hardest piece to master.

Originally posted by Falco Lombardi
I would say the pawns. Silman in "How to Reassess Your Chess" says the knight is one of the hardest to master.

The knight. Backward moves by knights already on their ideal square (ie outpost). The mind has a habit of overseeing them.
Karpov and Shirov agree with me. Or should I say I agree with them

Originally posted by Policestate
The knight. Backward moves by knights already on their ideal square (ie outpost). The mind has a habit of overseeing them.
Karpov and Shirov agree with me. Or should I say I agree with them

I think Tal does too =)

For some reason I end up using the analysis board a bit more when trying to calculate a series of pawn moves, compared to any other piece. Most especially in the end game.

Originally posted by UndeadNightOrc
For some reason I end up using the analysis board a bit more when trying to calculate a series of pawn moves, compared to any other piece. Most especially in the end game.

I am wary of 'analyse board'. I am convinced it must impair visualisation, and the brains calculating ability.
Developing this ability is what gives one the edge over the board. Suppose it doesn't matter if you only play on line.

And yes, I can relate to your theory on the difficulty in assessing evolving pawn structures. For some reason my brain copes OK with the mobility of the pieces when assessing new positions, but not the way their scope changes in light of subtle pawn moves.

Maybe I'm just a retard?

Originally posted by Policestate
I am wary of 'analyse board'. I am convinced it must impair visualisation, and the brains calculating ability.
Developing this ability is what gives one the edge over the board. Suppose it doesn't matter if you only play on line.

And yes, I can relate to your theory on the difficulty in assessing evolving pawn structures. For some reason my brain cop ...[text shortened]... t not the way their scope changes in light of subtle pawn moves.

Maybe I'm just a retard?

Good point.

I don't understand why many past teachers warned against playing blindfold. I think that the ability to visualise the board is a key skill. Grandmasters are nearly all still awesome when they are blindfold.

Blindfold chess is totally beyond my understanding, I dunno how they do it. Sometimes when i'm lying in bed I try to 'think' a game through, furthest I ever got was about 6 or 7 moves each side, then lost track. How the hell do they do that?


EDIT: I'm talking about an unfamiliar opening here, it's fair to say i'd be familiar where every piece is in say move 7 of the Slav, but taking it from there... beyond me!

Must be the black's dark bishop.

I have trouble with the white squared one in the french.

Unless my opponet kindly plays Bb5+

Originally posted by Jusuh
Must be the black's dark bishop.

Why??? 😕
Or were you just kidding?...

Nobody's said rook!?! That's tough in "crowded" endgames.
Really, there's no individual piece toughest to master. You must consider all pieces as a whole. It's necessary to master "chess" and work with all the pieces well.

I think Ive gotten to the pt. where I can do fine w/o my queen.
Game 3013226 (progress)
Game 2866814

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I think we have all agreed that there is no consensus. Pieces are easy or complex to utilise dependant on the position. Queens are a nightmare in open positions, simply because assessing their potential moves two or more positions ahead is too much for most mere mortals to calculate. So I guess Her Majesty wins the argument from an 'analysis' perspective.
However, Queens appeal to the logical mind, as they move in a logical pattern.
So I agree with those who say knight and pawn. Knights because their movement seems to trouble the logical mind - knights seem to 'suprise' me in games more than any other piece, and pawns because their movement changes the dynamic of all the other pieces by altering the distribution of space. I marvel at so many top level games where the simplest pawn advances produce results that are nigh impossible to visualise before you see it in action.

Good debate. Wonder what the World Championship level players would say?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

no. the dark one. light one is often exchanged, but dark one is often the key piece (especially true in Grunfeld, KID, Pirc, Sic. dragon etc.) and remains longer on board.

i'd say for beginners the knight and bishop are the hardest to get the hang of they always get forked or a long bishop attacks all the way across the board. when calculating pawn move in an endgame where its like 6 pawns on the board and nothing else i find that one of the most difficult areas of my game. the reason i think the pawn is the hardest is to master is because they are what you use to create outposts, usually you have to attack a piece use a minority attack to gain your outpost. then your knight just marches on in. pawn moves also dictate the whole game which you have to know how to correctly place your pawns on good squares for your pieces to have the best mobility.

I've been slowly getting a handle on the pieces, right now I am proficient at using most of the pieces, the thing that usually gives me the most trouble is using all the pieces together in a long-term strategy, including pawns.

I would have to say pawns are the hardest to master, but maybe it is the knight as well... for the knight the board takes on a different landscape... straight lines are not straight anymore...