[The Chess] Debaser vs. Pinback - Teaching Style

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 9:53 am

White bishops move like this, but black knights move like this:

...Ne6

Debaser · Post by **Debaser** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 9:57 am

Rad1

And with that, both my rooks have been... developed.

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 10:02 am

Fine strategic play.

This move is just to set up the next move:

...Nh7

Debaser · Post by **Debaser** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 11:21 am

Well, you've certainly left me quivering with anticipation. I guess in the mean while, I should try to restore my queen's relevance somewhat.

b1

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 12:55 pm

Assuming here you meant: Qb1...

CRY HAVOC, AND LET SLIP THE PAWNS OF WAR!!!!

...f5.

Debaser · Post by **Debaser** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 4:07 pm

pinback wrote:Assuming here you meant: Qb1...

CRY HAVOC, AND LET SLIP THE PAWNS OF WAR!!!!

...f5.

Part of me would like an actual explanation of this, but I think I can kind of see the way you're layering your offense.

f4

This pretty much forces you to trade Bishops. Somewhere in the back of my mind, a bishop and a knight seems superior to two knights, thanks to the power of variety(also my rooks and queen seem to be in a slightly more powerful position than yours, so reducing the number of pieces on the board will emphasize their importance). Also, one way or another that will break up your pawn line in the next couple rounds.

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 4:18 pm

Debaser wrote:Part of me would like an actual explanation of this, but I think I can kind of see the way you're layering your offense.

I am launching a fierce King-side offensive against your increasingly poorly defended King. I have no explanation past that. I'm not that strong at The Chess.

This pretty much forces you to trade Bishops. Somewhere in the back of my mind, a bishop and a knight seems superior to two knights, thanks to the power of variety(also my rooks and queen seem to be in a slightly more powerful position than yours, so reducing the number of pieces on the board will emphasize their importance). Also, one way or another that will break up your pawn line in the next couple rounds.

We're at the point in the game where I'm running out of thinigs to teach. I'm good at reciting theory and laying down the basics (which you now all know), but when it comes to specific, complicated positions (like this one), I'm as lost as anybody.

But yes, let's trade bishops. In reality, I could play ...e4, but that would slow the game way down and stifle my questionably-planned Kingside attack I spoke of earlier.

...Bxg2

Then, assuming Kxg2:

...Qe8

Two purposes of this move: 1. Break the pin on the d6 pawn that your rook imposed upon it. 2. Ready the queen to join the Kingside attack.

(Also protects the knight, should some horrible fate befall him.)

(EDIT: And hey! Look! Qe8 attacks your undefended a4 pawn! I swear, I didn't even notice that at first.)

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 4:24 pm

A few more words about the bishop trade:

1. While I'm not thrilled about giving up my King-aiming bishop, I'm happy to get rid of yours, because, if you'll look at the current pawn structure, your black-squared bishop is relatively useless at the moment.

2. (Now this is important.) The rule goes, "If you're ahead in pawns, trade pieces. If you're ahead in pieces, trade pawns." The reason for this is, as the game goes on, pawns slowly but surely become more and more valuable. If a game managed to reach the end game, where the game has boiled down to the King, a couple pieces, and a few pawns, then pawns take the center stage, and the player with more is likely to win. So, if you find yourself ahead in pawns, you are happy to trade away pieces, because it sets up a favorable endgame. If you're ahead in pieces, the opposite theory applies. Get rid of the pawns, so that by the time the endgame is reached, your superior army will be able to take care of the stragglers.

This is not to say that trading bishops was my correct play. This is simply my (theory-based) rationalization of it. Use at your own risk.

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 4:25 pm

Also, as an aside:

I dunno about you, but I think this is a pretty good game of chess!

Debaser · Post by **Debaser** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 5:05 pm

pinback wrote:Also, as an aside:

I dunno about you, but I think this is a pretty good game of chess!

Probably the best game I've ever played. I'm starting to get stumped. If you'd care to provide some sort of thesis on pawn structure (i.e., why yours seems to be so much fucking better than mine), I'd love to hear that. I'm beginning to get claustrophobic.

