[what is this?]

[what is this?]

<< previous | page 6 of 6 | next >>

REMOVE THE FOUNDATION! "Remove the foundation" is an expression by GM Sergey Shipov used in the context of getting rid of a pawn that supports a piece, making that piece "unstable" on the square it resides on because it is no longer supported by a pawn, the best defender. 10 games, 1936-2012 Rook-Queen Attacks The coordination of Rook & Queen For Decisive Results 34 games, 1862-2007 Sac to create 6th-rank connected passed pawns See 31 ... ♖e2xc2! in the following playchess.com blitz game as a great example of this tactical idea. Position after 31 ... ♖e2xc2!: click for larger view Black sacrifices his all-powerful 7th-rank e2-rook for the measly White c2-pawn. Why? Because eliminating the White c2-pawn frees his connected advanced c- and d-pawns, transforming them into connected passed pawns on the 6th rank, which easily defeat the hapless White rook. [Event "3m + 0s, rated"] [Site "?"] [Date "2006.08.23"] [Round "?"] [White "Varvarka_87"] [Black "Ivanisevic Ivan"] [Result "0-1"] [WhiteElo "2665"] [BlackElo "2904"] [ECO "B30"] [PlyCount "64"] [EventDate "2006.08.23"] [EventType "blitz"] Ducats=0+- 5 1. e4 [%emt 0:00:00] 1... c5 [%emt 0:00:00] 2. Nc3 [%emt 0:00:01] 2... e6 [%emt 0:00:00] 3. Nf3 [%emt 0:00:01] 3... Nc6 [%emt 0:00:00] 4. Bb5 [%emt 0:00:00] 4... Nd4 [%emt 0:00:00] 5. Bc4 [%emt 0:00:01] 5... Nf6 [%emt 0:00:04] 6. O-O [%emt 0:00:05] 6... a6 [%emt 0:00:02] 7. e5 [%emt 0:00:09] 7... d5 [%emt 0:00:02] 8. exf6 [%emt 0:00:01] 8... dxc4 [%emt 0:00:01] 9. fxg7 [%emt 0:00:00] 9... Bxg7 [%emt 0:00:00] 10. d3 [%emt 0:00:00] 10... b5 [%emt 0:00:07] 11. Bg5 [%emt 0:00:25] 11... Qc7 [%emt 0:00:11] 12. Nxd4 [%emt 0:00:10] 12... cxd4 [%emt 0:00:02] 13. Ne4 [%emt 0:00:00] 13... Bb7 [%emt 0:00:03] 14. Qf3 [%emt 0:00:29] 14... Rg8 [%emt 0:00:03] 15. Bh4 [%emt 0:00:09] 15... Be5 [%emt 0:00:09] 16. Bg3 [%emt 0:00:10] 16... O-O-O [%emt 0:00:01] 17. Bxe5 [%emt 0:00:03] 17... Qxe5 [%emt 0:00:01] 18. Qxf7 [%emt 0:00:00] 18... Bxe4 [%emt 0:00:07] 19. dxe4 [%emt 0:00:00] 19... Qxe4 [%emt 0:00:02] 20. f3 [%emt 0:00:01] 20... Qe3+ [%emt 0:00:02] 21. Kh1 [%emt 0:00:01] 21... Qg5 [%emt 0:00:37] 22. Qxe6+ [%emt 0:00:05] 22... Kb7 [%emt 0:00:03] 23. Rg1 [%emt 0:00:00] 23... Rge8 [%emt 0:00:02] 24. Qh3 [%emt 0:00:04] 24... Re7 [%emt 0:00:01] 25. Rae1 [%emt 0:00:03] 25... Rde8 [%emt 0:00:01] 26. Rxe7+ [%emt 0:00:01] 26... Rxe7 [%emt 0:00:00] 27. b3 [%emt 0:00:01] 27... c3 [%emt 0:00:02] 28. Qg3 [%emt 0:00:05] 28... Qxg3 [%emt 0:00:04] 29. hxg3 [%emt 0:00:00] 29... Re2 [%emt 0:00:00] 30. Rc1 [%emt 0:00:03] 30... b4 [%emt 0:00:01] 31. Kg1 [%emt 0:00:01] 31... Rxc2 [%emt 0:00:03] 32. Rxc2 [%emt 0:00:02] 32... d3 Time (Lag: Av=1.56s, max=2.6s) . [%emt 0:00:01] 0-1 4 games, 1947-2007 Sacrifice a pawn to make knight central outpost 3 games, 1914-2007 Swinging rooks: incredibly dangerous to king A <ROOK> that can quickly join the action is often an essential prerequisite for a piece sacrifice, as pointed out by David LeMoir in his outstanding "Essential Piece Sacrifices". 