Art of attack
The book Art of attack from Vladimir Vukovic almost entirely covers the theory of plan gamma. So in stead of thinking for myself I decided to make a study of the book. Well, some thinking for myself remains, since the book has a tendency to formulate matters a bit too abstract, while the given examples are too concrete. The translation of both to a pragmatic approach is still work the reader has to do for himself. But it's a good start.
I'm very happy how a lot of pieces of the puzzle fall together. All positional play in the middlegame is geared around piece activity, which has as its goal invasion, which has as its goal to mate the enemy king. There are two holes in the story, the opening and and the endgame.
The endgame.
The book Secrets of chess endgame strategy of Lars Bo Hansen covers this stage very well and gives you the clues about the do's and don'ts in the middlegame in order to get an endgame with fighting chances. I haven't studied the book thoroughly yet, since my weakness in complex middlegame positions costs me more points by far. But whenever appropriate, I will take up the study.
The opening.
Now I have a clue about what to do in the middlegame, there will come a time in the future that I will have to ask myself how to open the game in accordance to my middlegame insights. That time is still far away, but one of the questions I have to answer is "what is the importance of the center?" I mean if piece activity is your main technique in the middlegame, then why should you clog up the center with pawns? Of course there is a reason to it, but I haven't thought about it seriously yet. At first sight it seems contradictionary. The question is important, since a lot of openings revolve around occupying the center. Without an insight how the center relates to improved piece activity I have no idea what I'm doing when I play such opening.
That picture is really disturbing.
ReplyDeleteactivity--invasion--mate, being sure to take advantage of, and avoid, accidents along the way :)
Very interesting. I am looking forward to reading what appears to be the Art of Attack for newbies, The Art of Checkmate.
These level 5 CTB problems are the first where you actually have to do some work to get mate. Pry open lines to get access to the King, that kind of thing. It is very enlightening.
Blue,
ReplyDeleteactivity--invasion--mate
Now you summarize it so excellent I see the true correlation all of a sudden. It is not found by forward thinking. That would be: I activate my pieces until I can invade. Then I try to hop from the invasion square to the mating square.
But it is found by backwards thinking: I attack the kingsposition on the first front (plan gamma) but I cannot break in since the position is well defended by pieces. So I have to start a second front (plan bhèta) to deflect the defenders from the first front. This is the invasion. In order to make that happen I have to fight against the defenders of the second front (the invasion square). So it is all about starting a diversion attack!
I enjoy your blog, and reading your trials and tribulations.
ReplyDeleteReducing chess to a few simple rules seems like a noble but impossible goal. In particular, your middlegame mantra "Activate-Invade-Mate" seems to leave out a bunch of stuff. What about pawn structure? Or Imbalances a la Silman? And don't forget that chess is a competition - a practical middlegame goal might simply be "Don't commit unforced errors."
In tennis, you can win with a powefrul serve, lobby from the baseline, charging the net, etc, or simply by waiting for the other guy to miss. Similarly, there are many ways to win - and lose - in chess. Sadly, every position is different and there is no one right approach. Many times, there are even several different legitimate approaches to a single position. Listen to your pieces and try to play the board, what the position demands from you at the moment. As you gain experience your judgment will improve.
If you insist on following dogma, try chessandpoker.com for an interesting read.
http://www.chessandpoker.com/introduction_to_blitz_chess.html
Bill
Anon: I enjoy that crazy site.
ReplyDeleteI like this rhyme:
Those that want to penetrate
use invasion squares they make.
If I had only known I needed to learn one simple poem to become a chess expert! What have I been wasting my time on tactics for??
Bill,
ReplyDeletethanks for the cheering.
That pokerguy has a volatile mind!
About your comment, I know my methods are crude. But that's how I'm build.
Me insisting on dogma's? LOL
Regarding "Secrets of Chess Endgame Strategy", I was just reading its review over at Chessville. Notice Korchnoi-Lukin, Stockholm 2003. I think Hansen's lesson to be willing to convert one type of advantage (an extra pawn in a queen ending) into another (the opposition in an equal pawn ending) is a good one, but it only makes sense if you are also able to evaluate that the resulting pawn ending is a win or at least very favorable. His book would be useful for someone who has a strong grasp of endgame theory.
ReplyDeleteLF,
ReplyDeleteHis book would be useful for someone who has a strong grasp of endgame theory.
It is quite the other way around. Without a good grasp of what is in Hansen's book, endgame theory is useless. His book makes endgame theory alive. Without it, it is just a dull and dead set of techniques.
"if piece activity is your main technique in the middlegame, then why should you clog up the center with pawns?"
ReplyDeleteI can imagine these reasons (without saying I am using them properly):
1. You clog the center in order to launch a pawn assault on the wing, the closed center is protecting your King from the counter-attack.
2. You clog the center for the moment until you have set up your invasion troops, then you open and invade. The closed center serves as sort of a camouflage, making your opponent think that he is protected from invasion.
Playing the Danish (Alekhine variation) I no longer have to worry about pawns in the center :)
ReplyDeleteSo far the games have been extremely fun with this variation. Tactically rich but not as nuts as the KG.
"His book makes endgame theory alive. Without it, it is just a dull and dead set of techniques."
ReplyDeleteYou could say the same thing about forks and skewers, but we all know there are beautiful combinations too. I think very few would describe Kopaev, 1953 or Barbier,Saavedra 1895 as dull positions. :)
"It is quite the other way around. Without a good grasp of what is in Hansen's book, endgame theory is useless."
You could say, without a knowledge of strategy, tactics like forks, pins, and skewers are useless. But it isn't so, unless you face a strong opponent who also knows tactics! And so it is with endings.