Recently, I played a game where I was losing and managed to sort of catch up. I knew that if I captured my oponents pawn that the game would be a draw because the king cannot and bishop cannot mate. After realizing that I could not capture the queen, I foolishly resigned. I just read a chess book and now I see that I could easily have drawn because there was no one to promote his pawn on a light square w/ a dark bishop. If I didn't read this book, I would never have known. So my suggestion is pleassssssse study.Game 866727
Originally posted by hahahaaaaSorry, I wrote this column in a rush. After realizing I could not capture the pawn, I foolishly resigned. I think everyone know what I meant, but just in case. I corrected one of my typos. Thanks. I love this site a lot and I think I will soon suscribe. 🙂
Recently, I played a game where I was losing and managed to sort of catch up. I knew that if I captured my oponents pawn that the game would be a draw because the king cannot and bishop cannot mate. After realizing that I could not capture the queen, I foolishly resigned. I just read a chess book and now I see that I could easily have drawn because ther ...[text shortened]... d this book, I would never have known. So my suggestion is pleassssssse study.Game 866727
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThank you, I will have to check out The Middle Game in Chess. Sounds good. I've been reading How to Reassess your chess by Jeremy Silman, but I would like to go even deeper afterward.
I find that I fall back on ideas I learned from Nimzowitch's My System and to a lesser extent Znosko-Borovsky's The Middle Game in Chess a lot. MCO also taught me a lot.