There are static cues which are geared around the line of attack:
State of the target
- balance of attackers and defenders
- invasion square
- killbox around the target present
- wrong target (need exchanges first to get the right target into position)
State of the defender
- pinned
- overloaded
- has the wrong properties (must be exchanged for a defender with the right properties)
State of the line of attack
- blocked
- target not on the endpoint yet
- attacker not on the beginpoint yet
- pivot point present
- LoA can be closed by defenders
State of the attacker
not on the beginpoint yet
It doesn't make a difference which cue pops up first. It is a matter of getting a complete picture of the line of attack from attacker to target. Each static cue triggers the related standard scenario.
And then there are the dynamic cues.
Dual purpose move 2:1
- double attack
- discovered attack
- fork
- skewer
- capture the defender
A dual purpose move alters the state of a target. It tips the balance.
Single purpose move 1:1
- "with tempo"
- with additional punch
- postponement move
A single purpose move accomplishes a certain task without altering the main line.
A dynamic cue plays a role in the tempo battle.
Positional play
I made a lot of progress lately in the department of positional play. It lets you define which goals you want to reach ("what"). Like getting a good knight against a bad bishop, for instance. These ideas have their own cues, of course. Often related to the position of the pawns. We talk about that later.
Tactics can be used as a means to reach positional goals ("how").
PART I:
ReplyDeleteIn light of the shift in emphasis towards weaknesses (targets; defenders) and how to get at them (via lines of attack), I went back to review GM Aagaard’s observations in Chapter 7 — Simple Decisions, Thinking Inside the Box. My comments are enclosed in curly braces “{}”.
Not only was my technique poor when I was younger; all my decision making in quiet positions was questionable. I simply did not know WHAT I was looking for. It was only later that I understood that I was thinking about “simple decisions”. I did not know exactly what I was looking for, but I knew I would SEE it when I saw it.
At one point, by means of an abstract association with another subject, I realize that often the problem is not that we are unable to come up with the right answers; but rather that we fail to understand which questions we should be asking.
One day I spent an afternoon writing a long list of recurring questions: I then pruned it. I wanted a very short list: one I could remember.
{We often create long detailed checklists to make sure that we cover everything we think might be important, thereby avoiding oversights and blunders. The fact is that such long checklists almost certainly will lead us astray. Why? Because such checklists require considerable focused attention and we will NOT remember all the details because of Short-Term Memory limitations. Pilots use detailed checklists to handle all potential (known) problems. Each one of those checklists starts with the identification of the problem symptoms (cues; clues), which in turn “trigger” specific automated responses to those specific symptoms. If there are any missing or ambiguous symptoms, immediately focused attention is directed elsewhere to find additional or a more salient set of clues and the appropriate sequence of procedures to respond to all of those clues. This is very similar to Kline’s recognition-primed decision model. GM Tisdall’s variation processing is an example of the RPD model in chess.}
1. Where are the weaknesses?
2. What is my opponent’s idea?
3. Which is the worst placed piece?
{While re-reading this list of questions, I was struck by a sudden realization: I had perhaps [truthfully, most likely] misunderstood the full intent and implications of these three questions.}
PART II:
ReplyDelete{When I read the first question, I stored “WHAT are the weaknesses?” [identification of the type of weakness] instead of “WHERE are the weaknesses?” [location within a local area of interest]. This illustrates how System 2 can ASSUME there is only one viewpoint of a question which is then stored into Long-Term Memory. System 1 will regurgitates that (perhaps erroneous) viewpoint in the future with absolutely NO indication that the answer might be restricted in scope.}
{When I read the second question, I ASSUMED that it meant to identify the opponent’s long-range plan. Ideas are short-term and usually associated with tactics. This encompasses what the opponent can do to further his own plan, but most importantly, what steps he can take to hinder what we want to do. In short, this is the notion of resistance. We have to SEE how the opponent can resist our intentions.}
{I misunderstood the implications of the 3rd question. I ASSUMED that it referred to my worst placed piece as a WEAKNESS. I completely overlooked that it could be referring to my worst placed piece in terms of strengthening an attack, or to the opponent’s worst placed piece in terms of preventing it from become more useful to the opponent. Related advice is to always bring in the last available reserve piece for the attack. Certainly that “last reserve piece” would be considered the worst placed piece!}
These three questions are the most relevant ones. Games are decided on the weakest squares; our opponent moves roughly as often as we do; and your position can always be improved by bringing in the worst placed piece, or by preventing your opponent’s worst placed piece from getting into the game or being exchanged. {And there it is: the refutation of my assumption regarding my worst placed piece only as a weakness.}
I have used these three questions as a player, as a writer and as a trainer. I use them with players rated 180, 1800 and 2680. They are universal, because they allow us to access our disorganized knowledge of the position and focus on the most important aspects of it.
“He who is not aware of his ignorance will only be misled by his knowledge.”
— Richard Whately, an English logician and theological writer
"Long variation, wrong variation." — GM Bent Larsen
ReplyDeleteThe same is true of long detailed checklists.
Where does x-ray attack fit in ?
ReplyDeleteAn X-ray attack is a dual purpose move. With one move you threaten two targets. It usually takes two tempi to bring both targets into safety.
DeleteSofar I avoided the use of the term "weakness", since there are many ways to define a weakness and I want to avoid misunderstanding.
ReplyDeleteI discriminated between static and dynamic salient cues. The first step is the diagnosis. What are the targets, defenders, LoA's and attackers and what state they are in? This seeing of the static cues sheds light on the "what". What should we try to accomplish. Only when that is totally clear, we should look for the remedy. The dynamic cues shed light on the "how".