chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

 
If you LINE UP your pieces, no need for DECOYS
Compiled by notyetagm
--*--

If you <LINE UP> your pieces, then there is *NO* *NEED* for <DECOYS>, as you have *ALREADY* <LINED UP> your pieces for me to <PIN>, <SKEWER>, and <FORK>.

WHEN YOU ATTACK AN ENEMY PIECE WITH ONE OF YOUR LINE PIECES, YOU FORM THE PREREQUISITE FOR A DISCOVERED ATTACK. The problem is that the attacker is thinking only about attacking the enemy piece on that <SQUARE>, not about the <LINE>. That is, the attacker is not considering that he is <LINING UP> his attacking line piece with the enemy piece along a <LINE> and that this alignment could possibly be turned into a <DISCOVERED ATTACK>. The attacker is thinking only about the attacked <SQUARE> but in chess <SQUARES> and <LINES> are co-equal.

For example, in the Alekhine vs Lasker 1914 game, Alekhine blundered with 41 ♖d7?, attacking the Black d5-knight. Why was this rook move a blunder? <BECAUSE ALEKHINE WAS THINKING -ONLY- ABOUT THE d5-SQUARE, NOT ABOUT THE LINE!> That is, Alekhine placed his White rook on d7 to attack the Black d5-knight on that <SQUARE> (d5). Alekhine missed the importance of his White d7-rook now being on the same <LINE> (d-file) as the Black d5-knight. And since the White d7-rook was <UNDEFENDED> and the Black d5-knight can give <CHECK>, Dr. Lasker saw that the alignment <White d7-rook + Black d5-knight> gave him the possibility of creating a <DISCOVERED ATTACK WITH CHECK>, which he executed with 41 ... ♖d3!, winning an exchange.

DO NOT THINK ONLY ABOUT THE SQUARE: ALSO THINK ABOUT THE LINE(!)

IF YOU LINE UP YOUR PIECES, THEN THE REASON WHY SIMPLY DOES NOT MATTER

ATTACK an enemy piece with a line piece

BLOCK the attack of an enemy line piece

CAPTURE an enemy piece or square (Nakamura game below) with the support of one of your line pieces

DEFEND one of your pieces with one of your own line pieces

FORM a battery along a line.

In all of these cases above, <A>-<B>-<C>-<D>-<F>, you have lined up your pieces either with each other so the enemy can <PIN/SKEWER/FORK> them or with an enemy piece so that the enemy can create a <DISCOVERED ATTACK>, and the reason why you lined up your pieces this way in the first place is -completely- irrelevant.

IF YOU LINE UP YOUR PIECES, THEN THE REASON WHY SIMPLY DOES NOT MATTER

---

Ivanchuk vs Aronian, 2008

Position after 36 ♕f5-f4


click for larger view

This game, Ivanchuk vs Aronian, 2008, is my new teaching example for my tactical lesson <IF YOU LINE UP YOUR PIECES, THE REASON WHY SIMPLY DOES NOT MATTER>.

Here Ivanchuk has just played 36 ♕f5-f4, in order to <DEFEND> his White a4-bishop. However, he has also just <LINED UP> his f4-queen with his a4-bishop along the 4th rank, which is not a good alignment because the White a4-bishop cannot move along the line on which it is lined up.

In fact, I have a special term for this type of White a4-bishop + White f4-queen alignment: <BAD ALIGNMENT>. <BAD ALIGNMENTS> are rooks lined up with something on diagonals, bishops lined up with something on ranks or files, and knights lined up with something on ranks, files, or diagonals. These pieces are just waiting to be -victimized- by the alignment because they cannot move along the line of the alignment and hence do not control squares along it.

Why are such <ALIGNMENTS BAD>? See the game continuation here. After 36 ... ♖d8-c8 37 ♖g5-g3??, Aronian (Black) struck with the simple tactic 37 ... ♖c8-c4, <FORKING> the White a4-bishop and f4-queen that White -conveniently- lined up for Black.

Position after 36 ... ♖d8-c8 37 ♖g5-g3?? ♖c8-c4 <rook fork>


click for larger view

<Again, the reason why the White a4-bishop is lined up with the White f4-queen for the <ROOK FORK> 37 ... ♖c8-c4 does not matter. <IF YOU LINE UP YOUR PIECES, THEN THE REASON WHY SIMPLY DOES NOT MATTER!> Aronian just thanks Chucky for lining up his f4-queen and a4-bishop along the 4th rank, <FORKS> them with 37 ... ♖c8-c4, and wins a piece.>

IF YOU LINE UP YOUR PIECES, THEN THE REASON WHY SIMPLY DOES NOT MATTER!

