Adopting a strategy
Yesterday, my 100 points higher rated opponent offered me a draw in this position.
 |
| White to move |
n2r1rk1/4q2p/5bp1/pBNbpp2/8/P3P3/1BQ2PPP/2RR2K1 w - - 1 28
I thought for 10 minutes and accepted the draw.
The reason that I accepted the draw was that I looked for tactics, but couldn't make any of them work. I was inclined to play 28.Nd7, but I knew that would not work.
Today I looked at the position with Stockfish, and it deemed the position as +2.78 for white.
The move that I considered scored +1.30, which is giving a lot away.
Stockfish confirmed that there is indeed no winning tactic here. Stockfish proposed 28.Qa4
This example made me realize that I need a strategy for this type of positions. When I know that there is no tactic OR I simply am not smart enough to find one OR I cannot make a tactic work, I must make a positional move without further ado. Absorption of more tactical patterns will not help me here.
The past 4 months I looked whether it would be possible to make positional play work for me. It showed me that I must look for invasion squares. d7 is a logical invasion square, which makes Qa4 a logical move. That it attacks a5 doesn't hurt either.
Hence I must make positional moves the base of my play. Tactics will emerge whenever they like to. I must stop trying to force them when they refuse to show themselves.
An important lesson!
It never seizes to amaze me that every deep chess insight turns out to be highly trivial once formulated. Of course you must base your moves on positional considerations and wait until tactics emerge. Not the other way around.
ReplyDeleteYou can always work on an invasion. But a tactic is simply not always there.
As a consequence, I must dive deeper into positional play.
ReplyDelete