the attacker makes lots of errors. you play solid, slow him down with counterattack, and wait. when he can't make progress he'll sac a piece. then you mop up.
against the stonewaller, you reserve your pawn breaks. put everything behind that and break through. if you can switch to secondary break while he's rallying the troops to plug the first break, that'll usually crash through.
against waiter you play solid, take no strategical/positional risks, keep everything coordinated and safe. not because it's solid, but because it's FAST. easy simple moves, no complications. - the trick is doing all that slightly faster and clocking him down. with 8 seconds to your 30s left he'll drop material like crazy, the you mop up or he flags.
now if I only could follow my ow advice...
12 Oct 11
Hi Robbie.
In the blitz game you posted I think you have White classed wrongly as an 'attacker'.
Here.
Here a true attacking would never play 4.a3 as in the posted game.
(they would also refrain from playing move like 3.d4-d5 unless there was a Knight on c6.)
An attacker throws his pieces out, castles and sacs for a check.
You never see a prophylactic pawn move. The only pawn moves you see are
e-pawn and d-pawn to get get the bits out then an h-pawn run at the kingside
or a blast with an f-pawn.
The plus with the attacking nutter is that they will lose 9 out of 10 but the
one win in 10 is always glorious.
12 Oct 11
Originally posted by Paul Leggettthose are difficult to play against. care to add examples of the 'derailing lines'? do you have any favourites?
I would add The Offbeat Nonconformist, who always plays the unusual, offbeat, or downright bizarre openings just to be different.
Every offbeat opening usually has one line or scheme that completely derails it (that's why it's less popular, usually, unless a strong player rehabilitates it and it becomes a fad), and you can usually annoy the #$^$ out of them by playing the annoying line against them all the time.
here's couple of mine:
against from gambit I decline the second pawn and play nf3-nc3-e4, a bit like a ruy:
against morra I play e6-Ne7-Ng6, but lately I've had some troubles with it. I'm guessing someone's put out a video or book about it recently, because suddenly everyone's playing the white side well...
curiously enough, I'm always sort of puzzled what to play against 1.f4 myself, although I've played it exclusively for years already. so usually I go for solid offbeat Be7 type of things (which annoy me most as white), as I really don't want to face white mainlines myself...
12 Oct 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOooh, sorry robbie but 6..a6? is a howler, should be 6..c4! White can just retreat the bishop after a6...
here is an example of the attacker, a blitz game just played illustrates the concept well.
mummin v robbie the howler (awooo)
[pgn] [Event "RHP Blitz rated"] [Site "www.timeforchess.com"] [Date "2011.10.12"] [Round "?"] [White "mummin"] [Black "robbie carrobie"] [Result "0-1"] [PlyCount "76"] [EventDate "2011.??.??"] 1. e4 b6 {Owens opening, whi ...[text shortened]... relentless attacker. Awwwwoooooo, werewolfs of London, awooooo} 0-1[/pgn]
12 Oct 11
2 edits
Originally posted by Marinkatombno its not, not according to stockfish its not, its the second choice engine move, c4 is
Oooh, sorry robbie but 6..a6? is a howler, should be 6..c4! White can just retreat the bishop after a6...
the first, but a6 is not a howler, its just not the optimal move. It doesn't matter
anyway, it was only a blitz game used to illustrate a point. Anyhow, after c4 the bishop
is trapped, but its not as pretty as imprisoning it.
13 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by wormwoodOff the top of my head, I have a simple example from my club.
those are difficult to play against. care to add examples of the 'derailing lines'? do you have any favourites?
here's couple of mine:
against from gambit I decline the second pawn and play nf3-nc3-e4, a bit like a ruy:
[pgn]
[Event "Edited game"]
[Site "SEACUCUMBERIII"]
[Date "2011.10.12"]
[Round "-"]
[White "-"]
[Black "-"]
[Result "*"]
most as white), as I really don't want to face white mainlines myself...
I have played the Dutch on occasion just to mix things up. One of my friends, Joe Sanderlin, owns a Roman Dzindzichashvili video where Roman says that a quick Bg5 followed by Bxf6 defangs the Dutch, as black's Nf6 is central to black's attacking plans. Joe follows it religiously.
