Let us think about which areas we need to investigate when we talk about an attack. Vukovic describes several situations.
- The king in the middle which has still the right to castle
- The king in the middle which has lost the right to castle
- The king which has castled kingside
- The king that has castled queenside
When to make committal moves
When the king is in the middle but hasn't lost the right to castle, it is not the right time to make committal moves. Since when you commit your pieces to an attack and the king simply castles into safety, your pieces will look silly.
Instead you must make flexible moves. Which attack the king in the middle, but are useful for an attack on the castled king position too.
Keeping the king in the middle
There are several ways to keep the king in the middle.
- Putting pressure along the e-file so the king is forced to protect a pinned piece
- Forcing the king to move
- A pawn storm along the flanks, so the king will castle into trouble
- Piece sac on f7
As you see, it is often difficult to attack the king in the middle with non committal moves. You must be pretty sure that you know what you are doing. I would opt for flexible moves instead and force the king to castle.
Especially the e-file and the f7 point are vulnerable.
Where to put your pieces
Since the castled king is a stable sitting duck, it is easier to investigate this situation first. From there you can draw some conclusions that you can extrapolate to more volatile situations like the king in the middle. Vukovic advices to attack the squares around the king. For instance bishops on a3, a2, a1 en b1, are all considered to participate in an attack on a king on g8. The same for rooks placed on f1, g1 or h1.
A knight must be placed where it can reach the squares around the king. That is why often the center is such good place for the knight.
Where to put your pawns
Behind your pawns, there is room to manoeuver. That is what space advantage is about. There is one problem with pawns though: they can stand in the way of your pieces. So you must have a mobility plan for your pawns. Which pawn break or pawn exchange is going to free up your lines of attack? You must have a philosophy for that.
The battle of the LoA's
Lines of attack are sort of neutral. The question is, who can dominate it. Often a struggle for domination must be conducted. Not seldom the pieces which can possibly dominate an open file are exchanged, just to prevent the other party from domination.
Counting defenders versus attackers
Often you need three extra pieces for an attack. One to sac, two to deliver mate. You now know which squares need your attention: the squares around the king. Especially g7 and h7 are vulnerable. g7 is the most powerful to attack, since is covers the escape routes of the king.
You not only count the defenders, but you count the moves too which they need to interfere with the lines of attack. That way you can determine which pieces will play a role in the defense and which do not.
The same you do for the attackers. You count the moves your attackers need to move towards the target squares. You need a philosophy to let all pieces be able to participate in the attack.
When the balance between moves to attack and the moves to defend is seriously disturbed, it is time to throw the kitchen sink.
When to pawn storm
When you have castled opposite, a pawn storm at the king is a safe way to attack. Especially when the king has fianchettoed or when a pawn on h7 provides a leverage. But again, you must be aware that your pawns can block your lines of attack.
Attacking on two fronts
Besides a kingside attack, it is good to open up another front. This second front has the intention to lure away the defenders from the king.
Conclusion
As you see, there is quite some stuff to investigate. What I like about it, is the coherence between the several areas. This means that I'm no longer looking for moves that are accidently good, but I'm looking for moves that are logical. Of course I need time to process the feedback, but for the first time I'm learning from my games!
While studying GM Averbakh’s Chess Tactics for Advanced Players (again, for the umpteenth time), I came across this tidbit of wisdom:
ReplyDeleteSituations in which the object of attack (in this case the king) is subjected to an attack and at the same time its freedom of movement is restricted will henceforth be called combined attacks. I should like to repeat that a combined attack always involves an attacking contact, a confining [restricting] contact and occasionally a protective contact. In this connection I should like to emphasize that the coordinated attack on other pieces, which we discussed at the beginning of Part 2 is basically the same as a mate ending. Here too we always find an active contact along with confining contacts aimed at the piece being attacked. That is why such a coordinated combination of contacts can also be called a combined attack.
Not sure how (if at all) that fits into the current discussion.
The grand scheme is as follows. From move one you focus on adding pressure to the enemy king. The pressure leads to pieces that are occupied with defensive duties. In this stressful situation, the enemy pieces are not always what they look like. Since they have defensive duties to fulfil, they are not free for other tasks. This means you do not wait until accidents happen, you force them to happen. The kingside attack is the means, not necessarily the end. Tactics naturally arise from good positions. It is important to be opportunistic, and change course when the chances arrive.
ReplyDelete