Why is it that so many players castle on the king's side at the first opportunity, even when not necessary? I have witnessed this behaviour in opponents of mine rated from below 1000 up to more than 1500.
I have been a habitual castler in the past, but have since given up the practice.
I'm not complaining about my opponents castling, as it often gives a great opportunity to trap the king, especially if the three end pawns are left in their original positions.
Is there any logic to castling as a matter of course? If so, what the hell is it?
I do not know enough about chess to instruct you. However castling is a sound move done at the highest level of play. The highest level of play is the chess championships as played by such players as Fischer, Tal, Alekhine, and some ten or so other players that I consider the best ever.
Originally posted by martin williamsCastling puts the king in relative safety.It is a lot easier to trap and attack the king if it stays in the center.It is not a wasted move since in most games you will have to castle anyway to keep your king safe.
I'm not saying you shouldn't castle: there are times when it is an excellent strategy. My problem is with those who castle to no apparent strategic advantage, just because they always do it. It strikes me as a waste of a move.
However,it is true that with many (most) players castling has become an automated reflex,and it is often done while there is a better move.
A lot of players simply don't look for a better move,just castle right away.I know I have done that many times and I probably will keep doing it despite the fact that I'm aware of this flaw in my play.
Sir Lot.
It has to do with what's coming up in the game. In a lot of games, even when the center files have not opened up yet, I know they're going to open. I know from experience my opponent (or I) can blast them open even if it involves sacrificing a pawn to do so. So I'll castle in order to go ahead and get out of the way of the strorm that I KNOW is coming. If my opponent leaves their king in the middle and he's vunerable to checks, tactics, whatever, then I'll happily do just about anything to keep the king stuck there and start chasing him around.
On the other hand there are many cases where castling can be delayed. Closed games where the center pawns are locked and it's tough to break open the center for example. If there are no open diagonals to my king, no open center files, and I see that the center is going to be locked up for awhile, then I'll delay castling in order to develop other pieces first.
So like all things in chess, it depends on the position. Every game is different.
Two main reasons:
1. putting the king in a safer place. Many, many games are won and/or lost by attacking a king left in the center -- a king in the center is subject to attack from all the enemy pieces. Partially because the center pawns are usually advanced in the opening, leaving lines open against a king in the center, and partly because it is easier for all the enemy pieces to get at the center. A couple of my favorite example games: Game 488555 (wherein my opponent leaves his king in the center against the king's gambit to take the time to counterattack instead, and resigns on move 24 facing a mate in 2 with 2 queens.) Game 68274 (wherein my opponent exposes the king early in the center to disastrous results)
2. Fastest way to develop a rook to the center where it can exercise the most influence on the fight.
Just to put in my two cents here.....
I don't think I have ever lost a chess game because I castled too early. I know I've lost quite a few because I didn't castle soon enough ort at all. That being said, many times I still find myself considering the option to castle and then looking for something better to do, especially with a center that isn't in any danger of opening up. Sometimes it's even best not to castle at all. Edmar Mednis wrote a book called "The King in the Middlegame", and he gives some good examples of situations where the king is left in the center, oftentimes to give the player an edge in the endgame. I believe there are a few lines in the Caro Kann where Black's king ends up on d7 and quite happy.
However, it takes a lot of experience to gain a sense for when it is alright to leave the king in the center. Until this sense is developed, it's usually best to err on the side of caution and shtuttle the king away to the corner.
I suppose in the end it all comes down to playing style. An attacking playing style seems to favour opponents who have castled. Having secured the centre of the board, they move their king to the edge of the board where their defenses are weakest. If you rely solely on three pawns for defence, you are asking for trouble. Castling should be strategic, not automatic, and the king should still be amply defended. Leaving the king in the centre and involving it in the attack is risky, but it can reap rewards in the latter stages of an attritional game, where each side has only a few pieces remaining.
Mmmm..... castling can sometimes be delayed with advantage, but an inexperienced player should castle rather than not if in doubt.
Vukovic once anaylsed the results of a number of simul games by masters. He found one common feature in 'simul massacres' where the master won all or nearly all the games : the late castling by opponents.
While the beginner often fails to castle quickly enough, the average player does so too mechanically.
Pillsbury is acknowledged to have been the first to summarise the rule on castling for strong players. And I quote " ....castle because you must or because you want to, never, just because you can."
Pretty much sums it up.
skeeter
When people castle early in the game and the pawns in front of the king are all untouched, often they have a knight in front of the pawns, which I always try to take with my bishop so they end up with doubled pawns and a massive gap in their "defense".
Hasn't failed me yet... I love it when people castle early 😀
the castled position is kind of cosy - but the position with both rooks and the king all on the original squares and no pieces in between gives you an incredible mobility both of attack and king-cosiness; your king is free to run to either side of the board, or stay in the centre ... this can lead to very interesting positions and bizarre options mmm and sometimes disastrous defeats ....
Originally posted by flexmoreLooking at your logo, I do believe you like running 🙂
your king is free to run to either side of the board, .
Castling has so many consequences and can be done for so many different reasons that you cannot easily fit it into rules. Castling is one of the most intuitive moves we make. It is also the only time, that we can make 2 moves at the same time. What I like about not yet castling is the heightening of the suspense.
Fjord
