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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 26 Jul '09 20:46
    sharp - what does this mean? is it tactical, or are there many exchanges etc etc?
  2. 26 Jul '09 20:55
    Yeah a "sharp" line means that it's very tactical and one must be careful because of the possibilities for disaster if you don't play accurately.
  3. 26 Jul '09 20:57
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    Yeah a "sharp" line means that it's very tactical and one must be careful because of the possibilities for disaster if you don't play accurately.
    Yes that is a pretty good description, "sharp" means that if you miss one little detail of the position you might be ripped apart
  4. 26 Jul '09 22:52
    thanks guys, what about, inaccuracy? we often read a book and we read, this may not be the most accurate move order, or this move was not as accurate as some other move? how can one determine the difference in accuracy? what is accuracy? how does one evaluate accuracy? is it the difference between two plausible moves? is it the opposite of playing a loose move? you know sometimes we read, that this move was a little loose? what does that mean, a little loose? is it not an outright blunder but not the ultimate move or something? any help or even games would be most appreciated for these terms have bugged me for ages! regards Robbie.
  5. 26 Jul '09 23:09
    Keep in mind that in a 'sharp' position, often one little mistake from your opponent will often allow you to tear them apart too. It isn't a bad thing.

    As to 'inaccuracy', that is a move that is 'not the right move', generally for tactical reasons. Sometimes the opponent won't pick up on these either though. I tend to see a lot of "More accurate was __somemove__"which generally means "that move is okay, but this one is slightly better/safer". Inaccuracy definitely has a negative connotation compared to "more accurate"
  6. 26 Jul '09 23:18 / 2 edits
    http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=113552&page=1

    my understanding of innaccuracies in speaking of move order means perhaps your capture order allows the defender some resource that a more forcing move order would have eliminated. In this way it is innacurate. For example. Imagine a skeloton setup with a white knight on f3, bishop on c4, and queen on d1. Black has his uncastled king surrounded by his queen on d8 and dark bishop on f8. If black tries to pin whites knight. White could play Ne5 threatening both the hanging bishop and mate on f7 if black takes the white queen. However, this can be defended by be6. If white plays bxf7+ first, this is impossible and white wins the f-pawn instead of doubling it. In this way the seond line is innacurate in that it allows for a stronger defense.
  7. 26 Jul '09 23:22
    Originally posted by Frogspondence
    Keep in mind that in a 'sharp' position, often one little mistake from your opponent will often allow you to tear them apart too. It isn't a bad thing.

    As to 'inaccuracy', that is a move that is 'not the right move', generally for tactical reasons. Sometimes the opponent won't pick up on these either though. I tend to see a lot of "More ac ...[text shortened]... er". Inaccuracy definitely has a negative connotation compared to "more accurate"
    yes you are correct, that's what i was trying to say, more accurate is - some move - but better was such and such a move. how is it evaluated though, better in what sense? safer? tighter as opposed to a loose move, tactically sound? obviously it depends on the position, it being relative, but how is it evaluated - kind regards Robbie.
  8. 26 Jul '09 23:22
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    thanks guys, what about, inaccuracy? we often read a book and we read, this may not be the most accurate move order, or this move was not as accurate as some other move? how can one determine the difference in accuracy? what is accuracy? how does one evaluate accuracy? is it the difference between two plausible moves? is it the opposite of play ...[text shortened]... r even games would be most appreciated for these terms have bugged me for ages! regards Robbie.
    'A loose move'.I've never come across that term.Where did you read that?

    Could it be a move that loosens the position?
  9. Standard member atticus2
    Frustrate the Bad
    26 Jul '09 23:24
    Inaccuracy refers to a move which, while never a blunder, is sufficiently inferior to a credible alternative that one's position can be compromised perhaps not immediately, but longer-term.

    For example, imagine your bishop is on c4 and Black hits it with b5. You can retreat to b3 or d3 or even e2. None of these moves is fatal; all are playable. But an expert might judge that Bd3 is the most accurate, alternatives being inaccurate or less consistent with the demands of the position.

    Positional accuracy is a hard-to-acquire skill, harder than tactical accuracy. For example, I'm still never sure where to put my rooks in many positions - e1 & d1; e1 & c1; d1 & c1? Judging it right first time saves time, as i've learned to my cost
  10. 26 Jul '09 23:44 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Winston Smith
    'A loose move'.I've never come across that term.Where did you read that?

    Could it be a move that loosens the position?
    no my friend i read it in my John Emms repertoire book, 'attacking with 1.e4', i think, or was it somewhere else, let me see if i can find the reference and i will post the thoughts to clarify the term, i knew it was in a kings Indian attack section that i read it, so far the comments are really brilliant and most helpful- regards Robbie.
  11. Standard member Blackamp
    Death
    27 Jul '09 03:11 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by atticus2
    For example, I'm still never sure where to put my rooks in many positions - e1 & d1; e1 & c1; d1 & c1? Judging it right first time saves time, as i've learned to my cost
    i read a rule of thumb somewhere: put the rooks on the files that you think are most likely to open up, or that you want to prevent your opponent from opening up.

    see also 'mysterious rook moves'.
  12. 27 Jul '09 07:23
    They swallow thesauruses these chess writers. Nigel Short once used antiphlogistically a word based on a medical term (antiphlogistic) meaning something done to prevent something bad happening.

    Prophylactic is another more common word with a similar meaning.
  13. 27 Jul '09 08:03
    I don't know if I myself consider sharp as tatical, it's just a type of position that really doesn't allow mistakes, one mistake from either side and the game is over.

    Endgames that are won or lost because of 1 tempo are also sharp IMHO.
  14. 27 Jul '09 08:11
    Jan Timman once was questioned how to decide which rook to put on an open file.He came up with a brilliant answer:

    "Think long and hard until you're absolutely certain which rook it has to be.Then take the other one!"
  15. 27 Jul '09 09:32
    Originally posted by Winston Smith
    Jan Timman once was questioned how to decide which rook to put on an open file.He came up with a brilliant answer:

    "Think long and hard until you're absolutely certain which rook it has to be.Then take the other one!"
    Chess quotes are often misattributed and I'm pretty sure it was the Argentinian GM Oscar Panno who said this, not Timman.