---

A great example of this principle is the following fragment from a recent ICC bullet game.

Black to play: 18 ... ?


click for larger view

Here Black could not resist playing 18 ... ♖d8-d2?!, penetrating to the 7th rank with his rook and <FORKING> the White e2-queen and b2-bishop.

Position after 18 ... ♖d8-d2?!


click for larger view

But notice this important point that Nakamura (White) saw. The d2-square was <DEFENDED> by the White e2-queen. So for the Black d8-rook to take the d2-square and occupy it, Black needs the support of the his Black a5-queen.

Whenever you use your line pieces, you must be careful not to <MISPLACE (ALIGNMENT)> your pieces! Here Black sees his Black a5-queen defending/supporting his Black d2-rook. Nakamura, on the other hand, sees a Black piece on d2 lined up =diagonally= with the <UNDEFENDED> Black a5-queen, which is not one but two(!) preconditions for a <PIN>: 1) two pieces of the same color lined up on a file or diagonal, and 2) the rear piece is <UNDEFENDED>.

So seeing these two preconditions for a <PIN>, Nakamura played 19 ♕e2-e1!, <PINNING> the Black d2-rook diagonally to the <UNDEFENDED> Black a5-queen.

Position after 19 ♕e2-e1! <pin>


click for larger view

Like Weteschnik writes, <EVERY UNDEFENDED PIECE IS A POTENTIAL CANDIDATE FOR A PIN>, page 48, "Understanding Chess Tactics".

Event "ICC tourney 303301 (1 0)"
Site "Internet Chess Club"
Date "2007.07.08"
Round "4"
White "Smallville"
Black "manest"
Result "0-1"
ICCResult "White forfeits on time"
WhiteElo "2795"
BlackElo "2371"
Opening "Queen's pawn game, Darooha variation " ECO "D02"
NIC "QP.08"
Time "22:49:17"
TimeControl "60+0"

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. g3 Bf5 4. Bg2 h6 5. O-O c6 6. c4 e6 7. b3 Nbd7 8. Nc3 Bd6 9. Bb2 Ne4 10. Nd2 Ndf6 11. e3 O-O 12. Ncxe4 dxe4 13. Qc2 Qa5 14. a3 Rfd8 15. Nxe4 Be7 16. Nxf6+ Bxf6 17. Qe2 c5 18. dxc5 Rd2 19. Qe1 Bxb2 20. Ra2 Qc3 21. Bxb7 Rf8 22. c6 e5 23. c7 Bc8 24. Bd5 Bh3 25. Rxb2 Qxb2 26. Qc1 Qxc1 27. Rxc1 Rc8 28. Bg2 Bxg2 29. Kxg2 Rxc7 30. b4 e4 31. c5 Rd3 32. a4 Kf8 33. Rc4 f5 34. b5 Ke7 35. c6 Kd6 36. g4 g6 37. Rb4 Rd5 38. a5 Rc5 39. b6 axb6 40. axb6 Rc8 41. b7 Rb8 42. gxf5 Kc7 43. fxg6 Rxc6 44. g7 Rg6+ 45. Kf1 Rxg7 46. Rc4+ Kxb7 47. Rxe4 Kc8 48. Rc4+ Rc7 49. Re4 Rbb7 50. Kg2 Rb2 51. Rd4 Rb6 52. Rd1 Rg6+ 53. Kf1 Rf6 54. Re1 Rcf7 55. Re2 Rxf2+ 56. Rxf2 Re7 57. Re2 Rd7 58. Rc2+ Kd8 59. Rd2 Ke8 60. Ke1 Rf7 61. Rd3 Re7 62. Rd4 Rd7 White forfeits on time
0-1

31 Qe4-c4?? lines up with f4-bishop for fork 32 ... Rd8-d4 0-1
D Bojkov vs A Bennett, 2009 
(B22) Sicilian, Alapin, 32 moves, 0-1

36 Qf5-f4 lines up with White a4-bishop, 37 ... Rc8-c4 forks'em
Ivanchuk vs Aronian, 2008 
(C84) Ruy Lopez, Closed, 60 moves, 0-1