5 games, 1978-2008 tactic: En Prise Compiled by ChessCoachClark under the name of En Prise Tactic. EN PRISE is another core chess tactic that should be in the toolbox of every student. En Prise is indeed another tactic that can be simple or sublime. In addition, this result may be either accidental or deliberate. When an accidental move, then the chess player is welcome to make the unencumbered capture. However, that capture may subject the aggressor to severe consequences when En Prise was deliberate and well-calculated! Checkmate may even be imminent. En Prise is a French term that has been taken to mean available for capture (Michael Goeller, PAWN BATTLE RULES AND STRATEGIES, p. 2.) Other meanings include: available for taking, hanging or hung, loose, gratis, in take, for free, etc. My own explanation of En Prise is that it refers to a chessman who has been left behind in jeopardy while some other direction has been taken. (A violation of the military principle to never leave a soldier behind.) I explain it as "Ice Cream!" to my youngest students, though, having never met a child who doesn't love that dessert! Let it be pronounced "ohne preez" as if varying bone and ice, which is what lead me to use the phrase "Ice cream!" in the raised voice of an interjection around children when they do it. Fittingly for both cases-- as a treat for the other side when an accident and as a treat for the planner when a strategic ploy. From Top 4 Basic Chess Tactics to Win Chess at ChessHints.com: An En Prise is the most common and simplistic tactic of chess. The piece that is En Prise is attacked but not defended, leading to the most simple move in chess — the capture of an undefended piece. For example, if a player leaves a Bishop undefended in the same column as a Rook, the Rook can take the En Prise Bishop. The concept of the Poisoned Pawn is not limited to the footman, but may be applied readily to all of the other chessmen other than the King himself. Here is where the conscious ploy of an En Prise temptation lurks. Another practical application of the En Prise tactic is to target unprotected chessmen on the other side of the board and calculate a set of moves that will culminate in the capture of one of more of them. Nothing wrong with being sneaky that way! Thanks to NOTYETAGM, for the games below where the Queen makes a Fork with Check to win an En Prise piece. Be sure to look at the preceding moves to see how the calculation proceeded in each case, though. The excellent chess writer Edward Winter has an article about En Prise that bears reading for background information and interesting details (http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...). This game collection is a project in progress. Games are listed in date order, not in order of importance. 14 games, 1895-2006 Tactic: RELOAD to exploit alignment <<<<RELOAD>: all it really means is that the defender is not <DEFENDING> a critical square -enough- times, enough times to keep -all- of the opponent's attacking pieces out.