Queen vs. Two Rooks Part Two
Let’s see another game which gives a better indication of how to defend (along with an introduction to how the inclusion of minor pieces affects the queen vs. two rooks imbalance):
Let’s see another game which gives a better indication of how to defend (along with an introduction to how the inclusion of minor pieces affects the queen vs. two rooks imbalance):
One of the most misunderstood elements of chess is that of the material imbalance – this is where each side has different pieces on the board. Of course, we don’t have to concern ourselves with the gigantic material imbalance of being a queen up for nothing, but many players avoid the opportunity to enter positions with a (on the pawn = 1, knight = 3.25, bishop = 3.5, rook = 5, queen = 9.75 material values) near-equal material imbalance. This can mainly be attributed to fear of the unknown (as there aren’t so many articles or books on this subject).
As I mentioned last week, tactical chess understanding is the ability to create and exploit advantages in a position by dynamic/combinative means. Tactical chess understanding comprises both the attack and the counterattack – which can’t be underestimated as a defensive resource.
A couple of years ago I wrote a blog post on the 'Rudiments of Chess Understanding', defining chess understanding as 'how well one appreciates the value of pieces, pawns and squares in a given position'. This is true, but I now feel the definition can be made a lot more specific and helpful:
Positional chess understanding is the ability to evaluate conflicting advantages and ways to maximise our advantages/decrease the opponent's.
Hello everyone!
Do you know what it’s like when you really want something, you want it so much that you’ll make some sacrifices to maximise your chances of getting it?
I was very determined to attain my final Grandmaster norm at the recently concluded Australasian Masters in Melbourne, and with all my other writing and coaching along with my tournament preparation and playing, the blog took a back seat…but I’m back and well!
[Event "WCh 2014"] [Site "Sochi RUS"] [Date "2014.11.12"] [Round "4"] [White "Carlsen, M."] [Black "Anand, V."] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "B40"] [WhiteElo "2863"] [BlackElo "2792"] [Annotator "Illingworth,Max"] [PlyCount "94"] [EventDate "2014.11.08"] [Source "ChessPublishing"] [SourceDate "2013.03.07"] {In this blog post I'll examine Games 4-6 of the World Championship Match (for
[Event "URS-ch17"] [Site "Moscow"] [Date "1949.11.17"] [Round "18"] [White "Flohr, Salo"] [Black "Geller, Efim P"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "E92"] [Annotator "Illingworth,Max"] [PlyCount "122"] [EventDate "1949.10.16"] [EventRounds "19"] [EventCountry "URS"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceDate "1999.07.01"] {In this blog post I will tackle an often oversimplified subject:
[Event "Valencia"] [Site "Valencia"] [Date "1475.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "De Castellvi, Francisco"] [Black "Vinoles, Narcisco"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B01"] [Annotator "Illingworth,Max"] [PlyCount "41"] [EventDate "1475.??.??"] [EventCountry "ESP"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceDate "2007.11.25"] {One of the most common causes of a mistake in chess is when we assume that
[Event "World Championship 13th"] [Site "Buenos Aires"] [Date "1927.10.26"] [Round "21"] [White "Capablanca, Jose Raul"] [Black "Alekhine, Alexander"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "D63"] [Annotator "Illingworth,Max"] [PlyCount "64"] [EventDate "1927.09.16"] [EventRounds "34"] [EventCountry "ARG"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceDate "1999.07.01"] {My inspiration for this week's post is the World Championship practice of the
[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "1905.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Domination Study"] [Black "Composed by Henri Rinck"] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator "Illingworth,Max"] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "8/1p4R1/2kp4/2p1P3/2P2Npq/3P3p/4K1PP/8 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "0"] [EventDate "1905.??.??"] {Don't you love it when you stop one of your opponent's pieces from safely moving to any of their available squares? Such a theme is known as