9 - Nf6xd5? lines up Black d5-knight, b7-bishop for 10 Qd4! pin
Karjakin vs F Bindrich, 2007 
(E17) Queen's Indian, 14 moves, 1-0

37 - Rxd4? wins pawn, lines up d4-rook with undefended a7-queen
Aronian vs Kramnik, 2007 
(D45) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, 43 moves, 1-0

26 RxNb4 Qa5!? pins White b4-rook to undefended White d2-queen
Nimzowitsch vs Tartakower, 1923  
(A04) Reti Opening, 48 moves, 1-0

52 ... Ne7-c6?? lines up knight with e6-king for a fatal SKEWER
Ivanchuk vs Eljanov, 2007 
(E15) Queen's Indian, 53 moves, 1-0

46 ... Kd6 lines up king with Black d2-rook for 47 Rd5+!! FORK
Kramnik vs Naiditsch, 2007 
(E04) Catalan, Open, 5.Nf3, 47 moves, 1-0

Loose Black c7-queen + White e5-knight => 27 Qh4-f4! DISCOVERY
Smyslov vs Pachman, 1947 
(C11) French, 33 moves, 1-0

39 ... Qa2-d2! exploits White d3-rook + d4-queen + g3-king
K B Richardson vs D Andreev, 1977 
(B11) Caro-Kann, Two Knights, 3...Bg4, 39 moves, 0-1

28 Nc5?? defended by White h5-queen but allows FORK 28 ... Rd5!
P Wyss vs Navara, 2007 
(B48) Sicilian, Taimanov Variation, 28 moves, 0-1

33 ... Rc8xQc4 Black c4-,f7-rooks lined up for fork 34 Bb7xd5
Kramnik vs Aronian, 2007 
(E15) Queen's Indian, 35 moves, 1-0

29 Nxg5? wins pawn but lines up g5-knight + e3-rook for skewer
S Danailov vs Kasparov, 1980 
(E92) King's Indian, 30 moves, 0-1

30 ... Rd2xf2?? lines up Black f2-rook, f5-knight for fatal pin
Kasparov vs Kramnik, 2001 
(C67) Ruy Lopez, 41 moves, 1-0

28 ... Be7xb4? allows pin against undefended b8-rook, b8-square
Kramnik vs Carlsen, 2007 
(E06) Catalan, Closed, 5.Nf3, 30 moves, 1-0

83 Kf8-g7? lines up g7-king, e5-queen for skewer 83 - Qh3-h8+!!
Kotronias vs Hebden, 2007 
(C99) Ruy Lopez, Closed, Chigorin, 12...cd, 86 moves, 1-0

32 ... Rc8xc6?? captures dangerous White passer but creates pin
Kasparov vs Adams, 1997 
(B04) Alekhine's Defense, Modern, 33 moves, 1-0

30 - Qd6? lines up queen, Black f6-knight for 31 Re1-e6! fork
Mamedyarov vs M Gurevich, 2007 
(D43) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, 31 moves, 1-0

39 ... Nf6xe4! lines up Black knight with undefended c6-queen
Anand vs Kasparov, 1997 
(B84) Sicilian, Scheveningen, 41 moves, 0-1

27 ... Nc7xb5? lined up with undefended Black b8-rook, pin
Morozevich vs Tkachiev, 2007 
(A06) Reti Opening, 29 moves, 1-0

35 ... Qd5-b3 aligns Black b3-queen + d3-rook for pin 36 Re5-e3
Mamedyarov vs Svidler, 2007 
(D30) Queen's Gambit Declined, 35 moves, 0-1

23 Rc1xc6 defends White d6-knight but makes alignment for pin
K Bulski vs Negi, 2007 
(C45) Scotch Game, 32 moves, 0-1

34 ... Qc7-d7? lines up Black queen, loose d8-bishop for skewer
Ivanchuk vs Karpov, 2007 
(D37) Queen's Gambit Declined, 38 moves, 1-0

20 ... Rb8-c8?? defends Black c6-knight but creates c-file pin
Kramnik vs Karpov, 1999 
(A30) English, Symmetrical, 31 moves, 1-0

I Sokolov vs Shirov, 1999 
(E97) King's Indian, 24 moves, 0-1

30 NxNc5 lines up White c5-knight,c2-queen for pin 30 - Qa8xBc8
Z Kozul vs Topalov, 2007 
(D02) Queen's Pawn Game, 41 moves, 0-1