>>> <RELOADING> is the terminology used by Martin Weteschnik in his new book "Understanding Chess Tactics" to succinctly describe what I call the principle that <One Defender Cannot Keep Out Two Attackers>, especially a single pawn defender. --- Salov vs J de la Villa Garcia, 1987 Black has just played 14 ... ♕d5-d7. White to play: 15 ? click for larger view Notice the <ALIGNMENT/CONFIGURATION> of the Black heavy pieces and king: Black a8-rook, Black d7-queen, and Black e8-king. White would -love- to place his light-squared White f3-bishop safely on the c6-square, where it would <FORK> the Black a8-rook and d7-queen as well as <PIN> the Black d7-queen to the e8-king. In Weteschnik's outstanding "Understanding Chess Tactics", page 77,: <But here is a little trick for you: it helps a lot to be on the lookout for squares you wish to place your pieces on, even if your wish doesn't seem possible. The dream square might become reality by moving another(!) piece to that square first, paving the way for you to occupy it once more; this time with the piece you initially envisioned for that glorious square.> So to occupy the c6-square with the White f3-bishop, Salov (White) first occupies this square with his White d4-knight: 15 ♘d4-c6!! (Burgess). Position after 15 ♘d4-c6!! click for larger view 15 ♘d4-c6!! is a perfect example of the <RELOADER> concept. --- From an ICC bullet game by GM Harikrishna: With 25 ♘f3! White sets a devilish tactical trap. The trap is sprung after 25 ... ♗g4? 26 ♕x♖f7!, winning material based upon the <DOUBLE KNIGHT FORK> <RELOADER> on the g5-square. [Event "ICC 1 0 u"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2008.06.25"] [Round "-"] [White "tomcruise"] [Black "sweetcricket"] [Result "1-0"] [ICCResult "Black resigns"] [WhiteElo "2604"] [BlackElo "1546"] [Opening "English, Tröger defense"] [ECO "A25"] [NIC "EO.20"] [Time "13:10:29"] [TimeControl "60+0"] 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 d6 4. Bg2 Be6 5. d3 g6 6. Nf3 Bg7 7. O-O h6 8. Rb1 Qd7 9. b4 a6 10. Re1 Nf6 11. a4 O-O 12. b5 axb5 13. axb5 Nd8 14. Qb3 Nh5 15. Ba3 f5 16. Ra1 f4 17. Nd2 fxg3 18. hxg3 Bh3 19. Bh1 Qf5 20. Nce4 Kh7 21. c5 dxc5 22. Bxc5 Rf7 23. Rxa8 Ne6 24. Be3 Nef4 25. Nf3 Bg4 26. Qxf7 Qxf7 27. Nfg5+ 1-0 --- Radjabov vs Topalov, 2008 Position after 18 ... ♘g6xe5! click for larger view Topalov's outstanding 18 ... ♘g6xe5! gets my vote as the most instructive <RELOADER> of all-time, since it does not involve either a <KNIGHT FORK> or a square lined up with the enemy king, as most <RELOADERS> do. Black simply wants to get his h5-rook onto the e5-square so that he can <SKEWER> White's two <UNDEFENDED> minor pieces (e4-♘,e3-♗) ehich are conveniently already lined up on the e-file. After 19 f4x♘e5? ♖h5xe5 Black regains his sacrificed knight with the <ROOK SKEWER> of the <UNDEFENDED> White e4-knight and <UNDEFENDED> White e3-bishop, winning two pawns for nothing. (VAR) Position after 19 f4x♘e5? ♖h5xe5 click for larger view What makes this tactical blow even more impressive is that the super-tactician Radjabov overlooked it. Simply -amazing- tactical acuity by Topalov. --- click for larger view Mamedyarov's great <RELOADER> 30 ♖e1xe6!! in his game against Nielsen is based on