@Eladar
Several players in the 1900-2100 range have weighed in here with several suggestions: h3, Rf1d1, Ra1c1, Ne5, Nf4. As Paul remarked, "White is spoiled for choice in a position like this."
As Ragwort noted, in the actual game, you did play three of the suggested moves, but by the time you played them they were no longer good moves because the board position had changed by then.
Rather than concentrating on specific moves, I would like to expand on something else Ragwort mentioned: "Years ago trees of analysis and formalized 10-point thinking routines were all the rage. This … gives an insight into what might be going on in a good player's head when they analyze." Ragwort did not mention the points in the routine, so I will mention some of them now.
semi-permanent considerations:
1. material advantage
2. bad king position
3. passed pawns in the middlegame
4. opponent's weak pawns
5. strong vs. weak squares
6. pawn islands
7. strong pawn center
8. control of diagonal(s)
9. control of file(s)
10. control of rank(s)
11. bishop pair
ephemeral considerations:
12. bad piece position
13. bad piece coordination
14. advanced development / retarded development
15. centralization / consolidation
16. control of more space
These are called strategic elements, or sometimes Steinitz's elements (he did not invent them, but implemented them systematically and published annotated games based on these considerations or elements). The order in which the elements are listed is not indicative of their importance, however they are not of equal importance. The order of importance will shift during the course of a game.
A solid grasp of these elements is essential to get over the 1800 barrier in chess. These elements explain why the moves suggested above were suggested, why they seemed "obvious" to the players who suggested them. Once one has a grasp of these strategic elements, candidate moves suggest themselves, offer themselves as "obvious", as follows:
h3 retards the opponent's development (item 14.);
Rf1d1 supports the center and consolidates (items 7. and 15.);
Ra1c1 controls a file and retards the natural freeing move for Black c7-c5 (items 9. and 14.);
Ne5 controls space deep in the opponent's territory (item 16.) but has the potential disadvantage of under-protecting the d4 pawn (item 7. minus);
Nf4 same as Ne5.
It will be seen that one move may fulfil more than one element, or fulfil one but weaken or violate another, simultaneously. Recognizing when one consideration is more important than others, in a given position, is what makes the difference between a strong player and a very strong player. Recognizing when the fulfilment of one at the cost of violating another is a good risk or a poor risk is what makes chess interesting (as Mark Twain said, "difference of opinion is what makes horse races." ) Recognizing how to
make one consideration more important than another is what makes the difference between the champion and the also-rans.
I have recommended a book to you before; I still recommend it:
Chess Strategy for Club Players, by Herman Grooten, ISBN 978-90-5691-268-0. Grooten explains the above elements theoretically (I copied the list directly from his book), and demonstrates each element practically in sample master games. If you are serious about improving, consider this your homework assignment.
One final word of wisdom, from S. Tartakower: "Chess is a struggle against one's own errors."
29 May '19 23:362 edits
Now what?
Back to Top