Q versus Q almost always means OVERLOADED

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

Kibitzing

Q versus Q almost always means OVERLOADED
Compiled by Baby Hawk

I realized the basic tactial principle

<<<Q versus Q almost always means OVERLOADED>>>

by solving several <FORK-OVERLOAD TRICKS> and then seeing Nicholas-Bisquier MCC 2008 in which the <LOOSE> Black c5-queen after ... ♕e7-c5?? dropped off to ♘f5xg7+! as the Black f8-bishop was now <OVERLOADED>, having to <DEFEND> both the Black c5-queen *and* the g7-checking square.

24 ... Re8-e1+! White d1-rook defends d4-queen from ... Qc5xQd4
Aronian vs Svidler, 2006
(D80) Grunfeld, 24 moves, 0-1
29 ... Ra8-c8! White e7-knight defends d5-queen from .. Qd6xQd5
Onischuk vs Shirov, 2008
(D27) Queen's Gambit Accepted, Classical, 29 moves, 0-1
28 ... Re2-e1+! White d1-rook defends d4-queen from ... Qf6xQd4
S Maus vs Tal, 1990
(A30) English, Symmetrical, 28 moves, 0-1
3 games

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