Tactical Motif #1

How about a series of threads devoted to certain tactical motifs?

This position just arose for me from a caro:




I played 1.d5!

Anyone else with examples of pawn breaks that work because of tactics? Specifically if the square in front of the pawn is well covered, but the pawn can move forward anyway because of uncovered attacks or some other clever tactics.

Nice example.

I call them them 'hot spot' combo's.
The square near the King that is heating up with more and
more pieces attacking it. (b6).

Once you have a 'hot spot' on the boil finding other pieces to
add to the flames is usually easy and moves like d5 as in the in
the above diagram will suggest themselves to you right away.

One of the first things I do when scanning a test position.

"Any Hot Spots?"

One moot point - just a minor niggle of mine.

After showing the position and explaining the idea behind it.

Any chance of then showing the whole game.
It really is beneficial watching and studying the play that leads up
to these instructive positions.

I always remember a quote by Spielmann about being able to play
any combination that Alekhine played. But can never get into
the postions that Alekhine could.

I call them "aiming points" - i.e. the King is always an aiming point, undefended pieces, defending pieces... - but not sure if that is a regularly used term... "hot spots" sounds just as unqualified. 🙂

Originally posted by heinzkat
I call them "aiming points" - i.e. the King is always an aiming point, undefended pieces, defending pieces... - but not sure if that is a regularly used term... "hot spots" sounds just as unqualified. 🙂

Hi Heinz.

I must have got 'hot spots' from somewhere.

I thjink it was in a book on tactics by Bondaresky.

I've been using that term for about 30 years.

But what the hey. What ever term you use.
If it works for you then stick with it.

I bet all players have there own terminology
for everything to do with chess.

I like Keith Ruxton's term when we agreed that Rampant Chess
would not contain long (never to be played over) variations.

Remember, "If it's long - it's wrong."

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Any chance of then showing the whole game.
It really is beneficial watching and studying the play that leads up
to these instructive positions.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. Once beginners have learnt a few basic mating patterns and attacking ideas, they need to learn how to get to the sort of positions where this sort of tactic is likely to be happen.

It is much more difficult to teach this! If you show them a game where a bishop plays to c4 and you say "f7 is a weak square, the bishop attacks it and the pawn on f7 is pinned" they'll point out that it is protected by a king and a rook and who cares if it's pinned - what's going to happen on g6? I've been reduced to saying that if you put your pieces on "good" squares, then strong moves are likely to be possible sometime in the future. It's not quite right, but it's a good starting point.

I can't for the life of me recall the game. I spent a few hours playing blitz and this was somewhere in the middle.

I do know it was an advance caro where I played an unusual variation:

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nd2 e6 5.Nb3 Nd7 6.Nf3 Ne7 7.Be2 h6 8.0-0 Bg6 My opponent left book here and I can't remember what I played exactly. I think 9.Bd3 Nf5 10.c4 dxc4 11.Bxc4 and now I have no idea what the next 16 moves were. Sorry 🙁

Edit: I will add that I've now set up all my computers to auto-save my games so this won't happen anymore.

Originally posted by Fat Lady
I wholeheartedly agree with this. Once beginners have learnt a few basic mating patterns and attacking ideas, they need to learn how to get to the sort of positions where this sort of tactic is likely to be happen.

It is much more difficult to teach this! If you show them a game where a bishop plays to c4 and you say "f7 is a weak square, the bishop atta ...[text shortened]... possible sometime in the future. It's not quite right, but it's a good starting point.

And what are the specific squares that you desperately need at the phase of the opening? And for what purpose do you need them? Is there any chance these squares to be considered primary as "outposts" and "strongholds" that they will soon serve your Strategy?

And what are the squares that you need most during the middlegame? And for what purpose do you need them? Is there any chance these squares to be considered necessary in order to help you stream the accumulated force of your pieces to the soft spots of the enemy camp? Is this accumulation of brutal force a product of your Tactics, or is it a product of a specific way of thinking that takes a specific shape through variations guided with accuracy move by move according to a plan? And what the concept of sac has to do with the enemy's soft spots, the accumulated force of your army and with the healthy placement of the enemy pieces? And what all this has to do with the pawn structure overall, not to mention its relation with the main strategy of the opening and the quality of the game during the middlegame? And how the opening and the middlegame are related to the phase of the endgame?

I long ago forgot about the egg and the chicken, for in my opinion Chess is Inhale - Exhale, it is Strategy/ Evaluation - Tactics, Strategy/ Evaluation - Tactics all the way down to the bitter end; and I try at first to develop my chessmen by means of controlling during the opening the Good Squares of the chessboard whilst leaving the bad ones to the opponent. This way I keep the wind behind me. And during the middlegame I try constantly to turn my ship broadside the soonest possible; if I am fast and accurate enough, I will win.

Is this primitive thought hard to be explained to the chessplayer and to be conceived by him? It has to be a bit hard I reckon, otherwise the begginers would be more easily advanced; but then one thinks that the whole issue is maybe related to the trainers, who at that level they serve Classicism instead of helping the student to dig Dynamism😵

I played 1.d5!

I assume you are white since black doesn't have a d pawn. My question is "why?"

Originally posted by Eladar
[b]I played 1.d5!

I assume you are white since black doesn't have a d pawn. My question is "why?"[/b]

Yes, I was white. Otherwise I would write 1...d5

Greenpawn did a good job pointing out the reason. The target is b6.

I remember my opponent played 1...c5? to which there's a number of good replies, but I just played 2.d6 and won that way.

1...Nxd4 2.Rxd4! followed by 3.Bxb6!
1...Rxd4 2.Bxb6!

One way or another white is getting in. Still hoping for someone else to show a tactic similar to this.

I'm afraid I'm a bit slow. I was confused as to how d5 in itself was attacking b6. It attacks c6.

The real tactic was to expose the bishop behind d5. An actual explanation of what is happening here would help those of us who suck and need this kind of thread. Otherwise you're just singing to the choir and the rest of use are sitting here saying "huh?".

One other thing, it would be nice to give the motif a name, something descriptive. Motif #1 is totally meaningless.

I suppose your right, but I don't know any better name than tactical motif #1. Do we call it pawn breaks w/discovery?

I prefer to leave the analysis to interested readers, but I don't mind answering any questions once asked.

The discovery is just one variation on this motif. I would think the name would be something like Green Pawn named: hot spots. In this case it would be called a discovered hot spot.

I'd think that if the bishop was still on c1 and the d pawn was already advanced, Be3 would bring about the same kind of motif you are trying to deal with in this thread. Or does it require the discovered nature to fit the motif.

I'm looking specifically for pawn pushes that work because of tactics, as I described in my original post. The square in front of the pawn may be well guarded, but a push comes anyway. Anything of this nature I would like to see. So, discoveries aren't really necessary, maybe pins on pawns that guard the square in front of the pawn would allow the same thing.