I was reading Buckley's book "Practical Chess Analysis" and in the very first chapter he advices the novice to learn the color of each square on the board by taking a quarter of the board and then progressing to the other quarters using the dark squares. That is a1 b2 c3 and d4 are all dark and then proceed to the adjacent dark squares within that quarter: a3 b4 c1 and d2... etc.
I was wondering if there could be an easier method to learn the color of each square without having to memorize them by a simple mathematical rule... Well, simple enough: Let the board be a cartesian plane with numbered axes x and y [a,b,c,d,e,f,g,and h for the x axis, and 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 and 8 for the y axis]. If the addition of the coordinates yield an even number then tye square is dark and if it yields an odd number the square is light...
Examples:
a1 = 1+1 = 2 DARK, g7 = 7+7 = 14 DARK
So that one has been taken care of... Now the problem of naming the diagonals that cross a given square has proven to be more complicated because I have had to walk the diagonal mentally.
Problem: Given the square c5 what long diagonals cross this square...
a3-f8 and a5-e1
However, I don't want to have to mentally walk through the diagonals but quickly do a calculation that yields the answer...
So much for figuring out the color of the squares of the board without having to memorize them! I will work on the diagonals problem and see if I can come up with an answer... However, if someone has it figured out by now please let me know the technique...
Originally posted by AlopintoDoes he tell you WHY you need to learn the colors of each square?
I was reading Buckley's book "Practical Chess Analysis" and in the very first chapter he advices the novice to learn the color of each square on the board by taking a quarter of the board and then progressing to the other quarters using the dark squares.
All I ever leaned was that the queen starts on its own color. Other than that, I can't see any value in learning the colors of each square, unless maybe you are going to play blindfolded and need to visualise the color complex of each bishop.
Just curious, because I've never come across this advice before.
I believe the diagnonal problem can be solved like this:
Add the two squares together. If it gives an even number, it's black.
If odd, it's white.
1+1=2 (black). 3+4=7 (white)
It's an interesting math problem, but not much more than that, and I don't think I'm going to be doing this kind of math when I play chess.
The only reason you would ever need this would be to help with visualization. However I manage without intimate knowledge of square colour. It's hard to explain but with a bit of practice you can see the position of the pieces after 10 moves of an opening. Once you can read the notation for 10 moves and then go to a chessboard and set that position up you're sorted.
Originally posted by GatecrasherYes he does. The idea is to be able to visualize correctly the position mentally in such a way that you can quickly know if, for example, the square f2 can be attacked by a bishop at b7 and to know your terrain better. It seems to help with accuracy in spotting the field of action of the pieces and tactical possibilities better...
Does he tell you WHY you need to learn the colors of each square?
All I ever leaned was that the queen starts on its own color. Other than that, I can't see any value in learning the colors of each square, unless maybe you are going to play blindfolded and need to visualise the color complex of each bishop.
Just curious, because I've never come across this advice before.
The idea of using dark and light squares helps you visuallize the board better and the positions that you project mentally (says Buckley) I will give his advice a try to see if I can gain speed in visualizing variations and positions with accuracy.
For the time being I made a set of 64 cards for each square and the following exercises will be pursued:
1. Name the color of each square
2. Name the long diagonals that intersect a given square and its color after randonly shuffling the deck recording time and responses.
3. Mentally place a knight on a random square from the deck and name all the squares that the knight control from such square.
However, a friend of mine told me that I missed the point when pursuing this exercise after testing me:
"What color is c4?"
Then I proceeded with my algorithm to add 3+4 = 7 LIGHT but took some time to do it... While after 10 seconds he said that I was taking too long... He then asked me to test him with three different squares and responded immediately without missing an answer.
After I told him how I did it he said that I was completely missing the point and that the idea was to have the board mentally engraved so that I could play blindfold... I told him that I haven't done that before but if that it would help me with my understanding of chess and to win more games that I was all for it.
Buckley is not a GM but a senior master from the USA. However, his book is written for fishes like me and in a language that any patzer would understand. The very first chapter deals with the question "how many moves can you see ahead?" or Training the mind's eye to see the board clearly and the positions.
Originally posted by XanthosNZThat's another exercise that has lots of value. I am going to use it as well after I can manage to learn how to orientate myself with an empty board.
The only reason you would ever need this would be to help with visualization. However I manage without intimate knowledge of square colour. It's hard to explain but with a bit of practice you can see the position of the pieces after 10 moves of an opening. Once you can read the notation for 10 moves and then go to a chessboard and set that position up you're sorted.
Originally posted by AlopintoPersonally I found those type of exercises useless. I'm a learn by doing type of person. Start with the basics and work from there.
That's another exercise that has lots of value. I am going to use it as well after I can manage to learn how to orientate myself with an empty board.
Everyone should know what the board looks like after 1. e4 e5 or 1. d4 d5. Find your favourite opening and start visualizing the position after each move. Then when you reach a particular position try to find the threats and defenses in each players position.
Practice. Start with openings you know and then work on lesser known ones until you can do with any set of moves.
Originally posted by dpressnellAhhh.. I see I wasn't playing attention when I wrote that.
I believe the diagnonal problem can be solved like this:
Add the two squares together. If it gives an even number, it's black.
If odd, it's white.
1+1=2 (black). 3+4=7 (white)
It's an interesting math problem, but not much more than that, and I don't think I'm going to be doing this kind of math when I play chess.
Originally posted by AlopintoThanks for the explanation. Very interesting. Not totally convinced that it is useful at our level of play, but anything that helps with visualization can't be a total waste of time.
Yes he does. The idea is to be able to visualize correctly the position mentally in such a way that you can quickly know if, for example, the square f2 can be attacked by a bishop at b7 and to know your terrain better. It seems to help w ...[text shortened]... ng the mind's eye to see the board clearly and the positions.
I guess if you have an ambition to play 45 simultaneous games of chess, blindfolded, as Najdorf did in the 1940's, then this is the kind of exercise would set you on the right course!
But your friend is right, if it is something you want to do, learn the colors of each square, rather than calculating them. Then the ability becomes instinctive and subconscience, rather than becoming a distraction.