chess
machine; I ought to be struggling to close
the position, so that I can outmaneuver the
program and slowly build up an attack that
cannot be stopped. Instead, I am just
gobbling up material that the program hangs.
The program seems unwilling to move now,
though earlier it was chugging along very
well. I'm two pawns up against the Master
level-- a fairly easy win for me.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 16 Aug 2008 16:48:49
From: help bot
Subject: Re: What to do when opponent doesn't play as expected in the opening?
|
On Aug 16, 7:11=A0pm, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote:
> I'm studying Giuoco Piano right now and I have a question about how to
> play when Black doesn't follow the first few moves. For example:
>
> 1 e4 =A0e5
> 2 Nf3
>
> If, instead of 2...Nc3,
That should be ...Nc6.
> Black plays something (other than 2...Nf6) that
> does not protect his e5 pawn, should White play 3 Nxe5? I mean, this is
> the reason you attack the pawn in the first place
White does not play Nf3 in the hope that
Black will fail to see the threat to his e-pawn.
Rather, White plays this move in order to
develop that piece, toward the center, and
getting it out of the way allows castling on
the King-side once the KB is moved as well.
=46rom f3, the Knight applies pressure to key
central squares like e5 and d4, and it also
keeps a watchful eye on g5, h4 and even d2.
> but it also seems to
> violate the rule of moving a piece twice in the opening (and it moves
> the knight off a good square).
Such rules were created to help you decide
what to do when there is nothing to do. When
there is something to do (i.e. capture a free
pawn), the rule is to have a good look around
and then do what must be done.
> Also, Black could probably attack the
> knight with a pawn, forcing White to retreat (and thereby moving the
> knight a third time).
Yikes! You are taking these helpful aids
far too seriously, for the only rules that can't
be ignored are that checkmate ends the
game and that you cannot move into check.
> So question #1: what should White do here? Continue to develop and
> ignore the pawn, or take it?
That depends on the position; what move
has Black made?
> And question #2: let's say Black plays 2...Nf6. Now White's pawn is
> under attack. What should White do here? Take the e5 pawn anyway?
> Continue his plans with 3 Bc4? Does Black then take the pawn on e4?
You are now deep in the realms of openings
theory-- the correct approach can be decided
by looking at what move yields the best
results at your level of play, or at the master
or grandmaster level, or better still, what will
lead to the type of position you are most
comfortable with. (Actually, you may learn
faster by steering for those types of positions
with which you are decidedly /uncomfortable/.)
> Or does White defend with Nc3? If so, this puts an end to the plan to
> play 4 c3 and 5 d4.
White need not stick to any fixed plan. He
may in fact, adapt to the ever-changing needs
of the position, like a chameleon.
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 16 Aug 2008 21:02:49
From: help bot
Subject: Re: What to do when opponent doesn't play as expected in the opening?
|
On Aug 16, 8:44=A0pm, J. Tactics Salerno <[email protected] >
wrote:
> > =A0 Yikes! =A0You are taking these helpful aids
> > far too seriously, for the only rules that can't
> > be ignored are that checkmate ends the
> > game and that you cannot move into check.
>
> It's not that I'm adhering so strictly to these guidelines ("rules" is a
> bad word, I guess), it's just in this case it makes sense. Is it worth
> capturing a pawn at the expense of moving your knight around two extra
> times and not developing anything else? I'd say no, but to be honest I
> don't think I know enough to tell when it *is* worth it or not.
To answer such a question I would need to
know the move that Black has supposedly
played-- the one you don't want to specify.
Very generally speaking, if it was a do-
nothing move, then capturing the pawn is
good. It makes no difference how many
times the gods-of-chess-rules are offended
by your moving the same piece over and
over. However, if the unspecified move led
to tactical problems after Nxe5, then you
have to examine and weigh the details
carefully.
Let me give a crude example here:
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Ne7
3. Nxe5 d6
4. Nf3 g5
5. Nxg5 h6
6. Nf3
White has moved the same piece, over
and over and over-- violating cherished
laws of chess as specified by numerous
talking heads. But Black is the one who
is busted here. (You see, those rules are
for (i.e. Russian cheaters), not *you*!)
You -- tactical wizard that you are -- are
above the hackneyed laws by which lesser
men must live. You are free -- like the
invisible man -- to steal pawns, to move the
same piece repeatedly, or even to pre-
maturely move your Queen if it suits your
whim! That's because no man is strong
enough to stop you; you are a dynamo; the
Hercules of the chess board! Only
TACTICS direct your play; you are a master
of tactics, and they inform your every move.
Mortal men fear you -- and rightly so --
because you are a *tactical monster*. Go
forth and conquer.
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 16 Aug 2008 20:44:32
From: John Salerno
Subject: Re: What to do when opponent doesn't play as expected in the opening?
|
help bot wrote:
>> If, instead of 2...Nc3,
>
> That should be ...Nc6.
Oops, yeah! :)
>> Also, Black could probably attack the
>> knight with a pawn, forcing White to retreat (and thereby moving the
>> knight a third time).
>
> Yikes! You are taking these helpful aids
> far too seriously, for the only rules that can't
> be ignored are that checkmate ends the
> game and that you cannot move into check.
It's not that I'm adhering so strictly to these guidelines ("rules" is a
bad word, I guess), it's just in this case it makes sense. Is it worth
capturing a pawn at the expense of moving your knight around two extra
times and not developing anything else? I'd say no, but to be honest I
don't think I know enough to tell when it *is* worth it or not.
|
|
