In this post I will take a few huge steps that may be hard to follow. Or swallow. But I feel the intrinsic logic behind it allthough I don't spend much time to write it down clearly. Don't let that keep you from commenting though. I hope you can bear with me. I will try to clarify matters later.
In a previous post I defined the following triptych for what to do when there is nothing to do, I found:
- a bipolar goal to strive for. Decline the possibilities of your opponent while improving your own.
- A hierarchy of moves based on the amount they attribute to the optimal position and the amount of tempo's needed.
- A hierarchy in piece move vs pawnmoves.
To identify the elements that are involved in a trap I start with looking at simple positions. In the hope to derive more complicated laws from it. Take the following position.
Investigation of the relationship between space and tempo's.
- The rooks have to take away space of the black King. From a limiting point of view, the move Rh6 comes to mind. But you can't mate a king in the middle of the board. Why not?:
- An uncovered rook can only take away 3 squares of a King. Two rooks can take away 6 squares. But to trap the king you should take away 9 squares. Where do the last 3 come from?:
- The edge of the board is able to take away another 3 squares. In fact you can treat the rim as a piece, when it comes to write an algorithm of mobility. The corner even is able to take away 5 squares.
- The King needs tempo's to attack a rook. You have to put your rooks out of reach, in that way you add tempo's to the counterattacking King.
- On a board with 3x3 squares you can't mate the King since your rooks cannot be placed out of reach.
From this point of view the duplo-attack is a special case of a trap.
Black to move.
The black King cannot go to the 6th rank due to the double attack Rf6+
So the double attack limits the posibilities of the black king. Thus adding to its trap.