## Posts

Showing posts from September, 2018

### Oversimplify this!

What types of moves do we have? How can we judge the effect on the initiative? In the hope to get system I involved, I simplify matters. Maybe I'm even oversimplifying them. Worrying about oversimplification is a habit of system II, so I don't care. We must simplify matters before we can complicate them. CCT. But since a check is just a threat, CT will suffice. For now. Mate is just one move short of capturing the king in a forced way. I will simplify mate as a gain of wood. Just to simplify matters even more. What type of moves do we have? Cashing in Quiet move Postponement move Counter attack before Counter attack after Preparing moves  Preliminary move Duplo attack move Attacking an immobile piece Cashing in When we just capture a hanging piece, we cash in. There is no additional tempo involved. In fact we lose a tempo. We hand over the initiative to the opponent. We get a piece of wood in return. "The threat is often stronger than the execution&quo

### Prestidigitatic display

Originally posted on April 15, 2017 Diagram 1 black to move r1r5/4qppk/p1R1pn1p/1p6/2N1PB2/bN3Q1P/P4PP1/2R3K1 b - - 0 1 [ solution ] King target? No Queen target? No Rook c6? Hanging That makes the rook a target. A hanging piece is kind of immobile. Do I have a follow up punch when I take it? No Does the opponent have? Yes. He can take a hanging bishop and save his knight at the same time. So rook c6 is not the target to start with. Is rook c1 a target? yes Can I capture it with follow up punch? Yes, rook c6 remains hanging and so does the knight. 1. Bxc1 saddles white with three tasks: Recapture the bishop Save the rook on c6 Save the knight White has no multiple function move that does accomplish three tasks in one go. White can only try a postponement move, but he can't change the outcome. What I intend to develop, is to get a (system I) feel for this kind of reasoning. There are quite a few combinations of multiple tempo moves. B

### War on lists

This position was first published on April 21, 2017 Diagram 1 black to move 2r3k1/5ppp/p7/1prRq3/4n3/P1N1P2P/1P3PP1/2RQ2K1 b - - 0 1 [ solution ] I have declared the war on lists. List of targets, list of points of pressure , list of lines of attack , list of attackers, list of candidate moves, list of defenders, that kind of stuff. System II is very fond of making lists. But once they are made, it lacks the skills and the Short Term Memory slots to use them. Putting the mind on halt. I start at the end of the line with the king: Is it a target? Yes Is it a target because it is immobile? Yes Is it part of a potential duplo attack Yes Which is the other target of the duplo attack? Queen What is the point of pressure ? c1 Is c1 B.A.D. (Barely Adequate Defended)? Yes Is c1 part of a duplo attack? Yes What is the other target? Knight Is the knight immobile? Yes Why? It is defending the other rook too So it is overloaded? Yes Is the other rook B.A.D. (B

### After 1. Ng4

Maintaining the initiative is a method for pruning when you think forwards . In the previous post I was reminded that we must think backwards first. Backwards thinking starts at the end of the line: the targets. There are four potential targets: King Queen d8Q Bishop In the diagram of the previous post, we couldn't discover anything that signals that we should start with 1. Ng4. This means that we can only find 1. Ng4 by trial and error in combination with luck. If you are lucky you find 1. Ng4 within a few minutes. If you are not lucky you can think for days on end. That is of course the horror scenario that we want to prevent. That is why I start the analysis now after 1. Ng4. If we can determine fully what is going on after 1. Ng4, then we might be able to find out how that is telephoned to the position before 1. Ng4. BLACK to move (after 1. Ng4) Case A No matter what black does, 2. Nxf6 wins. Except for two scenarios: 1. ... Qxd7 (A1) Bishop moves

### Determining the targets

The initiative is a mighty pair of pruning shears for the tree of analysis . But it isn't right to start with the initiative. The initiative works forward. We have proven in this blog time and again, that we need to think backwards first. Aox remembered us to that with his description of his ideal approach to a problem, in his comment on the previous post. We need to start with the targets. Otherwise we will not get anywhere. What questions should we ask to get the right targets and the right attacking square from this position?  diagram 1. White to move 2R5/3P1pkp/5bp1/1q2N3/p7/6BP/5PPK/8 w - - 1 1 [ solution ]

### Preliminary moves

Just when you start to think you are making progress, you stumble on a position where everything you have invented so far can be thrown out of the window. Or at least it seems so. We talked about this position before (June 3, 2017). Can the tree of analysis be pruned by the mighty shears of the initiative here?  diagram 1. White to move 2R5/3P1pkp/5bp1/1q2N3/p7/6BP/5PPK/8 w - - 1 1 [ solution ] UPDATE Our system I is not so well developed that we recognize the knight fork direct from the beginning. Nor will we be able to develop our system I to that degree. That is what this blog has proven. But can we reach the same solution by applying simple means? Like simple reasoning and the rules for the initiative? If there is nothing forcing in this position, then we can never force the end combination. Hence there must some force be applied. When we have found a move or two, our system I may find it easier to kick in and reveal the knight fork. Let's give it a try. The