Originally posted by tomtom232 I believe it was more not thinking of both simultaneously.
I think d4 threatens the fork and rids you of a weak pawn.
If ...Bxf3 Bxf3 ...e5 d5 and now you have the same passed pawn but much easier to support it. in your variation your pawn was passed but you have no way to defend defend it from attack and this gives it no threat to advance. In this ...[text shortened]... r opponent didn't seem to realize this and allowed the pawn to become a great strength for you.
its quite interesting tomo, sometimes we play moves which are good but for the wrong reason. In retrospect, it appears to me that according to my understanding white must prepare d4-d5, positionally this seems to be logical, that d4 also threatens a fork which may in fact be strong tactically but is a by product of the overall strategic aims and this is the interesting part, for if you had played d4 because it threatens a powerful fork and is tactically threatening and I played d4 because it prepares d5 at some point, who is to say either one is wrong in his thinking? both in fact may be correct but from a different perspective.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie its quite interesting tomo, sometimes we play moves which are good but for the wrong reason. In retrospect, it appears to me that according to my understanding white must prepare d4-d5, positionally this seems to be logical, that d4 also threatens a fork which may in fact be strong tactically but is a by product of the overall strategic aims and thi ...[text shortened]... ther one is wrong in his thinking? both in fact may be correct but from a different perspective.
I don't see how d4-d5 threatens to fork anything. It is e4-e5 that threatens the fork of bishop and knight.
Originally posted by RJHinds I don't see how d4-d5 threatens to fork anything. It is e4-e5 that threatens the fork of bishop and knight.
I have not stated that d4-d5 threatens to fork anything, d4 threatens e5 which does threaten to fork knight and queen as tomo pointed out, my own opinion of the position is that according to my understanding d4-d5 is the plan of action that I would pursue in retrospect.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie I have not stated that d4-d5 threatens to fork anything, d4 threatens e5 which does threaten to fork knight and queen as tomo pointed out, my own opinion of the position is that according to my understanding d4-d5 is the plan of action that I would pursue in retrospect.
Moving d4 first is too slow. Any advantage you have will be gone by then.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie no its the best move in the position
Maybe I am looking at the wrong position for when I mentioned 13.e4 you were concerned about the reply 13.Bxf4 messing up your kingside. Why would 13.d4 eliminate that concern? It seems more damaging because you have no other choice.
Originally posted by RJHinds Maybe I am looking at the wrong position for when I mentioned 13.e4 you were concerned about the reply 13.Bxf4 messing up your kingside. Why would 13.d4 eliminate that concern? It seems more damaging because you have no other choice.
go to the position shown in the original post, the bishops have been exchanged already.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie [fen]rn3rk1/pp3ppp/2pqpn2/8/1P2P1b1/P1NP1NP1/5PBP/R2Q1RK1 w - - 1 15[/fen]
in the above position i played the move e5 forking the queen and the knight which was
apparently a mistake, it seemed to me to be such a natural choice, it forced ...Bxf3 exd6
...Bxd1 and Rfxd1, after which i perceived that my newly formed passed d pawn would
need blo 7.Kf2 Kd6 38.d4 Nc6 39.a6 Kc7 40.Bxc6 Kxc6 41.Ke3 Kb6 42.Ke4 Kxa6 43.d5 1-0[/pgn]
Well if you insist on the exchange of those bishops then how about the following to also exchange the knight for bishop and double a pawn?
Originally posted by RJHinds Well if you insist on the exchange of those bishops then how about the following to also exchange the knight for bishop and double a pawn?
Originally posted by Paul Leggett I know some people are going to summarily dismiss this, but the position you give is a prime example of "Post It Note" application.
When I apply Greenpawn34's "Check all checks, and look for loose pieces", I immediately see the loose knight on c3.
Since the loose knight is the loophole in your planned e5 fork, it's pretty cogent.
Personally, I ...[text shortened]... tical" mistake, where I make things needlessly complicated and miss the simple stuff.
My take is, the combination depends on playing e5 with a pawn fork. If the pawn is protected the combo will work, because if not QxP breaks it up, in theory.😉
Remove said defender and the combo is busted. The knight is protected, yes, but it is removable, hence the problem with the combination.
(Not trying to speak for Paul. They say a wise man speaks because he has something to say, a fool because he has to say something. I'll STHU now) 😞
Essentially, the loose knight (I am referring to the knight on c3) means that white can't recapture with 16. Qxf3, because black can take the e5 pawn with an attack on the loose knight.
It is probably more correct to say that 14. Bg4 is the true loophole, since there is a tactical reason why the push to e5 is not an effective fork.
I believe he means that the loose knight on c3 provides the loophole for white, since his planned fork attack would lose a pawn if it was not for that knight coming to the rescue to protect the pawn. Thus the term loophole.
Originally posted by Paul Leggett Essentially, the loose knight (I am referring to the knight on c3) means that white can't recapture with 16. Qxf3, because black can take the e5 pawn with an attack on the loose knight.
It is probably more correct to say that 14. Bg4 is the true loophole, since there is a tactical reason why the push to e5 is not an effective fork.
Oh I see, you were thinking of a loophole for Black to get out of the fork.
thinking deficiencies
08 Jan '13 11:33
Back to Top