Often I see people, grandmasters down to novices, fianchetto their bishop at g2 and have a pawn at e4 or fianchetto at b2 and have a pawn at d4. Their are times when this is seemingly done pre-planned, i.e. not forced. This sort of position seems to me as though it defies a central idea of fianchettoing your bishop which is controlling the long diagonal. What is the purpose of a fianchetto with pawns in the center?
Originally posted by amolv06The fianchetto protects the Pawn and the arrangement allows for a discovered attack on the long diagonal.
Often I see people, grandmasters down to novices, fianchetto their bishop at g2 and have a pawn at e4 or fianchetto at b2 and have a pawn at d4. Their are times when this is seemingly done pre-planned, i.e. not forced. This sort of position seems to me as though it defies a central idea of fianchettoing your bishop which is controlling the long diagonal. What is the purpose of a fianchetto with pawns in the center?
Originally posted by amolv06Sometimes when something doesn't look so good statically - i.e. from the immediate fixed point of view - then you may want to consider it dynamically - i.e. what if the pawns were to move, etc.
What is the purpose of a fianchetto with pawns in the center?
For bishop on g2, pawn on e4, even if White's pawn is fixed it may still be serving a role by deterring Black from playing e.g. f5. Similarly, if White could get an outpost to d5/f5, exchanging this may lead to improving the scope of the fianchetto bishop, therefore helping support the outpost.
Sometimes a latent feature of the position limits the opponent's options if they need to avoid making the feature more active, hence it still impacts the game. Compare moves where a rook is not played to an open file but instead is played to a file where either side may try to open it in the near future. Again, dynamic possibilities rather than immediate static considerations.
This (Varenka's post) is generally correct - dynamic/long-term trumps static/short-term - but not entirely. Experience tells us that g2 with e4, and g7/e5, work well enough: the King's Indian Attack/Defence (KIA/KID) are good examples. But b2/d4 is less frequently observed than b7/d5, possibly because the QID is quite popular for Black.
These various set-ups need study though; they do break the 'rule' that the fianchettoed bishop should not usually be impeded by one's own pawn - for obvious reasons
Originally posted by Varenkarec'd.
Sometimes when something doesn't look so good statically - i.e. from the immediate fixed point of view - then you may want to consider it dynamically - i.e. what if the pawns were to move, etc.
For bishop on g2, pawn on e4, even if White's pawn is fixed it may still be serving a role by deterring Black from playing e.g. f5. Similarly, if White could get ...[text shortened]... n the near future. Again, dynamic possibilities rather than immediate static considerations.
Information which is useful to all players, and insightful! A very good way
of describing the ideas.
Good post.
-GIN
Originally posted by amolv06often it's only a problem if there are no breaks and the pawn gets stuck there. to break through, you generally need to somehow fix a pawn first, or it'll just advance and lock the door for good. one rock isn't enough to crack a nut if you have only soft things to put it against. you need a rock AND a hard place to crack anything hard like a defensive pawn structure.
Often I see people, grandmasters down to novices, fianchetto their bishop at g2 and have a pawn at e4 or fianchetto at b2 and have a pawn at d4. Their are times when this is seemingly done pre-planned, i.e. not forced. This sort of position seems to me as though it defies a central idea of fianchettoing your bishop which is controlling the long diagonal. What is the purpose of a fianchetto with pawns in the center?