the simple tactical point that the Black f7-pawn <DEFENDS> the e6-square -only- -one- time, and thus cannot keep the White c4-bishop, d4-knight, and e1-rook out of this square. click for larger view --- 32 ♕h4-f6+! forces 32 ... ♕b6x♕f6 33 e5xf6, <RELOADING> on the f6-square to <REINFORCE> the <PIN> on the <COMPLETELY PINNED> Black g7-rook with a pawn, winning a whole ♖ instead of ♖ for ♗. <RELOAD>: one defender (Black b6-queen) cannot keep out two attackers (White e5-pawn, White h4-queen). The f6-reloading square is lined up in a <PAWN ATTACKING> alignment (f6-g7) with the <COMPLETELY PINNED> Black g7-rook. click for larger view click for larger view click for larger view click for larger view [Event "ICC 3 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2008.01.05"] [Round "-"] [White "ledope"] [Black "weicp"] [Result "*"] [ICCResult "Black resigns"] [WhiteElo "3223"] [BlackElo "3122"] [Opening "French: Winawer, advance, poisoned pawn variation"] [ECO "C18"] [NIC "FR.11"] [Time "02:53:43"] [TimeControl "180+0"] 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 c5 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 Ne7 7. Qg4 O-O 8. Bd3 Nbc6 9. Bg5 Qa5 10. Ne2 Ng6 11. O-O c4 12. Bxg6 fxg6 13. a4 Bd7 14. h4 Rf7 15. f3 Qc7 16. Kf2 Rf5 17. Rh1 Be8 18. Ke1 Qa5 19. Kd2 Rc8 20. Qh3 a6 21. g4 Rf8 22. h5 gxh5 23. gxh5 Rf5 24. Rhg1 Kf8 25. Qg4 Rc7 26. Ng3 h6 27. Be3 Rcf7 28. Nxf5 exf5 29. Qh4 Nd8 30. Rxg7 Rxg7 31. Bxh6 Qb6 32. Qf6+ Qxf6 33. exf6 18 ... Qd6-d5?? walks into the <DOUBLE KNIGHT FORK (RELOADER)> 19 Ng4-f6+!, 20 Ne4-f6+, 21 Nf6xQd5 click for larger view click for larger view click for larger view click for larger view click for larger view [Event "ICC 3 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2007.12.29"] [Round "-"] [White "dinasor"] [Black "UptownExpress"] [Result "1-0"] [ICCResult "Black resigns"] [WhiteElo "2534"] [BlackElo "2406"] [Opening "Sicilian defense"] [ECO "B40"] [NIC "SI.43"] [Time "01:04:09"] [TimeControl "180+0"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bb5+ Nc6 6. O-O Be7 7. Ne5 Bd7 8. Bxc6 Bxc6 9. Qg4 Bf6 10. Re1 Ne7 11. d3 O-O 12. Qh3 Ng6 13. Ng4 Bg5 14. g3 Bxc1 15. Raxc1 Re8 16. Qh5 Qd6 17. f4 d4 18. Ne4 Qd5 19. Ngf6+ gxf6 20. Nxf6+ Kg7 21. Nxd5 Bxd5 22. Qxd5 Re3 23. Rxe3 Nxf4 24. gxf4 Rd8 25. Qxd8 f5 1-0 Here is a brilliant reloader example, from an ICC 1 0. click for larger view Black was just blundered with 47 ... ♔g7?. The White queen now has a forking square on f6, where she double attacks the undefended Black e7-rook and the Black g7-king. Although this forking square has only two defenders versus three White attackers, it appears to be safe for Black because the White queen is the first attacker. But after 48 ♕f6+!, anyway, Black has a big problem. If he tries to save his e7-rook by defending it with 48 ... ♔f8?, then he drops his g6-rook to the discovered pin 49 ♕xg6!. So Black must play 48 ... ♖xg6. Now White -reloads- on the f6-square with his g5-pawn by playing 49 gxf6+, and the pawn forks the Black e7-rook and g7-king just like the queen did! click for larger view This type of reloading is