26 Apr 12
Originally posted by Pacifiqueah yes but this is not what i have stated, naturally there are exceptions, or rather
[b]I was interested in applying universal opening principles which appeared to me were applicable in any situation.
There is no principle in chess, applicable in any situation, without exceptions.[/b]
other principles which have greater bearing on the position depending upon the
dynamics and which modify or in some instances completely over rule other
principles. My favorite being the Fischer v Petrosian game where Fischer exchanged
an active knight for a so called bad bishop so that he could penetrate the seventh
with his rooks. In my humble example the controversy arose over the move Nc3,
demonstrating various principles, development of the pieces, activation of the least
active piece, influence over the center, this was challenged by the assertion that f3
was also a viable alternative which demonstrated the principle of restriction, which it
is and did, the f6 knight is now reduced to a passive piece. Thus this is not so much
an exception simply as the application of a different principle and an example of
where one principle may over rule that of another. Now we are left with exceptions,
but even this is not so easy to express in a concrete way, for example what is the
exception to the principle of development? non development? why and for what
reason? there must be a reason otherwise its an unprincipled choice. Indeed
providing exceptions may be so extensive and dependent upon specific dynamics
that it could be said to fall outwith the term general opening principles.
26 Apr 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieplease do!!!!
It's so funny that everyone is talking about another type of beginner, yes indeed, i was
going to do a how to play a middle game based upon principles but the controversy and
hostility, with a few welcome exceptions, has put me off the idea for ever.
I would sooooo love to read the discussion it would generate 😀
Originally posted by WilfriedvaNo way, I choose life! Nah only kidding Ill see what i can do but most of the stuff i
please do!!!!
I would sooooo love to read the discussion it would generate 😀
would post would be about weak squares, potentially weak squares and pawn
structures, GP covered it in his previous blog using examples from RHP games
illustrating the way strong players create weaknesses and plan around those
weaknesses. The only thing i could offer would be to make it simple to understand,
after all im a pretty lowly rated player.
30 Apr 12
How about these rules for beginners:
Increase your mobility
Increase your pressure of the center of the board.
Pawns can't move backwards so be careful not to create holes on your side of the board.
King safety
Try to decrease your opponent's mobility and control the the center of the board.
I think these would be generally good ideas which are useful throughout the game.
Rules like never move the same piece twice can be derived by the basic idea of increasing mobility.
Castling fits under king safety and not moving a king's pawn falls under the ideas of king safety and pawns can't move backwards.
01 May 12
Originally posted by Eladaractually mobility is probably they most important principle and difficulties usually arise
How about these rules for beginners:
Increase your mobility
Increase your pressure of the center of the board.
Pawns can't move backwards so be careful not to create holes on your side of the board.
King safety
Try to decrease your opponent's mobility and control the the center of the board.
I think these would be generally good ideas which are u ...[text shortened]... ot moving a king's pawn falls under the ideas of king safety and pawns can't move backwards.
because of lack of it. How to illustrate it though to beginners is rather a difficult
exercise me thinks, as i dont really fully understand it myself, plus one would need
extensive illustrated games of the principles depending upon the dynamics of the
position. Probably Silmans thinking technique with its emphasis on imbalances is about
as concise and easily understandable a system of thinking that one can get to illustrate
this. From the top of my head i remember it was based upon, development, control of
key files and squares, pawn structure, initiative, minor piece imbalances, material
imbalances and space.
03 May 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI think the basics of mobility (having your pieces covering as many squares as possible) is pretty easy to teach. It explains why you would not move your pawn in front of your bishop blocking one of its diagonals. I've seen this happen more than once for a beginner. The idea of freeing up your pieces to cover as much of the board as possible just doesn't occur to them. If a beginner starts looking at all the squares he can reach, it might help him to start seeing all the squares his opponent can reach. Simply not giving up material is one of the biggest thing a beginner can learn.
actually mobility is probably they most important principle and difficulties usually arise
because of lack of it. How to illustrate it though to beginners is rather a difficult
exercise me thinks, as i dont really fully understand it myself, plus one would need
extensive illustrated games of the principles depending upon the dynamics of the
...[text shortened]... and squares, pawn structure, initiative, minor piece imbalances, material
imbalances and space.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe last thing any chess player needs is Jeremy Silman's thinking technique, much less a beginner.
actually mobility is probably they most important principle and difficulties usually arise
because of lack of it. How to illustrate it though to beginners is rather a difficult
exercise me thinks, as i dont really fully understand it myself, plus one would need
extensive illustrated games of the principles depending upon the dynamics of the
...[text shortened]... and squares, pawn structure, initiative, minor piece imbalances, material
imbalances and space.
There is a simple way of showing a beginner how a chess game is opened, and that's studying the games of Paul Morphy, objectively the best player ever.
This was the first game I ever memorized. It was an odds game, and actually the A rook wasn't on the board.
Originally posted by ThabtosMeh its not a bad idea, A first book of Morphy written by Frisco Del Rosario does just
The last thing any chess player needs is Jeremy Silman's thinking technique, much less a beginner.
There is a simple way of showing a beginner how a chess game is opened, and that's studying the games of Paul Morphy, objectively the best player ever.
This was the first game I ever memorized. It was an odds game, and actually the A rook wasn't on the b m positional superiority} Ke7 12.Ng6+ Kxf7 13.Nxh8# 1-0[/pgn]
that, but i still think my original post is better as it provides universal principles which
the beginner can understand and apply in any position, is absolutely crystal clear and
simple to understand, whereas your example waits until move five to explain anything,
the time it took my beginner to make four weakening pawn moves. Also i do not think
its a waste of time teaching a beginner positional concepts, Silman himself argues that
a six year old girl was able to understand that rooks belong behind passed pawns in
reply to a a similar statement, that being that its useless to teach beginners these
elements.
Originally posted by Eladarthis is the principle of maximum activity, i thought you were making reference to some
I think the basics of mobility (having your pieces covering as many squares as possible) is pretty easy to teach. It explains why you would not move your pawn in front of your bishop blocking one of its diagonals. I've seen this happen more than once for a beginner. The idea of freeing up your pieces to cover as much of the board as possible just doesn't o ...[text shortened]... nt can reach. Simply not giving up material is one of the biggest thing a beginner can learn.
mysterious and unreachable concept that i was not aware of or did not fully
understand, now its clear, thanks. Yes i must have dropped a thousand million pieces
placing them on unprotected squares where they were susceptible to a tactic.