Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 29 Jul '11 17:16
    I've been working under the assumption that the purpose for an opening is to develop one's pieces and achieve king safety.

    According to Savage, there is another purpose for an opening: to control the center. Is this actually a purpose for the opening or is this simply an overall goal for the game?

    I suppose the purpose for an opening also depends on whether one is white or black?
  2. 29 Jul '11 17:37
    develop your pieces properly and you will control the center...
  3. 29 Jul '11 17:41
    Originally posted by Eladar
    I've been working under the assumption that the purpose for an opening is to develop one's pieces and achieve king safety.
    What does it mean to develop one's pieces? Doesn't it mean to place them on such squres that they actively join the fight for the center?
  4. 29 Jul '11 17:52
    Originally posted by Eladar
    I've been working under the assumption that the purpose for an opening is to develop one's pieces and achieve king safety.

    According to Savage, there is another purpose for an opening: to control the center. Is this actually a purpose for the opening or is this simply an overall goal for the game?

    I suppose the purpose for an opening also depends on whether one is white or black?
    I would call the two things you suggest strategic, and I'd call center control a tactic that supports the strategic goals.

    I wonder how many openings are called the ______ Defense in which white is carrying out the defense? How many of them say that white is preparing for a "counterattack". So I'd say the general consensus is that the strategy that should be chosen by white is to win by attacking, and the strategy thusly forced upon black is to win by first defending successfully and then winning by counterattack. Also, Wikipedia says that most gambits are offered by white, not black, which supports this "attack" mode for white.
  5. 29 Jul '11 19:09
    Originally posted by Eladar
    I've been working under the assumption that the purpose for an opening is to develop one's pieces and achieve king safety.

    According to Savage, there is another purpose for an opening: to control the center. Is this actually a purpose for the opening or is this simply an overall goal for the game?

    I suppose the purpose for an opening also depends on whether one is white or black?
    There are three generally recognized opening principles: Center, development and king safety. There are countless books on the subject but How To Play Good Opening Moves by Mednis is one that covers each one of them.

    Those principles are what you you are trying to accomplish in the opening (not necessarily the purpose). When people evaluate a position out of the opening (like in MCO for example) the center,all things being equal, is the biggest factor in what that evaluation is. An advantage in the center can last the rest of the game if the other side doesn't have any way to counter. Development is a dynamic advantage that can dissipate if not taken advantage of in the short term. King safety is important but if both sides safely castle it loses its importance.

    Yes playing in the center should be a goal for the whole game. But, the battle lines for the center are almost invariably drawn in the first 2 or 3 moves. Take a look at ANY opening. Anything that is considered playable lays out how it will play in the center within the first few moves. Openings that don't aren't considered playable. Keep in mind that hyper-modern openings don't ignore the center. They just go about it in a different way.
  6. 29 Jul '11 19:13
    Originally posted by trev33
    develop your pieces properly and you will control the center...
    1. Nh3 develops a piece but doesnt control the center.

    What does "properly" mean? How are you supposed to know how what is proper if you don't know to control the center.
  7. 29 Jul '11 19:15
    Originally posted by WanderingKing
    What does it mean to develop one's pieces? Doesn't it mean to place them on such squres that they actively join the fight for the center?
    I don't think so. I think that your pieces may be developed to control a certain square. I think that your pieces may be developed so that you have as much mobility as possible. I think that your knights, bishops and queen should be moved off the back rank so that you can connect your rooks!

    I think those are basic ideas under which I've learned to function.
  8. 29 Jul '11 19:16
    Originally posted by savage4731
    1. Nh3 develops a piece but doesnt control the center.

    What does "properly" mean? How are you supposed to know how what is proper if you don't know to control the center.
    Nice example, but there are times that I've seen it suggested that you develop your knight to h3. It is a result of having played g3 and Bg2 and wanting to put your knight on f4 as quickly as possible.
  9. 29 Jul '11 19:19
    Originally posted by JS357
    I would call the two things you suggest strategic, and I'd call center control a tactic that supports the strategic goals.

    I wonder how many openings are called the ______ Defense in which white is carrying out the defense? How many of them say that white is preparing for a "counterattack". So I'd say the general consensus is that the strategy that should b ...[text shortened]... most gambits are offered by white, not black, which supports this "attack" mode for white.
    I think that 1.b3 is pretty much an opening that looks for a counter attack. Black can easily try to gain too much space without proper support. I've read a comment that Larsen was a very good middle game player and very good at counter attacks which was an explanation as to why we have the Nimzo-Larsen attack!
  10. 29 Jul '11 19:25
    Originally posted by savage4731
    There are three generally recognized opening principles: Center, development and king safety. There are countless books on the subject but How To Play Good Opening Moves by Mednis is one that covers each one of them.

    Those principles are what you you are trying to accomplish in the opening (not necessarily the purpose). When people evaluate a position ...[text shortened]... hat hyper-modern openings don't ignore the center. They just go about it in a different way.
    Yes, I know that hyper-modern openings look to hold back their pawns and apply force to the center by means of its pieces.

    The reason why I don't like to advance both center pawns two squares forward is that I don't like opening holes that my opponent can take advantage. When I do get caught with a knight on my side of the board that I can't do much about, I try to see what pawn moves led to this problem after the game.

    As for the question of the thread, I was thinking about what Roman's comment while watching his Qd6 Scandinavian dvd. He said that after playing a e6 that black can develop his f bishop, castle and end his opening problems. Roman's comment seemed to imply that as black your problem is simply getting developed safely and holding your ground.
  11. 29 Jul '11 19:25
    Originally posted by Eladar
    Nice example, but there are times that I've seen it suggested that you develop your knight to h3. It is a result of having played g3 and Bg2 and wanting to put your knight on f4 as quickly as possible.
    Yes, but then you are not developing to h3 you are developing to f4 via h3.
  12. 29 Jul '11 19:29
    Originally posted by tomtom232
    Yes, but then you are not developing to h3 you are developing to f4 via h3.
    Do you develop your knight to c3? Or do you intend to bring your knight to another square that might be more useful for attack. A knight on c3 isn't very useful for attack or defense if one plans to 0-0.

    I don't think you intend to leave your pieces on the squares that you develop them with the first move.
  13. 29 Jul '11 19:37
    OK, I've thought about it and I see the difference. One move is intended to stay there until you see what your opponent does, while the other is a move that a move with the intention to move to a specific square.
  14. 29 Jul '11 19:39 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Eladar
    Yes, I know that hyper-modern openings look to hold back their pawns and apply force to the center by means of its pieces.

    The reason why I don't like to advance both center pawns two squares forward is that I don't like opening holes that my opponent can take advantage. When I do get caught with a knight on my side of the board that I can't do much abou mply that as black your problem is simply getting developed safely and holding your ground.
    The "problem" in the opening is that white has the first move.

    Why is that a problem? Because, with the first move white can stake out a claim in the center that black can't match. Typically as the game progresses black can equalize in the center but white wants to inflict some persisting problem as a result.

    An example would be in the French defense or queen's gambit declined. In both cases black can end up with a bishop locked in his own pawn structure that came as a result of white's better center and black's attempts to equalize in the center.

    What the "problem" is can change as the game goes on but it starts as a result of white's center.
  15. 29 Jul '11 19:53
    Black's problem was how to develop his pieces and get castled. In the Scandinavian white doesn't have great central control, so I doubt his comment was about black's problem with central control.

    It seems to me that Roman's comment was in regard to developing the bishops and finding an open file for one's rook.