Only Chess
19 Oct 03
19 Oct 03
rules..
1)anybody can move any piece.
2)once somebody moves, thats the only move they can make
3) post your move in the thread title
i thought it would be fun to do a game where whoever passes upon the thread makes the next chess move, but that move is the only say he/she has in the game. What do you think?
1.e4
21 Oct 03
Originally posted by jcandancePerhaps the problem is your previous message - was that just a question, or did you actually make the move Bb5?
does nobody have a chessboard close by to make more moves? 😉
I suggest a new rule for the thread:
To avoid ambiquity, the number of the move should always be included when making a move. If the number is missing, then the move should be ignored.
So that if you did make the move, it should have been made as follows:
5.Bb5
As to your question, the good thing about that move is that it pins the black knight - the knight cannot move now, because that would result in a check. Pins are useful because they are often the roots of tactics that may end up winning material. Also, in some positions white may want to trade the bishop for the knight, or simply disrupt blacks queenside pawn formation by luring black into breaking the pin by ...a6, Ba4...b5, Bb3, after which the bishop would be left in good possition along the a2-g8 diagonal, and the black queenside pawns would be disrupted. However, in this possition due to the black pawn on c5, retreating the Bishop to a4 after 5...a6 would be a big blunder, as after 6.Ba4??...b5, 7.Bb3...c4 the bishop would be trapped.
In this particular position, I personally don't see the move 5.Bb5 as beeing particularly useful, as the bishop already had a perfectly good diagonal aiming right at the black weak spot at f2, and covering the white outpost at d5, and after 5...a6 white would be forced to either retreat the bishop (but not to a4), or trade it for the knight. So in this possition, I think that Bb5 would only make sense if white intends to trade the bishop for the knight. I'm not that familiar with the positions arising from the sicilian, as I never play it myself, so maybe white does have a good strategy that calls for that trade, I don't know.
There's a good rule of thumb though when it comes to opening play - don't move a piece twise until you've completed your development, unless you have a clear reason for doing so.
Great idea this thread by the way! 🙂
-Jarno
22 Oct 03
Originally posted by Pyrrho5.Bb5
Perhaps the problem is your previous message - was that just a question, or did you actually make the move Bb5?
I suggest a new rule for the thread:
To avoid ambiquity, the number of the move should always be included when making a move. If the number is missing, then the move should be ignored.
So that if you did make the move, it should have been ...[text shortened]... unless you have a clear reason for doing so.
Great idea this thread by the way! 🙂
-Jarno
Actually making the move . That was a good point. In this case, i don't see it as very useful, unles you are simply trying to make your opponent play with just one knight.. I tend to follow with ...A3, forcing either a retreat or an exchange. I seem to end up with double pawns on the C file, and an open b file for my rook. But yes, that's my move