Qa2+

I'm just kind of trying to take the pressure off myself a bit and maybe work at untying my hands. Forcing you to spend a round not really moving might help. Might.

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 5:21 pm

Our boards must be fucked up. I have both a white pawn AND a black knight in between a2 and my King. (white pawn on c4, black knight on e6.)

(before Qa2...)

bruce · Post by **bruce** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 7:13 pm

Debaser wrote:I'm just kind of trying to take the pressure off myself a bit.

Oh, for that, I recommend http://www.thehun.net.

Bruce

Debaser · Post by **Debaser** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 8:27 pm

Ah shit, I probably fucked it up when I was setting up my home board. I've repaired it, but I'm not in "chess mind" right now, so I'll make my move whenever I wake up tomorrow.

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Fri Jul 09, 2004 8:33 pm

No hurry, mate! We're all in this to learn. And learning takes time.

Debaser · Post by **Debaser** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 12:49 am

Alright, Ben, you know why I've been putting this off? I'm kind of stumped. I look at the board and cannot think of a useful move. Normally this would be the point in the game where I just move a pawn a square of something, but I've not wanted to do that because, in being forced to justify every move I make aloud (and thus, being forced to justify every move I make to myself), I have, thus far, been playing with more skill than I've ever played before, instead of simply being a reactionary opportunist. So I'm depressed at the idea of just "moving a guy" and hoping you give me an opening. That having been said...

g4.

I sure hope you give me an opening!!

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 12:57 am

(All of this assuming we have our boards synchronized now.)

I understand your feeling of "not knowing what to do next". But isn't that a better feeling than "shit, I'm getting slaughtered!"? I feel my job as teacher now has come to a satisfying end, and now I can focus on humiliating you with tactical superiority. Which, if you've been paying attention, you realize I don't actually have.

My problem with g4 (again, assuming that we're looking at the same board) is that you're essentially sacrificing the pawn out of boredom. If you don't know what to do, make a strong strategic move that doesn't overtly lose anything. Centralize your queen. Maybe start trying to double up your rooks on the d-file. Play some defense against anything I might be thinking about doing. I dunno. But don't just give shit away.

All "g4" says to me is, "Take my pawn... please!"

Which I will:

...fxg4

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 1:03 am

Let me add that, no matter what happens the rest of this game, I think that with the exception of the earlier "Qb3", you have acquitted yourself admirably in this game, and you have a hopeful future ahead of you in THE CHESS.

So, just don't play Qb3 again, and you'll do fine. Good job, DEBASER!

And if ICJ ever moves, I can do the same good for him! God, I just want to GIVE!!! Why can't I give??! Jonsey, why won't you let me give?

(Oh yeah, and g4 kinda sucked too. Don't do that again either. Other than that, and Qb3, though, SMOKIN'!)

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 1:05 am

BTW, I'm posting all of this drunk out of my skull!! Pretty good, huh? I'm impressed.

Debaser · Post by **Debaser** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 1:05 am

Well, to be fair, I kind of had wanted to break that pawn line for a while now, so I figured captured or capturing on my next turn, I'd at least get that done. The problem with moving my queen more center is that there's no square I see where she would:

A. Cover more of the board than she already does.

B. Cover areas of the board not already covered by another piece.

C. Not be immediately captured on your next move.

Other "strategic moves" felt similarly futile.

Anyway...

Kf2.

Are we still explaining moves? This one's pretty obvious, so I won't bother anyway, but if you want to turn things "real" I suppose we should stop divulging our intentions to eachother.

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 1:12 am

Assuming by "Kf2" you mean "Nf2"...

...Nxf4+

I understand and appreciate your rationale for your move. However, god-willing, you will now suffer the consequences.

NEVER give material up without purpose. If you want to see PURPOSE, relive that "Immortal Game" I posted whilst explaining algebraic notation. Motherfucker gave up his queen and both rooks, and still won. That's just ridiculous. But it worked.

If you don't have a plan, don't lose material (if possible, obviously.) Words to live by. The more material available, the more plans that are waiting to be discovered!