called "reloading with a similarly functioning piece". The tactical point was that f6 was a forking square for both the White f5-queen and the White g5-pawn, so reloading with the g5-pawn fully compensated for the loss of the White queen on this square. After 49 ... ♔f8 50 fxe7+ ♔xe7 51 ♖a4 a6 52 ♖b4 White has a technically won endgame. click for larger view Reloading on the f6-square has allowed White to trade ♕♙ for ♖♖, killing off any Black hopes of counterplay and leaving Black with a simplified lost position. In the actual bullet game White blundered and "reloaded" with his f4-rook (49 ♖xf6? instead of 49 gxf6), which did -not- compensate for the loss of the White queen on f6 because the f6-rook does not fork the Black king and rook like the f6-pawn does! [Event "ICC 1 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2006.06.27"] [Round "-"] [White "MasterSierra"] [Black "D-Fernandez"] [Result "0-1"] [WhiteElo "2094"] [BlackElo "2528"] [ICCResult "White forfeits on time"] [Opening "Sicilian"] [ECO "B50"] [NIC "SI.01"] [Time "02:17:37"] [TimeControl "60+0"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Qe2 Nc6 5. O-O Bg4 6. c3 e6 7. h3 Bh5 8. Bb5 Be7 9. d3 O-O 10. Bg5 Ne5 11. Nbd2 h6 12. Bh4 g5 13. Bg3 Ng6 14. Qe3 Nd7 15. Bxd7 Qxd7 16. d4 f5 17. exf5 exf5 18. dxc5 f4 19. Qd3 fxg3 20. fxg3 g4 21. hxg4 Qxg4 22. cxd6 Bg5 23. Nxg5 Qxg5 24. Ne4 Qe5 25. Rae1 Rad8 26. Nf6+ Rxf6 27. Rxe5 Nxe5 28. Qd5+ Bf7 29. Qxe5 Rfxd6 30. Qe7 R6d7 31. Qe5 Re8 32. Qf4 Rde7 33. Qxh6 Re6 34. Qg5+ Rg6 35. Qf5 Re7 36. Rf4 Re1+ 37. Kf2 Ree6 38. g4 Re7 39. g5 Kg7 40. g4 Kg8 41. Kg3 Rge6 42. g6 Rxg6 43. g5 Rge6 44. Kh4 Re3 45. Qf6 R3e6 46. Qf5 Rg6 47. Kg3 Kg7 48. Qf6+ Rxf6 49. Rxf6 Kf8 50. Kf4 Re6 51. Rxe6 Bxe6 52. Ke5 Bxa2 White forfeits on time 0-1 79 games, 1838-2010 tactics: 4 pieces in a row: clearance for discov _THREE_ pieces in a row make a discovery chain. So if there are _FOUR_ pieces in a row, we need to move one of our pieces out of the way with a <GAIN OF TIME (CLEARANCE)> so that we will have the requisite _THREE_ pieces in a row for the <DISCOVERED ATTACK>. 3 games, 2007-2010 TACTICS: ALIGNMENTS CREATE THREATENED SQUARES! Your pieces are -NOT- safe if they are in <ALIGNMENTS/CONFIGURATIONS>: files, diagonals, ranks, pawn forks, knight forks, king forks. Your pieces are <LINED UP>, that is, your pieces are in an <ALIGNMENT>, if an enemy piece can exploit the squares on which those pieces reside. And then it's a simple matter of <ALIGNMENTS CREATE THREATENED SQUARES>. In the Greenfeld-Daly Irish Ch. (9) 2008 game, the White c2-rook and White f3-queen are lined up via the e4-square because the light-squared Black b7-bishop on that e4-square can exploit the fact that the White rook and queen are on the c2- and f3-squares, respectively. And in Adams-Bareev Corus 2004, the Black c8-rook and Black g8-king are <LINED UP/MAKE AN ALIGNMENT> because a White bishop on the e6-square can attack both of those Black pieces on the squares on which they reside (c8 and g8) (♖e1xe6! 