RHP: Road to Better Chess Threat

I must admit that my seven year old son will often move a bishop to, for example, c4 or f4 (as White) and then, if his opponent moves a knight to c6 or f6, move the bishop again to get the pin.

In my limited experience of teaching kids to play chess it seems that they find it quite easy to understand the idea of a pin, though it takes a bit more effort for them to learn how to use a pin, for example attack the pinned piece again or take the pawn which the pinned piece is no longer defending.

I have a good one. Try not to think about all these rules too much. Rules are helpful, but knowing when to break them is probably just as important. Know the rules, but don't blindly follow them. Think about the position critically, and do the factors in the position warrant breaking the rules?

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
1. You can't always have the initiative. Attempting to take the initiative when you do not have the 'right to attack' (as Steinitz put it) leads to disaster.

2. I generally agree with this one; however, a few players are at their best when they are emotionally involved in the game. Former world champ Em. Lasker said of rival S. Tarrasch, "[h ...[text shortened]... Black isn't in a position to play 0-0, which makes white's 4th move more effective.)

Of course, these are general principles/rules. It is absolutely pointless to criticize them in specific situations.

Originally posted by exigentsky
Of course, these are general principles/rules. It is absolutely pointless to criticize them in specific situations.

It is when you claim then to be absolute.

Originally posted by exigentsky
Of course, these are general principles/rules. It is absolutely pointless to criticize them in specific situations.

I believe that 1) and 3) are not useful even as general principles.

Only 2) has some merit to it.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
It is when you claim then to be absolute.

Ok?

BTW: Xanthos, why are you Miss RHP?