tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post6731542156955597151..comments2024-03-28T01:17:43.262+01:00Comments on Temposchlucker: The law of conservation of threatsTemposchluckerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07977208394417444785noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post-44822782610649179362007-02-23T09:10:00.000+01:002007-02-23T09:10:00.000+01:00And how do you call a move of a knight so that it ...And how do you call a move of a knight so that it can capture an opponent knight with its next move? It is a threat only if this knight is hanging. But what if this knight is protected by a pawn? You may call it a trade offer, but basically it is a simple attack, isn't it?Christianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09160555681387976338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post-281598353897804802007-02-22T23:39:00.000+01:002007-02-22T23:39:00.000+01:00I use the word threat because Dan Heisman speaks a...I use the word threat because Dan Heisman speaks about checks, captures and threats. To me an attack is a series of moves, like in an attack against the enemy king, the Kings Indian attack etc..Temposchluckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07977208394417444785noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post-59610728062776843902007-02-22T21:39:00.000+01:002007-02-22T21:39:00.000+01:00Just a matter of wording. You may call an attack a...Just a matter of wording. You may call an attack a threat to take a piece next move. I for myself prefer to distinguish an attack (that takes place now) from a threat, which is an attack that can be made with next move. For instance, I call a knight fork a double attack rather than a double threat. A move that prepares a knight fork is a threat. A move that prepares a knight fork and the same time threatens checkmate, I would call this a double threat. In other words, for me, the difference is that an attack is immediately visible whereas a threat must be seen before the real attack takes place.Christianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09160555681387976338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post-28639689075919615682007-02-22T17:57:00.000+01:002007-02-22T17:57:00.000+01:00I mean threats against a piece. Is attack better?I mean threats against a piece. Is attack better?Temposchluckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07977208394417444785noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post-91087615465360015002007-02-22T17:52:00.000+01:002007-02-22T17:52:00.000+01:00BTW2 I have the impression that you speak of attac...BTW2 I have the impression that you speak of attacks rather than threats. Or am I wrong?Christianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09160555681387976338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post-4515880670179831182007-02-22T15:41:00.000+01:002007-02-22T15:41:00.000+01:00BTW thanks for encouragement lately. This comment ...BTW thanks for encouragement lately. This comment is my first post from new blogger. Seems to work fine.Christianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09160555681387976338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10713928.post-45472536590837865962007-02-22T15:39:00.000+01:002007-02-22T15:39:00.000+01:00Ineresting thoughts. Only a warning against labell...Ineresting thoughts. Only a warning against labelling double threats as «rare moves», this could undermine security awareness. Also I humbly disagree with calling moves without a threat «non-moves». A positional improvement is not necessarily a threat, but it is a very «yeah-move».Christianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09160555681387976338noreply@blogger.com