1-0 <reload>). Of these <ALIGNMENTS/CONFIGURATIONS> the most dangerous is the <KNIGHT FORK ALIGNMENT> when an enemy knight is located nearby or is centralized. See the games Topalov vs Nisipeanu, 2007 (White d3-queen + White g2-king with Black d5-,e6-knights) and A Aleksandrov vs Adams, 2002 (White h3-queen + h1-king with Black g4-knight) for examples of this particular <ALIGNMENT/CONFIGURATION>. 53 games, 1909-2017 Tactics: windmill In chess, a windmill is a tactic in which a combination of discovered checks and regular checks, usually by a rook and a bishop, can win massive amounts of material. This tactic is also sometimes referred to as a see-saw. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windm... 26 games, 1851-2017 tactics: Zwischenzug A forcing move that interrupts a capturing / recapturing sequence. 43 games, 1834-2016 Tal - The Safe Cracker 11 games, 1949-1988 THE POWERFUL PASSED PAWNS Kramnik vs Nunn, 1992 click for larger view <PASSED PAWNS CREATE AMAZING TACTICAL OPPORTUNITIES> [Event "ICC 3 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2007.09.23"] [Round "-"] [White "G-Milos"] [Black "AKhruschiov"] [Result "0-1"] [ICCResult "White resigns"] [WhiteElo "2824"] [BlackElo "2865"] [Opening "Queen's Indian: 4.g3"] [ECO "E15"] [NIC "QI.02"] [Time "13:49:19"] [TimeControl "180+0"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Bb4+ 5. Bd2 Qe7 6. Bg2 Ba6 7. Ne5 c6 8. O-O Bxd2 9. Nxd2 O-O 10. Qc2 d5 11. a4 Rc8 12. a5 Nbd7 13. axb6 axb6 14. Nxd7 Qxd7 15. e3 c5 16. dxc5 bxc5 17. Rfd1 Qb7 18. cxd5 exd5 19. e4 d4 20. e5 Nd5 21. Nb3 d3 22. Rxd3 Bxd3 23. Qxd3 Rxa1+ 24. Nxa1 Qxb2 25. Qxd5 Qxa1+ 26. Bf1 Qd4 27. Qb7 Re8 28. e6 fxe6 29. Qa6 Rf8 30. Qxe6+ Kh8 31. Qe2 c4 32. Kg2 c3 33. Qc2 Qxf2+ 0-1 Here with 33 ... ♕d4xf2+! Black gives up ♖ for ♙ to liquidate forces in order to promote his passed c3-pawn. The result: Black is ahead ♕ for ♗. 37 games, 1945-2013 The Spassky Battery A little-known series of books by Charushin highlights a number of attacking motifs typically discovered and used by a specific player: Alekhine's Block, The Steeplechase, Combination Cross, Mitrofanov's Deflection and Lasker's Combination. These motifs tend to be at the nexus of tactics and strategy. They are not as simple as a pin or double attack; relying more on specific and enduring positional characteristics. In going over Spassky's games some years back I discovered what I call the Spassky Battery. The Spassky Battery involves having two or (usually) three or four pieces occupying the central squares for one, two or three moves. Such a setup radiates a tremendous and often conclusive amount of force on the opponents position. Thus, the Spassky Battery is - like a pin, double fork or passed pawn - something to strive for in certain positions. The Primary SB squares are of course e4, d4, e5, d5. The Secondary squares are e3, d3, e6, d6. The Tertiary SB squares are c4, c5, f4, f5. Divisions may also be made based on whether the central squares are occupied with minor or major pieces. For a true Spassky Battery at least one piece must be on a Primary square. 