I haven't read any specific books touching on this topic and I wonder if some of you guys can share some insight on this. A lot of books include games where players would set upon a hoard of pawns advancing towards the Kingside or Queenside; and some would give little tips on which direction to storm, and here and there bits on "this will give him more space", "this cramps the enemy position", "in opposite side pawn storms the first to reach the enemy gates wins", but I feel there's a lot more to it than just that.
My questions are:
1. Should the number of pawns we commit to the advance have any relationship to the number of defending pawns and pieces we expect them to meet?
2. Is it okay the phalanx to continue to advance when we have a "hole" in one line? Say, a White pawn configuration of h4, g5, f2 (a piece is blocking it), and e5 (defended by d4 which is held up)? Or does it depend on the position?
3. How much of a part do pieces have during these advances? Should they support from the rear or is it okay if they also take a part in disarranging and breaking through the defence?
This is all I'm asking at the moment but should anyone have anything else which they think is important worth posting, feel free to drop a line or two. Or three...
Thanks.
Originally posted by Papyn Chase1 is a big no. If you look at the yugo to the sicillian white storms with two pawns to blacks three. It all depends on the relationship between possible tactics and position.
I haven't read any specific books touching on this topic and I wonder if some of you guys can share some insight on this. A lot of books include games where players would set upon a hoard of pawns advancing towards the Kingside or Queenside; and some would give little tips on which direction to storm, and here and there bits on "this will give him more s ...[text shortened]... k is important worth posting, feel free to drop a line or two. Or three...
Thanks.
Originally posted by Papyn ChaseEverything depends on the position. Sometimes you only need to use one pawn, sometimes 3 or 4. Sometimes the piece should be behind the pawns, sometimes in front, sometimes some before and some after. The best way to think about "pawn storms" is that your goal is open as many lines as you possibly can. Don't think about all these crazy rules and such, because in chess it all depends on the position. In opposite sides castling situations, you have to do whatever's the fastest to get at the opponents king. For instance, in the Yugoslav Attack of the Sicilian Dragon variation, normally white uses his h-pawn and g-pawn, sometimes just the h-pawn, while black normally doesn't use any, he relies on his strong g7 bishop and play down the c-file.
I haven't read any specific books touching on this topic and I wonder if some of you guys can share some insight on this. A lot of books include games where players would set upon a hoard of pawns advancing towards the Kingside or Queenside; and some would give little tips on which direction to storm, and here and there bits on "this will give him more s ...[text shortened]... k is important worth posting, feel free to drop a line or two. Or three...
Thanks.
Originally posted by tomtom232I'm going to give you a ticket for P.U.I.S.
1 is a big no. If you look at the yugo to the sicillian white storms with two pawns to blacks three. It all depends on the relationship between possible tactics and position.
posting under the influence of stupidity
the other guy is right...
position is everything, but I like your pursuit of pawn theory...
pawns are everything in chess...
let's take a board...
take away white's pawns, and take away black's queen... who wins?
well, the point system tells us that the queen is worth more than all of the pawns, however, I believe that, with best play from both sides, the player with the pawns wins...
Was it Steinitz who said pawns are the soul of chess?
whoever he was, he was correct.
Originally posted by rubberjaw30I was only posting for #1
I'm going to give you a ticket for P.U.I.S.
posting under the influence of stupidity
the other guy is right...
position is everything, but I like your pursuit of pawn theory...
pawns are everything in chess...
let's take a board...
take away white's pawns, and take away black's queen... who wins?
well, the point system tells us that the queen is w ...[text shortened]... s...
Was it Steinitz who said pawns are the soul of chess?
whoever he was, he was correct.
here is a game of mine illustrating my point from my earlier post.
Game 2230489
Actually, the first reply is pretty accurate. It's not really the number of pawns that the other side has, it's much more specific. It is about position and tactics. Also, if you take away Black's queen and all of White's pawns, White has a forced win. Sometimes players gambit to open so many lines against Black's king. This would do it for free.
Just go with your gut and eventually you will learn when to use a pawn storm. I know that most pawnstorms are incalculable so you have to have some knowledge of the positional aspects of the game(some knowledge is a figure of speach okay rubberjaw) but you will also have to develop a pattern recognition and an intuition about these things.
EDIT: oh and if you have games where you or your opponent pawn stormed study them to find what you/your opponent could have done better.
- Joined
- 20 Jan 07
- Moves
- 24607
Originally posted by Papyn ChaseIf you can get hold of a copy of "The Art of Middlegame" by Kotov and Keres you'll find an excellent chapter in there on this very subject. Some great examples and very nicely written.
I haven't read any specific books touching on this topic and I wonder if some of you guys can share some insight on this. A lot of books include games where players would set upon a hoard of pawns advancing towards the Kingside or Queenside; and some would give little tips on which direction to storm, and here and there bits on "this will give him more s ...[text shortened]... k is important worth posting, feel free to drop a line or two. Or three...
Thanks.
It'll give you just about everything you need to know.
Originally posted by rubberjaw30No way - with all those open lines the side with the queen would slaughter the side with the pawns.
let's take a board...
take away white's pawns, and take away black's queen... who wins?
well, the point system tells us that the queen is worth more than all of the pawns, however, I believe that, with best play from both sides, the player with the pawns wins...
Well, Talisman, I think I saw the copy somewhere in a bookstore. I'll get a hand on one soon.
I was thinking if pawn storms can be categorized like Tactics. In Znosko-Borovsky's The Art of Combinations in Chess (or The Art of Chess Combinations?), he wrote specific chapters where an attack was aimed at a certain pawn or square in the enemy position and added many general principles like which pieces generally best suit the method of execution.
I know for basic reasons that we have to look at the position to accurately assess how it should be conducted, but general plans we have in mind for most of the time, like, for example, storming a fianchetoed position, how much emphasis is there on having the g-pawn (b-pawn if queenside) removed to increase the chances of a successful attack? Are there standard set-ups for the configuration of the pieces we should have when we anticipate the position to be opened?
Originally posted by exigentskyreally?
Actually, the first reply is pretty accurate. It's not really the number of pawns that the other side has, it's much more specific. It is about position and tactics. Also, if you take away Black's queen and all of White's pawns, White has a forced win. Sometimes players gambit to open so many lines against Black's king. This would do it for free.
the queen wins vurses the pawns?
Originally posted by tomtom232go with your gut???
Just go with your gut and eventually you will learn when to use a pawn storm. I know that most pawnstorms are incalculable so you have to have some knowledge of the positional aspects of the game(some knowledge is a figure of speach okay rubberjaw) but you will also have to develop a pattern recognition and an intuition about these things.
EDIT: oh an ...[text shortened]... or your opponent pawn stormed study them to find what you/your opponent could have done better.
you just lost a bunch of credibility
Originally posted by rubberjaw30and then I said that he would need to develop pattern recognition
go with your gut???
you just lost a bunch of credibility
Edit: When I posted this I thought that I was responding to somebody who actually has credibility if I looked to see who it was first I wouldn't have tried to explain myself.