I'm going through Josh Waitzkin's Chess academy in Chessmaster grandmaster edition. In the art of learning section in Waitzkin vs Michael Granne, the narrator (Josh) seems to confuse the skewer with a pin a couple of times, for instance on page 22 of that game. Now I find it hard to believe that an IM would confuse the two twice in the same game, in both instances when the queen is pinned (I believe this is the proper term) to the king. If anyone has the software, could someone go through that part and let me know if I've always known the terminology incorrectly, or is it Waitzkin that is incorrect?
Post examples of the confusing positions.
On the left is a skewer on the right is a pin.
Reminds me of something Fat Lady once sent me that was sent to him.
"You will like the end I sacrifice a Rook to skewer the Queen and mate in
two moves."
He actually pins the Queen and misses a mate in one.
The tutorial uses the above position as an example. Waitzkin is playing black, and says "If he plays Qg4 (already played in the fen), do you see what I play? Look for a powerful skewer."
I saw Re4 immediately for black, however kept looking as I thought this was a pin and not a skewer. Turns out Re4 was the correct move after all.
Originally posted by amolv06Oh, you want the mistake-free version! That'll be an extra 20 bucks. 😉
[fen]6k1/p1pN1rpp/2p5/3p4/6QK/4r3/PPP3PP/8 b - - 0 1[/fen]
The tutorial uses the above position as an example. Waitzkin is playing black, and says "If he plays Qg4 (already played in the fen), do you see what I play? Look for a powerful skewer."
I saw Re4 immediately for black, however kept looking as I thought this was a pin and not a skewer. Turns out Re4 was the correct move after all.
Based on your information, Waitzkin is clearly wrong. It's inconceivable that he doesn't know the distinction. Why it happened, who knows? Maybe he drank too much wine during that part of the recording session 😉 , or maybe he recorded everything in a marathon 20-hour session and was punchy near the end, or maybe after he recorded that part, the king and queen's position got reversed somehow by someone else.
That's just one of those things that you have to smile at and keep going.
Originally posted by amolv06That's a pin alright.
[fen]6k1/p1pN1rpp/2p5/3p4/6QK/4r3/PPP3PP/8 b - - 0 1[/fen]
The tutorial uses the above position as an example. Waitzkin is playing black, and says "If he plays Qg4 (already played in the fen), do you see what I play? Look for a powerful skewer."
I saw Re4 immediately for black, however kept looking as I thought this was a pin and not a skewer. Turns out Re4 was the correct move after all.
Confusing terminology.
Every skewer is a pin and every pin is a skewer.The terms are ambiguous.
How to distinguish?
when the front piece is of lesser value it's a pin
when the front piece is of bigger value it's a skewer.
Btw,is it really waitzkin or did they only buy the right to use his name?
I prefer röntgen. 🙂
toet.
I think I've heard definitions that can explain this:
It's a pin if the first piece cannot or should not move because if it did something behind would die.
It's a skewer if both the first piece and the one behind it are more valuable than the skewering piece, or can be picked up en prise.
Thus, the Rook pinning the Queen to the King is also Skewering Queen and King.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI've never seen that definition of a skewer. Any idea where you came across that definition?
I think I've heard definitions that can explain this:
It's a pin if the first piece cannot or should not move because if it did something behind would die.
It's a skewer if both the first piece and the one behind it are more valuable than the skewering piece, or can be picked up en prise.
Thus, the Rook pinning the Queen to the King is also Skewering Queen and King.
Not only is that situation a pin, but it's an absolute pin. (imho)
From Winning Chess Tactics by Seirawan and Learn Chess Tactics by Nunn:
Seirawan:
"A skewer has been likened to a pin in reverse. With a pin, the attacker's objective is to win the pinned piece or the more valuable piece behind it. With a skewer, the attacker's objective is to threaten a valuable piece so that it is forced to move, allowing the capture of a piece behind it."
Nunn:
"Thus far it (a skewer) is the same as a pin, but now comes the crucial difference. In a pin the nearer enemy piece is less valuable than the more distant enemy piece, while in a skewer it is the other way around."
If I may attempt my own spin, in a practical sense the "badness" of each is that the damage occurs in a skewer when the skewered piece moves, whereas the damage occurs in a pin because the pinned piece can't move at all, or can't without making things worse.
The skewered piece is compelled to move, and the pinned piece is compelled to stay.
Paul
Originally posted by Mad RookPossibly Waitzkin's book - the introductory one. Not sure.
I've never seen that definition of a skewer. Any idea where you came across that definition?
Not only is that situation a pin, but it's an absolute pin. (imho)
http://www.chesshouse.com/Josh_Waitzkins_Attacking_Chess_p/4720.htm