10 games, 1900-2014 THE UNDERRATED REMOVAL OF THE GUARD -- HEISMAN http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heism... HEISMAN: <The logic “a guarded piece is not really guarded if the guard can be taken or attacked” is not emphasized in most beginner’s books.> <<<<EPHIPHANY>>>: if your <DEFENDER> can be attacked, then it is *not* a <DEFENDER> but rather it is a <TARGET> for the enemy to attack! That is what NM Dan Heisman is saying: <<<it's not a <DEFENDER>, it's a <TARGET>>>>>! --- http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heism... HEISMAN: <The logic “a guarded piece is not really guarded if the guard can be taken or attacked” is not emphasized in most beginner’s books.> --- 7 ... ? click for larger view HOLY CRIMINY!! You don't say "Gee, I could play ... QxN+ and ... QxR but I can't because of the White b2-pawn defender. Nice idea. Too bad I cannot play it". Instead you say "I am going to <DESTROY> that White b2-pawn <DEFENDER>, <REMOVING THE GUARD>, with 7 ... e7-e5! and 8 ... Bf8-a3!" 7 ... e7-e5! <line clearance: a3-f8> click for larger view 8 ... ♗f8-a3! <remove guard: c3> click for larger view [Event "USCL Los Angeles vs Manhattan"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2010.09.27"] [Round "6"] [White "Vovsha, Eli"] [Black "Kretchetov, Alexandre"] [Result "0-1"] [WhiteElo "2539"] [BlackElo "2376"] [TimeControl "3600+30"] [ECO "D01"] [PlyCount "62"] [EventDate "2010.??.??"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. e3 c6 5. Qf3 Qa5 6. Bxf6 Nxf6 7. Bd3 e5 8. dxe5 Ba3 9. exf6 Bxb2 10. fxg7 Bxc3+ 11. Kf1 Bxg7 12. Rd1 Be6 13. Qg3 Bf6 14. Qf4 Be7 15. Nf3 O-O-O 16. Nd4 Bd6 17. Qf6 Qc3 18. Bf5 Rhe8 19. Qxf7 Bxf5 20. Qxf5+ Kb8 21. Qxh7 Re4 22. Rb1 Bc7 23. h4 Rf8 24. Rh3 Qc4+ 25. Kg1 Qxa2 26. Nxc6+ Kc8 27. Nxa7+ Qxa7 28. Qg7 Ree8 29. Ra1 Qb6 30. h5 Kb8 31. h6 --- Attack the defender with a non-attacker from a square not in the defensive complex and capture (illusory protection), pin (overwork), dominate (drive it away) or double attack this defender. --- Kramnik vs Shirov, 2010 25 ? click for larger view (VARIATION) 25 ♖d1-e1!+- click for larger view Game Collection: THE UNDERRATED REMOVAL OF THE GUARD -- HEISMAN 25 Rd1-e1! attacks Black e4-knight defender of d6-forking sq --- Q L Le vs Ponomariov, 2010 20 ? click for larger view 20 ♗g3-d6! click for larger view Game Collection: THE UNDERRATED REMOVAL OF THE GUARD -- HEISMAN 20 Bg3-d6! attacks Black e7-queen defender of loose b7-bishop --- Carlsen vs Grischuk, 2010 39 ? click for larger view 39 ♘g3-f5! click for larger view Game Collection: THE UNDERRATED REMOVAL OF THE GUARD -- HEISMAN 39 Ng3-f5! attacks the Black h6-knight defender of f7 --- Kasimdzhanov vs Kamsky GRENKE Rapid World Championship MAINZ, GERMANY 2010 70 ♖e7-e5?? click for larger view 70 ... ♘b3-c1! 