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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 02 Jul '07 01:55
    Which would you prefer an open midgame? Closed?

    Well, I guess it couldn't really be closed.

    Well, which would you prefer? Feel free to qualify.
  2. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    02 Jul '07 02:11
    i played a pratice game with 3 knights against one queen..i made a dumb mistake, and it all unravelled with the loss of one of them...
  3. Standard member wittywonka
    Chocolate Expert
    02 Jul '07 02:14
    Originally posted by Kunsoo
    Which would you prefer an open midgame? Closed?

    Well, I guess it couldn't really be closed.

    Well, which would you prefer? Feel free to qualify.
    Are you offering a "set piece game"?

    Also, are you offering it as the initial set-up but having only the queen and other pieces, or are you going to create a pawn structure as if in a middle game and then put the queen/pieces on the board?

    Sounds interesting, though.
  4. Standard member clandarkfire
    Grammar Nazi
    02 Jul '07 02:22
    I think three pieces would usually be better, or at least as good.
  5. Standard member wittywonka
    Chocolate Expert
    02 Jul '07 02:33
    Originally posted by clandarkfire
    I think three pieces would usually be better, or at least as good.
    It also depends on exactly what kind of pieces you are limited to.

    For example, in theory, three rooks would overpower a queen.

    But, three knights, two bishops/one knight, etc. would, in theory be equal to a queen.
  6. 02 Jul '07 02:35
    i guess it depends on the circumstances that leads to three pieces for a queen in a real game
  7. 02 Jul '07 03:10
    yeah...it would depend A LOT on structure. All else equal, I think I would take any three pieces over a queen...but it sure would be nice if at least one of them is a rook.
  8. Standard member hammster21
    Endgamer
    02 Jul '07 03:19
    3 pieces would dominate a queen, as long as they worked together. If they are protecting one another then there's no way the queen can take them. And if you get into an endgame the pieces can escort a pawn up the board with ease.
  9. 02 Jul '07 03:24
    three pieces dominates a queen played correctly. just figure you have a rook bishop and a knight. vs a queen. thats like three highschool basketball players vs michael jordan. it might look even but they could do it with some coordination.
  10. Standard member Dragon Fire
    Lord of all beasts
    02 Jul '07 07:37
    I had a queen for only 2 minor pieces in Game 2946193 and found it very hard to break through eventually resorting to 2 exchange sacrifices. Against 3 minor pieces I suspect I would have lost.

    3 pieces should, in my opinion, in the hands of a good player, overwhelm the queen especially if the board is closed and the queen manoverability restricted
  11. Standard member English Tal
    Phoneless
    02 Jul '07 08:15
    I'm playing a game at the moment and I have a rook and three extra pawns against three minor pieces. Does that count?
  12. Standard member Dragon Fire
    Lord of all beasts
    02 Jul '07 08:50 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by English Tal
    I'm playing a game at the moment and I have a rook and three extra pawns against three minor pieces. Does that count?
    Thats a hard one.

    I think I'd take the 3 pieces unless those pawn were joined, passed and advanced when the danger of them queening may compensate.
  13. Standard member English Tal
    Phoneless
    02 Jul '07 09:04 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Dragon Fire
    Thats a hard one.

    I think I'd take the 3 pieces unless those pawn were joined, passed and advanced when the danger of them queening may compensate.
    It's a fascinating game. I'm playing someone with a higher rating, and I'd had his castled rook trapped on his backline by my unexpected pawn move on move 14!
    (I knew I shouldn't have done it, but it was so tempting that I did it and pm'd him that although it wasn't the strongest move I simply couldn't resist it against such a strong player!)
    I thought I'd have paid the price for it by now, but as it happens its settled down to K+R+5P vs K+N+N+B+2P after a rearguard action.
  14. Standard member Dragon Fire
    Lord of all beasts
    02 Jul '07 09:15
    Originally posted by English Tal
    It's a fascinating game. I'm playing someone with a higher rating, and I'd had his castled rook trapped on his backline by my unexpected pawn move on move 14!
    (I knew I shouldn't have done it, but it was so tempting that I did it and pm'd him that although it wasn't the strongest move I simply couldn't resist it against such a strong player!)
    I thought ...[text shortened]... ow, but as it happens its settled down to K+R+5P vs K+N+N+B+2P after a rearguard action.
    Sounds interesting as after all you could swop off the R & 5P for the B & 2Ps and draw.

    Better make sure if you have to do that that you give him all 5 pawns otherwise he will mate you with K & 2N vs K & P.
  15. Standard member English Tal
    Phoneless
    02 Jul '07 09:19 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Dragon Fire
    Sounds interesting as after all you could swop off the R & 5P for the B & 2Ps and draw.

    Better make sure if you have to do that that you give him all 5 pawns otherwise he will mate you with K & 2N vs K & P.
    Very good! I would simply hate to be in that contrived position!

    I almost resigned a while back out of respect, but hey, it's a duel tourney and I've won the other game... and after a few more moves I'll decide on the course to take; lots of options.