29 b2-b4!! Bf8xb4?! wins pawn but creates horrible b-file pin
Carlsen vs Onischuk, 2007 
(D30) Queen's Gambit Declined, 39 moves, 1-0

8 - Ne4xNc3 9 Qd1-d2! pins Black c3-knight, undefended a5-queen
Karpov vs Kasparov, 1986 
(D82) Grunfeld, 4.Bf4, 32 moves, 1-0

35 Qd7-g4? defends g2 but lines up Black e4-queen for discovery
Eljanov vs Radjabov, 2008 
(E77) King's Indian, 33 moves, 0-1

86 ... Kd6-c5? lines up with Black c4-bishop for pin 87 Re3-c3!
A Timofeev vs E Inarkiev, 2008 
(C84) Ruy Lopez, Closed, 117 moves, 1-0

33 - QxBc4 allows 34 Rc1, skewering Black c4-queen, c8-rook
Leko vs Kramnik, 2007 
(C84) Ruy Lopez, Closed, 51 moves, 1/2-1/2

30 Re6-e8? a4-queen defends e8-rook, Black exploits alignment
Taimanov vs Fischer, 1971 
(E97) King's Indian, 42 moves, 0-1

74 .. Bh2-g3? lines up with b3-rook for remove guard 75 Rc2-c3!
Carlsen vs Shirov, 2008 
(C78) Ruy Lopez, 80 moves, 1-0

16 ... Re8xNe3 lines up Black e3-rook,g5-queen for pin 18 Qc1!!
Rubinstein vs Lasker, 1909  
(D30) Queen's Gambit Declined, 40 moves, 1-0

21 Bd3xe4 wins pawn but lines up with e2-queen for - Rd8-e8 pin
Abrosimov vs Tal, 1959 
(B43) Sicilian, Kan, 5.Nc3, 22 moves, 0-1

43 Qd2-a5? lines up with White a7-rook for skewer 43 ... Rc2-a2
Ftacnik vs Kramnik, 1992
(D47) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, 43 moves, 0-1

33 Qe2-d2?? does nothing about alignment of c6-rook,a4-bishop
E Inarkiev vs V Gashimov, 2008 
(A70) Benoni, Classical with 7.Nf3, 53 moves, 1/2-1/2

23 ... Qc7-d7?! self-pins Black e6-bishop allowing 24 Rf1-f7!
Radjabov vs Bu Xiangzhi, 2008 
(D10) Queen's Gambit Declined Slav, 41 moves, 1-0

14 - Qe8-e4? lines up with undefended b4-bishop for 15 Rd1-d4!!
Ivanchuk vs Anand, 2008 
(E55) Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3, Gligoric System, Bronstein Variation, 16 moves, 1-0

10 Qe2-c2! creates pin on Black e4-knight + undef f5-bishop
Ivanchuk vs Carlsen, 2008 
(C67) Ruy Lopez, 40 moves, 0-1

32 Ra1-a8 skewers Black b8-queen to lined up Black h8-rook
Carlsen vs Aronian, 2008 
(D47) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, 36 moves, 1-0

13 Bb3-d5! forks the undef Black e4-knight, undef a8-rook
Fischer vs Tal, 1959 
(B87) Sicilian, Fischer-Sozin with ...a6 and ...b5, 52 moves, 0-1

59 ... Kh7-g7?? lines up with undef g4-bishop for 60 Rf6-g6+
D Howell vs Nijboer, 2009 
(B22) Sicilian, Alapin, 60 moves, 1-0

29 Qd2? allows 29 - Bf4!, skewering White d2-queen and c1-rook
Hector vs P Carlsson, 2007 
(C02) French, Advance, 31 moves, 0-1

34 ... Ne8-f6?? lines up with d6-queen for skewer which wins
I Sokolov vs A Chibukhchian, 2009 
(D02) Queen's Pawn Game, 37 moves, 1-0

52 .. Na5-b7?? lines up with Black f7-king making c7-forking sq
Rubinstein vs Tarrasch, 1922 
(D34) Queen's Gambit Declined, Tarrasch, 53 moves, 1-0

14 Be3-c5!(!) based on the Black e5-knight + c7-queen + b8-rook
Karjakin vs Stellwagen, 2009 
(B48) Sicilian, Taimanov Variation, 52 moves, 1-0

46 games

 » View all game collections by notyetagm PGN Download
 » Search entire game collection library
 » Clone this game collection (copy it to your account)
 » FAQ: Help with Game Collections


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC