DEFENDING CORRECTLY

Defending correctly
I know that its much more interesting to study wild attacks then the stubborn defense. I am an attacker who likes to attack even if I see that my combinations are dubious, and I won a countless of times even though I find refutation for my combinations myself, my opponents didn't found it while playing. I was playing against very good players, about equal chess strength as me who also failed to refute my combinations even though they were real pseudo attacks.

What dose it means pseudo attack? Well when I say that I mean attack that look pretty strong but in fact its not really dangerous unless your opponent doesn't blunder and then your pseudo attack is no longer pseudo attack.

How to recognise pseudo attacks? Well you really have to calculate and you have to be familiar with some basics of the defensive ideas. This tips are for guys under 1800 because I saw many of them failed to refute pseudo attacks of mine. Firstly if your opponent sac some material to get open lines, around your king, and you know that his attacking forces are small but powerful then its very good to give back some material for consolidation. Also in almost every non master attacks there is some key pieces which without them attack cant work, its very important that you see which piece is a critical piece on the board, and to play against that piece. Also your key defenders, you must know always which piece is holding your ground. Also, pins are very bad, I know that you all already knows that, and yet many little people have performed very logical thing, after for example the king side castle, when after your opponent create a rook lift and his rook is pinning your pawn in front of your king, just move your king away from the pin. Do not think that pin is not important, it will kill you.

I know that when talked this way some of you may be little confused, so I will put two games of mine, played here on chess.com online chess for which I think that are perfect examples of erors in defending the position which backfires on my opponents because I used their mistakes to create very strong attack and eventually to win.

Both of this games are in some fact strange, because I don't really play correspondence chess, and I wasn't really comfortable with the knowing that my opponent can analyzed every move for 3 days (although no one really does that). I play fast myself, I play fast in correspondence chess also which is not good, but its a habit and I cant get rid of it.

First game was against a guy who had better rating then me for 70 points when we started, but in the meantime he lost some games, and I won some, so in fact now I got better rating then him for over 100 points. Never the less I was impatient and I attacked, he made a mistake while defending and I won the game by resignation.

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3Bg7 4. Nf3 d6 5. e4 O-O6. Bd3 Nc6 7. d5 Nb88. O-O Nfd7 9. Qc2 e510. dxe6 fxe6 11. Re1 a612. b4 Nc6 13. a3 Nde514. Nxe5 Nxe5 15. Be2Qh4 16. Be3 Nf3+17. Bxf3 Rxf3 18. gxf3 d519. cxd5 exd5 20. exd5Be5 21. f4 Bh3 22. f3 Rf823. Bf2 Qxf4 24. Bg3Bd4+ 25. Qf2 Qxf326. Re3 Bxe3

As we can see he start his defensive moves very nicely, then he could took my bishop with his pawn on move 23. but he thought that he could go to some complications after I play 23.Rxf3 so he rejected a bishop, which I also think that is correct move, but then on move 24. he should have played Rxe5 and my attack would be dead stopped, my opponent would be way ahead in material, and my possible attacks after that move just couldn't worked, but he made a mistake and I won the game. Lesson is give up some material for consolidation, because my bishops were key attackers, in this position if he would get rid of one of my bishops, I would have no attack.

Next game is against a guy who was rated about 1880 and his rating didn't change drastically, in the matter of fact, he maintained his rating even after the lost game against me (and I was in the time of playing the game rated about 1770). And also this game is very special because its my best win so far (on chess.com) , so its kind of dear to me. He was also only guy over 1800 against I was playing until this game, so again I was a kind of impatient, and I wanted to attack. My entire game was very aggressive, and this game is quite different then previous game. In this game my attack was a real deal, I had very, very nice opportunities on the king side and in this game my opponent made subtle errors which cost him a position, and then he made an only blunder of the game on move 24, after which I won the game pretty nicely.
                              
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e53. dxe5 Ng4 4. Nf3 Bc55. e3 Nc6 6. Be2Ngxe5 7. O-O O-O8. Nbd2 a5 9. b3 Ra610. Bb2 Nxf3+ 11. Nxf3Ne7 12. Nd4 Rh613. e4 d6 14. Qc2 f515. Qc3 Rf7 16. Bc1 f417. Nf3 Nc6 18. a3 Ne519. Nxe5 dxe5 20. Rd1Bd4 21. Rxd4 exd422. Qd3 Qh4 23. h3Rg6 24. Qxd4 Bxh325. Bf3 Bxg2 26. Bxg2Rxg2 27. Kxg2 f3+

I think that both games were preety instructive, and that they are perfect examples of bad defending, I hope that all of you guys who read this articles are satisfied with content of an article. This article is primary made for guys under 1800, if you have any idea for a new article or question I would be glad to answer. I hope that you have enjoyed, every commment is welcomed.

ENGLISH OPENING

     The ENGLISH OPENING derives its name from its association with the Englishman Howard Staunton, who played it six times against St.Amant in their 1843 match, and also in historic London tournament of 1851.  Staunton and his contemporaries understood many of strategies that today we call "hypermodern". But Morphy's disdain for this opening caused it to fall out of fashion, and it remained so far an entire century. Afew daring explorers, such as Tartakower, Rubinstein and Nimzowitsch, ventured it occasionally prior to World War ll, but since then English has become routine.

ENGLISH OPENING:
Four Knight's Variation:
1 c4 e5 2 Nc3 Nf6 3 Nf3 Nc6 4 g3 Bb4 5 Bg2 0-0 6 0-0 e4 7Ng5 Bxc3 8 bxc3 Re8 9 d3 exd3 10 exd3 d6 11 Rb1 h6 12 Ne4 Nxe4.

ENDING GAME

Instructions

1.

o 1

Move remaining pawns down the board to break through your opponent's defense. Capturing your opponent's pawns weakens his defense.

o 2

Control the center of the board throughout the game, but particularly near the end of a chess game. If you control the center, you can be the aggressor and force your opponent to react only to your moves.

o Sponsored Links

 Brain Training Games

Improve memory and attention with scientific brain games. Free Trial

www.lumosity.com

o 3

Advance a remaining rook into a central vertical file to keep your opponent's King restricted. Next to a Queen, a rook is most powerful.

o 4

Capture your opponent's rooks. It's very difficult to place someone in check without a rook involved.

o 5

Begin moving your King. While you spend most of the game defending your King, the end of the game means fewer threats due to fewer pieces. A King can even become part of your strategy to put the other side in check.

o 6

Box in your opponent's King. As you put the King in check, your opponent must move his King. Keep following him, forcing him to move one square at a time. If you've adequately set up your chess pieces for the end of the game, you can effectively surround your opponent's King and put him in checkmate.

When a player's king is threatened by an opposing piece, it is said to be "in check". When a player places the opposing king in check he should announce, "check". The object of a player is not merely to place his opponent's king in check but to make certain that every square where the king has a possibility of movement is also covered. This is called checkmate. The king is considered captured.

Either player may resign at any time. This generally happens when a player loses a major piece and the outlook for victory in his case appears bleak.

Stalemate is considered a tie. A stalemate occurs when a player's only move is to place his own king in check, but its current square is not threatened. As long as he can move another piece or the king can move to an open square, stalemate may not occur.

A draw also results when the only two pieces on the board are Kings, regardless of their position. If the pieces remaining on the board make check mate impossible, for example one cannot checkmate an opponent with only a king and a bishop a draw would also result.

Games from Irving Chernev's "Capablanca's Best Chess Endings"

The opening of a game is important - and hundreds of books are written on the opening. The opening leads to the midgame. The midgame is important - and hundreds of books are written on the midgame. The midgame leads to the endgame. The endgame is important - and *no books are written on the endgame*!

