Awareness of the material balance is extremely important to develop. Most games of chess are won by capturing more stuff (or simply more valuable stuff) than the opponent.
On every move you should know who is ahead in material, or if it's even.
The point scale for piece value is:
Q = 9
R = 5
B, N = 3
P = 1
...meaning that a Bishop is worth 3 pawns, usually. (There are exceptions, which you will learn to see as you improve.)
- Joined
- 10 Sep 16
- Moves
- 8507
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemNoted. Now, I sometimes see people not capturing certain pieces and doing so deliberately. I once asked my chess opponent why she did not capture my rook. To my suprise she said" I saw it, Mr William, sir! I preffer positional play." I was stunned and she never explained further. I will look for that game and paste it here, if I know how. So, for, someone like me, you mean if I see a hanging piece and I have clearly analyzed that it is not a trap, I should capture it? I have in many games left hanging pieces, especially if they were pawns which have not moved, looking for more valuable pieces as you have indicated their values in yout post. Thanks for more advice.
Awareness of the material balance is extremely important to develop. Most games of chess are won by capturing more stuff (or simply more valuable stuff) than the opponent.
On [b]every move you should know who is ahead in material, or if it's even.
The point scale for piece value is:
Q = 9
R = 5
B, N = 3
P = 1
...meaning that a Bishop is worth 3 pawns, usually. (There are exceptions, which you will learn to see as you improve.)[/b]
You have to keep material balance by default. Meaning don't give up even a pawn if no real advantage to lose. If it is unclear about to have any advantage don't give up that easy. If you are two pawns up it is possible you might even beat world champion for K+R vs your's K+R+2Pawns.
Try to achieve this in one year. Bring down the spell to lose exchange unforced from 5 out of 10 to 1 out of 10. Then IMO you will get additional rating 100-200
Originally posted by adidiHow good was she? What position was she trying to maintain or build?
Noted. Now, I sometimes see people not capturing certain pieces and doing so deliberately. I once asked my chess opponent why she did not capture my rook. To my suprise she said" I saw it, Mr William, sir! I preffer positional play." I was stunned and she never explained further. I will look for that game and paste it here, if I know how. So, for, someone like ...[text shortened]... or more valuable pieces as you have indicated their values in yout post. Thanks for more advice.
Not every player has good ideas. Yet their bad ideas can easily beat you because of your mistakes.
I watched a documentary on Fischer and a guy noted that Fischer would suffer a bad position to achieve a material advantage. Purdy believed tactics are more important than positional advantage. He noted that in an Australian championship the player stronger in tactics defeated the player stronger in positional play.
I wouldn't like to generalise from a single game in a single tourney about the merits of predominantly tactical play over predominantly positional play. Certainly both elements are required to reach GM level. As someone here pointed out already, players tend to achieve chess proficiently in stages, and the tactical stage is one of them. Learning the basics of forks, pins, skewers, prying open pawn chains, traps and swindles, etc. An 1100-rating is a bit early for that though; at 1100 one is still struggling to see pieces en prise.
The great masters of tactical play were Anderssen, Speelmann, and Marshall. Their games still delight.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Ah, GP, to extinguish a man's enthusiasm for chess in 13 moves would give me no satisfaction. I would much rather he thrash me two years from now when I could look back on this and say, "I once beat him, you know."
[b][center]
Hi Moonbus,
First of all please forgive me for interrupting and butting in.
I know you are playing the O.P. and giving comments and possibly giving
him chances but in this game.Game 12188242 there was a real lesson for him.
A feel the burn position.
Black is being King-Pinned from both flanks and the centre...
PS Of course, I forgive you.
Originally posted by moonbusI was just relaying what Purdy wrote. Take it for what it is worth.
I wouldn't like to generalise from a single game in a single tourney about the merits of predominantly tactical play over predominantly positional play. Certainly both elements are required to reach GM level. As someone here pointed out already, players tend to achieve chess proficiently in stages, and the tactical stage is one of them. Learning the basics o ...[text shortened]... eat masters of tactical play were Anderssen, Speelmann, and Marshall. Their games still delight.
It's very rare that a positional advantage outweighs even the smallest material disadvantage. Some rules of thumb used by chess engines include:
doubled pawns worth about 1/3 of a pawn.
control of an open file with a rook about 1/2 a pawn
one tempo in the opening worth about 1/3 pawn
Rook on the 7th rank about one pawn
Unassailable knight outpost worth just under two extra pawns.
These can be stacked up, but unless the material sacrifice leads directly to checkmate, almost never is a positional advantage worth a whole knight, let alone a rook. That's what makes GM games with piece sacrifices so noteworthy.
Originally posted by BahariWell understood. Thanks so much.
You have to keep material balance by default. Meaning don't give up even a pawn if no real advantage to lose. If it is unclear about to have any advantage don't give up that easy. If you are two pawns up it is possible you might even beat world champion for K+R vs your's K+R+2Pawns.
Try to achieve this in one year. Bring down the spell to lose exchange unforced from 5 out of 10 to 1 out of 10. Then IMO you will get additional rating 100-200
Originally posted by EladarShe is a 1400+ player. I will look for the game and paste it here...
How good was she? What position was she trying to maintain or build?
Not every player has good ideas. Yet their bad ideas can easily beat you because of your mistakes.
I watched a documentary on Fischer and a guy noted that Fischer would suffer a bad position to achieve a material advantage. Purdy believed tactics are more important than positional adva ...[text shortened]... ian championship the player stronger in tactics defeated the player stronger in positional play.
Originally posted by adidiThat's not what positional play is! Positional play is identifying good squares to place pieces in the absence of more concrete things to play for, such as attacking the King, winning material, or promising a pawn.
I once asked my chess opponent why she did not capture my rook. To my suprise she said" I saw it, Mr William, sir! I preffer positional play."
So, for, someone like me, you mean if I see a hanging piece and I have clearly analyzed that it is not a trap, I should capture it?
Absolutely. Make them prove that their sacrifice works! If they can't, you win. If they can, you learn something.
I'd say take the free piece even if you see the trap, but don't think it works.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemThis is really helping. I now have answers to most of the questions I have during a game of chess. Thanks.
That's not what positional play is! Positional play is identifying good squares to place pieces in the absence of more concrete things to play for, such as attacking the King, winning material, or promising a pawn.
[quote]
So, for, someone like me, you mean if I see a hanging piece and I have clearly analyzed that it is not a trap, I should ...[text shortened]... rn something.
I'd say take the free piece even if you see the trap, but don't think it works.
Hi Monbus,
I don't think a 13 move lesson would extinguish the enthusiasm the lad is displaying.
being King-Pinned from all directions would have sunk in.
Now it's just a 'what could have happened'. The moment has passed. it never happened.
You learn from your defeats when you are staring the board at the
actual lose and you can see and feel the utter hopelessness of it all.
Now the lad will have to suffer 2-3 more losses due to his exposed King before it finally sinks in.