[cerveza_fiesta]

wait, why don't we just take his queen?

He's in check and can't take our queen when we vacate the premises with our knight.

EDIT - I'm an idiot. Was trying out moves and forgot to move our knight back. Forget the comment above

This post has been edited by cerveza_fiesta: 25 August 2011 - 12:38 PM

[Obdigore]

I would much rather trade 1 rook(us) for 1bishop(him) and 1 knight(him) instead of 1 queen(us) for 1 bishop(him)

CF, Im completely confused by what you are saying, he is not in check nor do we have a shot at his queen with any of our current pieces...

This post has been edited by Dutch Flag: 24 August 2011 - 07:05 PM

[Tapper]

So far, he's only a pawn behind and our position is very, very weak on his queen side. The proposed trade may instead be a gambit to bring his rook into play through castling over the queen side, at the expense of a bishop. Mind you, to play a gambit well means you're about infinite levels better at chess than 98% of the chess playing population, so I honestly can't tell if a rook on the D-column is worth the trade, but I just wanted to throw it out here.

So far, j2 has played well and there's probably more to this move than meets the eye.

Quote

I'm willing to trade since that would elimnate all his bishops and judging from the last game, no one except me on our team like to use rooks. If we trade pieces that leaves our queen on A6 and able to move over to F6 depending on his next move.

Imho, Rooks are definately useful (they're worth 5 points in theorycraft as opposed to 3 for bishops and 2.5 for knights for a reason) but mostly as an anchoring/ end-game piece. For much of the middle play, due to how pawns impose their structure on play, diagonal control/support is more powerful than vertical + horizontal threat. Only later in the game, especially after the elimination of bishops and/or queens, does the rook become really strong, imho. Last game, the board was still cluttered and we weren't yet in the end-game. Nor were we able to link rooks, either, which is their strongest combination.

When applying that point count above (mind you, position also plays a role), the intended rook for bishop + knight trade would thus also only give us .5 point advantage when looked at from very basic chess craft, which is less than a pawn (value 1).

This post has been edited by Tapper: 24 August 2011 - 10:42 PM

[Tapper]

cerveza_fiesta, on 24 August 2011 - 06:53 PM, said:

Rook to A5 now?

If he moves with that bishop we got him again and our rook is in the fight all of a sudden.

Or maybe better to start working on our right side? Right side is certainly more conservative.

Actually, I don't know which is better now. If we just threaten with the rook he might lock on that side and leave us free to work our resources on the right

I;d suggest b4-b5.

The effect is the same, the pawn is covered by Nc3 and Qe2, and that pawn will also anchor a Ra8-a6 move, if we're inclined to rove around his "home lines", and Nc3 x b5 (if that were to come to happen) will threaten his queen and open up Ra1-a7 which means a rook trade.

[cerveza_fiesta]

Dutch Flag, on 24 August 2011 - 07:02 PM, said:

I would much rather trade 1 rook(us) for 1bishop(him) and 1 knight(him) instead of 1 queen(us) for 1 bishop(him)

CF, Im completely confused by what you are saying, he is not in check nor do we have a shot at his queen with any of our current pieces...

Tapper, on 24 August 2011 - 10:51 PM, said:

cerveza_fiesta, on 24 August 2011 - 06:53 PM, said:

Rook to A5 now?

If he moves with that bishop we got him again and our rook is in the fight all of a sudden.

Or maybe better to start working on our right side? Right side is certainly more conservative.

Actually, I don't know which is better now. If we just threaten with the rook he might lock on that side and leave us free to work our resources on the right

I;d suggest b4-b5.

The effect is the same, the pawn is covered by Nc3 and Qe2, and that pawn will also anchor a Ra8-a6 move, if we're inclined to rove around his "home lines", and Nc3 x b5 (if that were to come to happen) will threaten his queen and open up Ra1-a7 which means a rook trade.

I'm a dumbass with the "take the queen" comment. I was trying out moves and forgot to move back the knight move I was looking at.

Looking at it properly, the pawn move is solid. Queen to F3 might be ok too hey? It would allow the queen to get in position for punching into the pawn at F6 and our white bishop still covers the diagonal up to A6 in case of any shennanigans with his bishop. It also leaves open a knight move up to A5 to threaten the queen and force a trade of some sort.

I'd call a move but I can't yet. Somebody?

This is a way cooler game btw. Good playing on both sides.

This post has been edited by cerveza_fiesta: 25 August 2011 - 12:47 PM

[Tapper]

cerveza_fiesta, on 25 August 2011 - 12:46 PM, said:

Dutch Flag, on 24 August 2011 - 07:02 PM, said:

I would much rather trade 1 rook(us) for 1bishop(him) and 1 knight(him) instead of 1 queen(us) for 1 bishop(him)

CF, Im completely confused by what you are saying, he is not in check nor do we have a shot at his queen with any of our current pieces...

Tapper, on 24 August 2011 - 10:51 PM, said:

cerveza_fiesta, on 24 August 2011 - 06:53 PM, said:

Rook to A5 now?

If he moves with that bishop we got him again and our rook is in the fight all of a sudden.

Or maybe better to start working on our right side? Right side is certainly more conservative.

Actually, I don't know which is better now. If we just threaten with the rook he might lock on that side and leave us free to work our resources on the right

I;d suggest b4-b5.

The effect is the same, the pawn is covered by Nc3 and Qe2, and that pawn will also anchor a Ra8-a6 move, if we're inclined to rove around his "home lines", and Nc3 x b5 (if that were to come to happen) will threaten his queen and open up Ra1-a7 which means a rook trade.

I'm a dumbass with the "take the queen" comment. I was trying out moves and forgot to move back the knight move I was looking at.

Looking at it properly, the pawn move is solid. Queen to F3 might be ok too hey? It would allow the queen to get in position for punching into the pawn at F6 and our white bishop still covers the diagonal up to A6 in case of any shennanigans with his bishop. It also leaves open a knight move up to A5 to threaten the queen and force a trade of some sort.

I'd call a move but I can't yet. Somebody?

This is a way cooler game btw. Good playing on both sides.

If he castles Kingside, the offensive value of that move is undone. It still opens a bishop-bishop trade and for that trade to happen, we'll have to cancel our own opportunity to castle.

I'll play

b4-b5, please.

[Whiskey Bass]

Bishop A6 to B7

[cerveza_fiesta]

 1.png (70.82K)
Number of downloads: 0

[cerveza_fiesta]

no idea what to do next. There are a bunch of possible moves.

[Whiskey Bass]

well, you'l all have a bit of time to plot, coz business calls.

thanks for the board update Cerveza

[Obdigore]

P E4 -> D5

[Sir Thursday]

We're going to have to be very careful here - while Black is uncastled, we can get away with the Queen on e2, but we're going to have to get it out of there sharpish once that happens.

[Obdigore]

We could of course do B H6 to prevent any kind of castling.

[Whiskey Bass]

castling King E8 to G8
Rook H8 to F8

[Obdigore]

he keeps rolling his eyes every time he moves. Makes me want to punch him. Does that make me a bad person?

[Whiskey Bass]

is that better for you dutch ??

[Use Of Weapons]

I thought it was just me! Was trying not to make a comment

[Whiskey Bass]

theres me thinking it was just a smiley face, have i been unintentionally irritating eveyone ?

[Mentalist]

I like the pawn take.
I'm thinking of Qc4 next.

[Obdigore]

I would like a P g2 -> g3 as a valid move as well