Yes, there are books, but they concern themselves with composed endings, or with theoretical (and for the most part artificial) positions. The composed endings are admittedly beautiful, but they are of limited value, as they have no relationship to practical play. Of the theoretical positions, many have their uses, but one must sift the wheat from the chaff. TO what use can we put such knowledge as the procedure for mating with a Knight and Bishop, or with the two Bishops, when an opportunity to do so may not occur in a lifetime? And why burden our minds with the manner of forcing mate with three knights (believe-it-or-not) or winning with four minor pieces against a Queen (sans Pans) when such positions as these have never yet been seen on land or sea? Capablanca himself says : "In order to improve your game, you must study the endgame before anything else; for whereas the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves, the middlegame and the opening must be studied in relation to the endgame." There are no books on endings from real life, no books from the practices of masters in actual play, let alone from the practice of a single master. This fact alone is enough to justify this book of endings, selected from the tournament and match play of the greatest endgame virtuoso the world has ever seen - the immortal Capablanca. Here are wondrous endings to enchant the reader, endings of breathtaking artistry. Here are endings of astonishing accuracy, whose relentless logic will inspire the earnest student to emulate a similar technique - the technique of seeking a clear-cut, efficient win, instead of a display of fireworks. The games are given in full, in order to show how a slight advantage acquired in the early stages, is carried forward and exploited in the endgame. I have annotated the endings in detail (a consideration they have rarely received before) for the better appreciation of the fine points of Capablanca's play, and have given credit to those who have anticipated my findings.Games from Irving Chernev's "Capablanca's Best Chess Endings"

The opening of a game is important - and hundreds of books are written on the opening. The opening leads to the midgame. The midgame is important - and hundreds of books are written on the midgame. The midgame leads to the endgame. The endgame is important - and *no books are written on the endgame*!

Yes, there are books, but they concern themselves with composed endings, or with theoretical (and for the most part artificial) positions. The composed endings are admittedly beautiful, but they are of limited value, as they have no relationship to practical play. Of the theoretical positions, many have their uses, but one must sift the wheat from the chaff. TO what use can we put such knowledge as the procedure for mating with a Knight and Bishop, or with the two Bishops, when an opportunity to do so may not occur in a lifetime? And why burden our minds with the manner of forcing mate with three knights (believe-it-or-not) or winning with four minor pieces against a Queen (sans Pans) when such positions as these have never yet been seen on land or sea? Capablanca himself says : "In order to improve your game, you must study the endgame before anything else; for whereas the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves, the middlegame and the opening must be studied in relation to the endgame." There are no books on endings from real life, no books from the practices of masters in actual play, let alone from the practice of a single master. This fact alone is enough to justify this book of endings, selected from the tournament and match play of the greatest endgame virtuoso the world has ever seen - the immortal Capablanca. Here are wondrous endings to enchant the reader, endings of breathtaking artistry. Here are endings of astonishing accuracy, whose relentless logic will inspire the earnest student to emulate a similar technique - the technique of seeking a clear-cut, efficient win, instead of a display of fireworks. The games are given in full, in order to show how a slight advantage acquired in the early stages, is carried forward and exploited in the endgame. I have annotated the endings in detail (a consideration they have rarely received before) for the better appreciation of the fine points of Capablanca's play, and have given credit to those who have anticipated my findings.

The Middlegame-What to Do??

After you played your opening, from memory or from good sound principles (control the center, develop you pieces, protect your king), now what? Now you are in the middlegame. Most players don't make it to the endgame, or if they did, they have a weaker position. For most people, games are won in the middlegame. Here is where the real thinking takes part.

In the middlegame, you would like to have the better position, try to win material, get in a postion to go into a winning endgame, or find a way to checkmate the enemy king. In the middlegame, you need to have an active position while defending against any weaknesses.

If you happen to lose a pawn, try to avoid exchanging your pieces, since you need them for counterplay. If you are up a pawn, you may want to exchange pieces and go into a favorable endgame, while avoiding any exchange of your pawns.

If your opponent seems to have undeveloped pieces or blocked pieces, keep them blocked while developing your pieces to better positions. It is not the time to exchange pieces that would free his game.

If your opponent did not castle or has an exposed king, threaten it with pieces and look for double attacks or checkmate patterns, even if you have to sacrifice a piece or two. This is the best time to look for tactics and combinations that your opponent cannot prevent or calculate as well.

If you have a pawn-side majority, actively try to advance your pawns on that side. If you have a passed pawn, try to push it forward as safe as possible. If you can back it up with a rook behind it, that is even better.

If you can double or isolate your opponents pawns, then do so. Two doubled pawns is like one pawn. But be careful as not to open up files for your opponent's rooks.

If your opponent is getting into time trouble, you might want to think about unexpected moves and make surprise threats that require some time calculating.

Watch out for a back-rank mate on your own king or look for a possible back rank mate on your opponent's king. Make sure your king has an escape route or can be protected. Make sure your king is defended before you attack. Too many times a player sees mate in three, but got mated in two instead.

Don't panic if a surprise move was made against you. It may look like you are lost or about to lose a piece, but calm down, sit on your hands, and calculate other counter possibilities. Don't make the first move that pops in your head. Look around you and look at everything on the board. In times of crises, look at tactics and combinations that may get you out of a jam.

If your opponent sacrificed a piece to gain some initiative, try to prevent that initiative. You may want to decline the sacrificed piece or may find a way to sacrifice back to gain the initiative and be on the offensive.

Be careful of your opponent's fianchettoed bishop that may strike anywhere on the long diagonal, especially if it is aiming at the side of a castled king. Think about fianchettoing your own bishop if the long diagonal is not blocked.

Don't waste a tempo and move a piece back and forth. Select a plan and play with a goal. if you run out of ideas, try to put a piece on a square that covers the most space or attacks the most squares. Avoid putting a knight on the edge or rim (less squares to attack), and get the knight in the center (a knight on the rim is dim).

If you are going to lose one of several pieces being attacked, give up the one with the least value and keep the piece that will be the most active.   For example, if you have to lose knight or bishop, keep the bishop unless it is blocked by your pawns.  At that point, the knight is stronger. 

If possible, try to get your rooks on the opponent's 7th rank. Even stronger, place both rooks on the 7th rank.

Avoid giving up a knight for a bishop unless there is compensation such as doubled pawns. In the endgame, the bishop is stronger than the knight in most cases. For example, two bishops can checkmate a lone king, but two knights cannot. The exception is if the bishop is blocked and cannot develop to attack the long diagonals.

Always ask yourself after every move by your opponent, can he checkmate me? Can he win any material? What is he threatening? Can he sacrifice something that I didn't see? Look for why your opponent made the move he did. After you have done that, and you feel it is safe, make your own plans for attack.

Capture pawns towards the center in most cases. Sometimes the rook pawn in the endgame can never win, but if it had been a center pawn, there are more chances of a win.

Opposite colored bishops has a high percentage of draws, even if one side is several pawns up. Be aware of that when it comes down to opposite colored bishops or when you are about to exchange or give up a bishop.

If you think you have found a good move, look for a better move as time permits. Come up with a couple of candidate moves, and rule out the bad moves.

Accept your opponent's sacrifice if you don't understand or can't justify why not to accept it. You may be able to survive the attack and get into a winning endgame if your opponent has not calculated all the winning moves from the sacrifice.

Don't drift in the middlegame. Forced concentration is the key to prevent drifting. Develop and execute a logical pattern as deep as possible. Calculate forced moves first.

Have a good pawn structure and seize control of the central squares as soon as possible.

If your opponent has castled on the opposite side that you castled, attack on the side of the enemy king and defend on the side of your king. Both sides are going to attack the king. Whoever gets there first usually wins.

Above all, have a plan and stick to it.

QUEEN'S GAMBIT ACCEPTED

       Hello guys. Do you enjoyed about my tactic yesterday? Ithink yes, but now i will give you a nice opening. There is QUEEN GAMBIT ACCEPTED. The opening isn't same with QUEEN GAMBIT DECLINED. But the structure and the position almost the same. So be careful if you tell this opening,because the opening have a very much alternative trap.
      THe opening of this opening implies a courageous attempt to take white offered pawn and repel the ensuing onlaught. One may think of the KING GAMBIT ACCEPTED wiht its may sacrifices to conjure an image of the gambit on the queenside. Thus it is ussually a surprise to the uninitiated that this opening is one of Black's safest and stodgiest defence to 1 d4.

QUEEN'S GAMBIT ACCEPTED:
1 d4 d5 2 c4 cXd4 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 BXc4 c5 6 0-0 a6 7 Qe2

ALL ABOUT TACTIC!!

THREE HUNDRED CHESS GAMES THE GAME OF CHESS Here we have two books by one of the greatest players and teachers of all time, a unique biography/games collection of a great old master. One could make the case that Dr. Siegbert Tarrasch was the strongest player in the world at some point during the 1890s; he also played at a world-class (top five) level throughout, and somewhat beyond, the first decade of this century, all the while keeping up his medical practice. Tarrasch was, deservedly, designated as one of the first five "grandmasters" of chess. But he became even better known through his writings on the game, which appeared in books, columns, and periodicals. For at least two generations of aspiring players, Tarrasch's work was the primary source of their chess education. Reti made the point that Tarrasch might have had even greater success over the board had he not shared so much of his knowledge with the rest of the chess world. Surprisingly, the recent translation of Tarrasch's masterpiece 300 Chess Games (Dreihundert Schachpartien, first published in 1896, I believe) makes this book available in English for the first time. The book is an annotated collection of Tarrasch's own games, along with a biographical description of Tarrasch's chess career, from his years as a youth in Breslau through 1894, when at age 32 he was arguably in his prime. A few years ago, I borrowed and read a copy of the German edition of 300 Chess Games in order to do my own research on Tarrasch, and I got most of my ideas about his contributions from this book. Not because he expounds upon his theories as much as he does elsewhere, but because 300 Chess Games is a record of how Tarrasch actually played, and how he explains his own moves. It reveals a pragmatic player who, however, had extremely strong opinions about certain positions, and who was judgmental regarding many move options about which the modern master would be indifferent, considering them more a matter of taste than of fundamental principle. 300 Chess Games offers an excellent perspective on late 19th-century play, and includes many classic illustrations of how to exploit positional advantages. I'm not sure which players would benefit most from playing through the games and notes of this book--probably those from about 1200 to 2000. For those who value the study of classic game collections, I think that the games in this book have more educational value than those of any great player up to Alekhine, because the positional themes and types of complex maneuvering which arise in Tarrasch's games are more universally applicable to a developing player's needs. Nevertheless, the book's main appeal will be to collectors and fans of the old masters. I don't have the German edition any more in order to make a direct comparison, but the translation by Sol Schwarz is unpretentious, literate, and reads very well, qualities lacking in the translations of many chess books. I do take exception to the habit of capitalizing all piece names, and even such things as "Queenside" and "the Exchange." Yes, nouns are capitalized in German, but that is no reason to do so in English. Okay, that's my petty academic quibble, expressed solely for the record. Admittedly, it has nothing to do with the generally high quality of 300 Chess Games. A more serious question is whether, as the German edition did, Hays should have gotten a strong player to write updated notes to supplement the openings section. I think you could argue this either way, and in any case, it's our gain to have this classic available in English. Since we're on the subject of English editions of Tarrasch's works, I also want to comment onThe Game of Chess, a new edition of which was put out by Hays in 1994. This is essentially an update of an older edition, with conversion to algebraic notation and some modest editing (e.g., some sparse notes and happily, more diagrams) contributed by the publisher. In this case, the translation (an old one) has many flaws and is not up to Schwarz' standard; but fortunately, the simplicity of the subject matter and clarity of Tarrasch's writing renders this unimportant. The Game of Chess is primarily an introduction to chess for near-beginners, with material of increasing complexity later on in the book that would serve intermediate players as well. Tarrasch starts with a description of algebraic chess notation and basic mates, assuming only a knowledge of the rules on the reader's part. I would describe his teaching method as a "standard positions" approach, in that he believes that exposing the student to a great number of fundamental and essentially-recurring positions will develop his or her intuition, a process, in his words, "analogous to that a mother uses to teach her child to talk." For me, this immediately raised the question of why so few of the novice's books we see in our super-bookstores takes this approach. Remarkably, Tarrasch gives a clearer and better description of how chess is typically played than I see in our modern books, which tend to be full of broad advice and invalid generalities. One can easily see why he was considered the preeminent teacher of his time: he was not trying to fool anyone. The Games of Chess has three major sections, on the endgame, middlegame, and opening, followed by illustrative games. The endgame section is mostly filled with fundamental, "must-know" positions, and is written clearly and efficiently. The openings section, not surprisingly, is often dated and inaccurate; although on the whole, it contains mostly valid and instructive ideas, especially for the study of 1.e4 e5. Tarrasch's renowned dogmatism about openings is evident, including his insistence upon the inferiority of many time-proven Black defenses, so any teacher using this text would have to supplement or replace this section with more up-to-date material. The middlegame section best illustrates the standard-position approach, systematically enumerating standard combinations and attacks, standard techniques (pins, forks, etc.), standard tactics and tricks, and standard positional concepts. As John Hall says in his Introduction: "Other books try to be more general than specific: he presents a large number of typical situations, covering essentially all the important structures...a sort of 'hands-on approach.'" And Tarrasch himself says: "A good game of chess is decided in the middlegame...For the conduct of the middlegame, we have in the studies of the typical combinations and attacks, made ourselves familiar with the raw material. The player who carefully studies this colossal material, until he makes it his own, should be able to cope with any situation." Of course, chess has become far more complex and there are a lot more "typical structures" these days, not to mention that Tarrasch's phrase "should be able to cope with any situation" was terribly exaggerated even at the time he made it. But I have to say that you could do much worse with a novice student than to forget all those popular books and series and simply teach directly from this book. Chess has advanced a great deal, but looking through this book, I'm not convinced that chess pedagogy has done so, at least at the elementary level. To conclude my Tarrasch discussion, I want to say something about his famous "dogmatism." Tarrasch's popular historical image is that of a follower of Steinitz who rather dogmatically followed the latter's ideas while expanding them to embrace the virtues of quick development and space control. I think that any objective study of Tarrasch has to conclude that he was indeed more dogmatic than most players of his stature, not only in his extreme statements about openings, but in assessments of strategies and even of individual moves. On the other hand, he played moves he had earlier criticized, and didn't seem to take his own theories as seriously as Steinitz did when it came to practical play. He also tried to establish himself as an original contributor to chess theory, independent of Steinitz. An interesting passage from The Game of Chess addresses Steinitz's "strong" recommendation that, versus rook-pawn attacks such as h4-h5-h6, it was best to allow the pawn to advance to h6 and then play ...g6, after which the pawn at h6 would be weak in the endgame. Steinitz also warned against blocking the pawn's advance by means of ...h6, for fear of weakening the g6 square. Tarrasch proudly argues against this, asserting: "Therefore never allow an enemy rook pawn to advance to the sixth rank, but block the advance by playing your own rook pawn one or two squares forward-a principle first enunciated by the author and diametrically opposed to the teaching of Steinitz. On this point, as on many others, I had been obliged to contest the teachings of that great theoretician. Here are some examples to demonstrate the truth of my dictum..." [italics his]. Of course, the truth is that one sometimes allows such an advance and one sometimes blocks it. There are no valid "dicta" or principles about such matters. But it shows how determined that thinkers like Steinitz and Tarrasch were to put chess on a rigorous scientific basis, even to the extent of establishing rules for a particular type of pawn advance. To this day, our elementary texts are full of bogus guidelines about more important topics than rook pawn advances, so we should not feel too smug about such quaint arguments. It would be very interesting to compare the results of using Tarrasch's The Game of Chess as an elementary textbook with those of using our five best selling introductory books. I doubt that 70 years or so of added chess experience would prove to have benefited the latter.

GIUOCO PIANO

     The GIUOCO PIANO (known outside the English-Speaking world as the"Italian Game") is a fifteenth-century opening that has stood the test of time.The name means quiet, or mid, game in contrast to various gambits White can play.Yet this is misleading, as the type of game that arises depends on the temperament of the players involved.If White is an exponent of hand-to-hand combat he plays lines like the Moller Attack, trying to blast throught the centre.Those seeking quiet positional manoeuvres prefer the lines with d3 and c3, postponing agressive action until the middle game.Many of the world's best players use the opening occasionally, and several Grand Masters, such as Kudrin, use it routinely, in preference to the Ruy Lopez.

GIUOCO PIANO:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5...