tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post672676464386212829..comments2024-03-28T01:17:43.262+01:00Comments on Temposchlucker: When to count?Temposchluckerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07977208394417444785noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post-49962624132762226862016-07-19T23:42:19.495+02:002016-07-19T23:42:19.495+02:00There are only (4) tactical weaknesses :
1) g3 w...There are only (4) tactical weaknesses : <br /><br />1) g3 which is attacked twice and defenden once and that by the kg2 ( which becomes that way weakness no 4 )<br />2) Nf3 which is attacked twice and defended twice AND is attackable by a pawn which is between the Black Queen and the white king<br />3) Qd3 which is attacked and defended once ( thats the only false altert )<br />4) Kg2 which is (x-ray) attacked by the Qg6 and squares around the king ate attacke by the black rooks and the bishop<br /><br />All hints are saying :g5<br />AoxomoxoA wonderinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16058687381216896080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post-89235603589754066022016-07-19T22:01:39.431+02:002016-07-19T22:01:39.431+02:00I don't question the usefulness of counting, b...I don't question the usefulness of counting, but I found that there is a moment to count that is more logical. Hence the title of the post. It is not logical to start counting when you are only inventorying the contact points and the invasion points. If a piece is hanging, you will notice it anyway, even without counting. The logical moment to count is when you consider the defenders. Since harassment of the defender changes the outcome of the count. This way, you prevent counting twice. The outcome of the first count isn't necessary nor useful.Temposchluckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07977208394417444785noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post-70484493361102735792016-07-19T21:45:24.844+02:002016-07-19T21:45:24.844+02:00The first count I used was on f3 (+2/-2). The seco...The <b>first count</b> I used was on f3 (+2/-2). The <b>second count</b> was on f1 (+3/-2); I didn't count the Nf3 as a defender of f1, although it does block the attack, because the Knight does not have the capability to "move" (attack) that square. Perhaps this is a personal idiosyncrasy of my own method of counting. The <b>third count</b> was on d3 (+1/-1). The <b>fourth count</b> was on g3 (+1/-2). Ergo, look at how to attack g4 (line of least resistance). There is an available duplo move: 1. ... g4! forking Nf3 and Ph3 AND (most importantly) allowing the line of the Black Queen to be opened to g4. White cannot guard g4 immediately in reply, so I investigated whether he could remove one of the attackers. Obviously he cannot remove the Bd6, so only the Black Queen is a target. If 2. QxQ, then 2. ... gxf3+ (Zwischenzug: check taking precedence over all other moves), and White loses the Nf3. An important consideration is the guard by Bd6 on Rf8. This allows 3. ... Rxg6, recovering the Queen.<br /><br />After 1. ... g4!, moving the White Knight does not prevent opening the line on to g3 because 1. ... g4! is a duplo (double attack in the form of a fork). 1. ... g4! 2. Nh4 gxh3+ and the Black Queen enters the King's field with fatal effect: 3. Kxh3 Qxg3# or 3. Kg1 Qxg3+ 4. Kh1 Qxh2# or 3. Kh1 Qxg3 and White will soon lose material. 2. Nh2 might be temporarily better but (in the long term) will still lose material.<br /><br />I guess the usefulness of "counting" depends on what is counted as important.Robert Coblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12427520849707914818noreply@blogger.com