As a result, when Joe plays 1. d4 f5 2. Nf3 or 2. c4, I automatically play 2. ... h6 and smile at him.
He invariably starts to grab his bishop, stops, then glares at me with a half-smile and mumbles "You son-of-a-..."!
Against From's Gambit, I have stopped more than one player cold simply by playing 2. e4 with a transposition to a King's Gambit. Some of those guys just play 1. ... e5 because they want to avoid a regular Bird's line, and have no clue how to play a KG. Easy pickin's.
There's more where that came from!
13 Oct 11
Originally posted by Paul Leggetthahah, yeah Bxf6 is annoying in dutch unless it's after Nc3 without c4 first. 🙂 I don't push h6 early in dutch though, but in offbeat sicilians I often do it if white lines up his Q+B battery to exchange bishops. 🙂
Off the top of my head, I have a simple example from my club.
I have played the Dutch on occasion just to mix things up. One of my friends, Joe Sanderlin, owns a Roman Dzindzichashvili video where Roman says that a quick Bg5 followed by Bxf6 defangs the Dutch, as black's Nf6 is central to black's attacking plans. Joe follows it religiously.
As a ...[text shortened]... have no clue how to play a KG. Easy pickin's.
There's more where that came from!
I'd like to play KG against from, but I simply don't know it well enough. I do know From accepted ok, but it's such a hassle in blitz that I just rather keep it solid and fast. also because the From guys all want sharp position, I prefer to not give it to them. seems like good enough reason. 🙂
14 Oct 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAfter ..a6 surely white just plays Be2. How does stockfish suggest you win the bishop? I can't see it..
no its not, not according to stockfish its not, its the second choice engine move, c4 is
the first, but a6 is not a howler, its just not the optimal move. It doesn't matter
anyway, it was only a blitz game used to illustrate a point. Anyhow, after c4 the bishop
is trapped, but its not as pretty as imprisoning it.
14 Oct 11
Originally posted by Marinkatombit doesn't win the bishop, nor can it with a move anything other than c4, but that is
After ..a6 surely white just plays Be2. How does stockfish suggest you win the bishop? I can't see it..
irrelevant, for the game was posted, not to demonstrate how to win a bishop, but how
strategical play can be utilised to overcome artificial attack.
14 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by greenpawn34It seems a little unfair to me to say that no "attacker" would play 4.a3. Sure, the move doesn't necessarily seem like a standard move from an attacking player but the thing about attackers is that they tend to play unexpected moves. What if white plays 4.a3 with the idea of b4, Bb2, c4-c5, Nc3 and queenside pressure? That seems at least moderately aggressive, right?
Hi Robbie.
In the blitz game you posted I think you have White classed wrongly as an 'attacker'.
Here.
[fen]rn1qkbnr/pbpp1ppp/1p2p3/3P4/4P3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 4[/fen]
Here a true attacking would never play 4.a3 as in the posted game.
(they would also refrain from playing move like 3.d4-d5 unless there was a Knight on c6.)
An atta ...[text shortened]... attacking nutter is that they will lose 9 out of 10 but the
one win in 10 is always glorious.
I should add that 4.a3 is a bad move, but it's a bold claim to dismiss white as a non-attacking player because of it.
- Joined
- 08 Apr 09
- Moves
- 19527
14 Oct 11
Originally posted by wormwoodI believe that many players would seriously benefit of doing a kind of role-playing game with the characters Robbie showed. Just try to play over-aggressive or over-defensive in a couple of games. You may not win, but will learn others styles of play, which will help in reconsidering the value of specific moves in games that do matter.
the attacker makes lots of errors. you play solid, slow him down with counterattack, and wait. when he can't make progress he'll sac a piece. then you mop up.
against the stonewaller, you reserve your pawn breaks. put everything behind that and break through. if you can switch to secondary break while he's rallying the troops to plug the first break, tha ...[text shortened]... like crazy, the you mop up or he flags.
now if I only could follow my ow advice...
I say this because lately, I had the impression that I often react the same way to certain positions. In another thread, I showed a game in which I decided to attack very aggressively, because of a positional mistake. This really opened my eyes. Eventually it was no succes, but I believe my opponent had a difficult time in defending. I learned that a counterattack can be very good as defensive measure.
Trying to think/play like another person, is much like taking another route to go to work. You get to see a whole new world.