Elaborating on the pictures

Robert said:

"Diagrams 2 and 3 did not map easily to the Tree of Scenarios. I could see the connections to different scenarios, but not easily map them to specific questions:

• B.A.D. – Add attackers with tempo
• PoP – Clear a blocked LoA with tempo
• Is of 2nd order
• Capture defender –
• Target can be saved with tempo?
• Can defender be recaptured with tempo?

I’m not suggesting a rigid one-to-one correspondence is necessary or desirable, but in the initial stages of applying the Tree of Scenarios and seeking outside comments, it might be more helpful to show a direct connection (at least for those of us who have not been privy to all of your thought processes)."

 I already expected to be asked to use more than 1000 words to explain the pictures ;)

The pictures are compacted, and contain more than one idea.

The two adjacent squares with T(arget) and D(efender) represent the idea that a target and a defender have a lot in common. A defender is a potential target with limited mobility due to its function. De target and the defender are connected. Whenever you see a target, you have to look whether there is a defender, and when you see a defender, you have to be aware of the target.

The red arrows represent the duplo attack. The initiative is based on duple function attacking moves which must be met by duple function defensive moves.

The green arrows represent the discovery I made in the tit for tat department: capture with additional threat to maintain the initiative.

I should add another idea concerning the initiative: capture the defender. This saddles the opponent with two obligations: recapture the defender, and save the now outnumbered target. There are three defensive options:

• recapture the defender with tempo
• save the target with tempo
• recapture the defender while redefending the target

There are other duple function moves that might deserve a separate picture: move an attacker with a defensive function to a line of attack while preserving the contact with the piece that is to be defended.

It is a work in progress of course, and I don't want to complicate matters too much at the moment.

The picture above is a combination of 3 pictures. From right to left:
There are 3 ways to handle a defender:

• +A = attack it
• X = capture/exchange it
• -D = deflect it

The middle of the picture is about the target. The balance between the amount of attackers and the amount of defenders tells you whether a piece is hanging or B.A.D. (Barely Adequate Defended)

The scenarios concerning a hanging piece are:

• Neutralize the counter attack and take the piece OR
• Take the piece and defend against the counter attack

These scenarios are not represented in the picture. They are not solely bound to a hanging piece, so it is not quite clear where to put those.

• +A = add attackers
• +D? = ask if you can outnumber the amount of defenders

The red left part of the picture represents two ideas:

• The filled red arrow is a clogged up line of attack which needs clearance (geometry motif)
• 2nd = when your investigation of the targets, defenders, box and initiative has been inconclusive, you have guide your attention to the points of pressure of the second order. The squares where two or more of your attackers converge.

I consider immodestly my logical thinking to be my forte. It never seized to surprise me that I don't think logical during solving problems. The reason for that is that my mind is easy mesmerized by the amount of possibilities. Due to my habitual trial and error approach, I simply forget to apply some basic logic. The tree of scenarios is a set of training wheels which should help me to prevent confusion by helping my mind to focus on simple basic chess logic.

But I'm talking too much and training too little.