0-1 click for larger view Game Collection: THE UNDERRATED REMOVAL OF THE GUARD -- HEISMAN 70 ... Nb3-c1! attacks White d3-knight defender of loose e5-rook --- I saw the following incredible sequence of two consecutive bullet games on ICC the other day: a GM whose handle is <Sauerkraut> lost two games in a row to the exact same tactic! In both games he resigned after missing the tactic <REMOVE THE GUARD/ILLUSORY PROTECTION>. Not only was it <REMOVE THE GUARD>, it was the exact same <REMOVE THE GUARD>: the capture of a bishop which was defending a royal knight fork square and did not have <REAL PROTECTION>. Position after 25 ... ♗e7-f6?? click for larger view Here Black (Sauerkraut) has just blundered with 25 ... ♗e7-f6??. Now after 26 ♗c3x♗f6! click for larger view Black has lost a piece and resigned. Black cannot recapture with 26 ... ♘d7x♗f6?? or 26 ... g7x♗f6?? because 26 ♗c3x♗f6! <DESTROYED THE DEFENDER> (Black f6-bishop) which was <DEFENDING> the e7-royal forking square of the White f5-knight. The Black f6-bishop performed the vital defensive task of <DEFENDING> the e7-square from f6, and neither the Black d7-knight nor the Black g7-pawn can perform that task of <DEFENDING> the e7-square from f6 like the Black f6-bishop did (<ILLUSORY PROTECTION/REMOVE THE GUARD>). Then in the -very- -next- -game-, <Sauerkraut>'s game reach the following position. Position after 26 a2-a4?? click for larger view Here White (Sauerkraut) has just blundered with 26 a2-a4??. Now after 26 ... ♘d3x♗e1! click for larger view White has lost a piece and resigned. White cannot recapture with 27 ♖g1x♘e1?? because 26 ... ♘d3x♗e1! <DESTROYED THE DEFENDER> (White e1-bishop) which was <DEFENDING> the d2-royal forking square of the Black c4-knight. The White e1-bishop performed the vital defensive task of <DEFENDING> the d2-square from e1, and the White g1-rook cannot perform that task of <DEFENDING> the d2-square from e1 like the White d2-bishop did (<ILLUSORY PROTECTION/REMOVE THE GUARD>). Yes, I know that these are two bullet (1 0) games on ICC, but still. It was simply -astonishing- to see a GM lose two games in a row to -exactly- the same tactic: the capture of a bishop (Black f6-bishop, White e1-bishop) which was defending a royal knight fork square (e7-square, d2-square) and had only <ILLUSORY PROTECTION> (Black d7-knight, Black g7-pawn, White g1-rook). <CAPTURING REMOVES THE GUARD!, CAPTURING DESTROYS A DEFENDER!> [Event "ICC 1 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2008.03.16"] [Round "-"] [White "Nichega"] [Black "Sauerkraut"] [Result "1-0"] [ICCResult "Black resigns"] [WhiteElo "2362"] [BlackElo "2154"] [Opening "English: Neo-Catalan accepted"] [ECO "A13"] [NIC "RE.10"] [Time "04:14:14"] [TimeControl "60+0"] 1. c4 Nf6 2. g3 e6 3. Bg2 d5 4. Nf3 dxc4 5. O-O a6 6. Ne5 Nbd7 7. Nxc4 Be7 8. d4 O-O 9. Nc3 Rb8 10. Bf4 Nb6 11. Ne5 Nbd5 12. Bd2 Nd7 13. Nd3 N7f6 14. e4 Nxc3 15. Bxc3 b6 16. Qe2 Bb7 17. Rfd1 a5 18. Ne5 Nd7 19. Nc4 Ba6 20. b3 Qc8 21. Qc2 Rd8 22. Ne3 Bb7 23. Rac1 c5 24. d5 exd5 25. Nf5 Bf6 26. Bxf6 1-0 [Event "ICC 1 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2008.03.16"] [Round "-"] [White "Sauerkraut"] [Black "pugak"] [Result "0-1"] [ICCResult "White resigns"] [WhiteElo "2134"] [BlackElo "2094"] [Opening "Mieses opening"] [ECO "A00"] [NIC "VO.13"] [Time "04:15:39"] [TimeControl "60+0"] 1. d3 Nf6 2. Nd2 d5 3. Ngf3 c6 4. g3 Bh3 5. Bg2 Bxg2 6. Rg1 Bxf3 7. Nxf3 e6 8. Bf4 Nbd7 9. Bd2 Bc5 10. c3 Qe7 11. Qc2 Bd6 12. d4 e5 13. dxe5 Nxe5 14. Nd4 g6 15. O-O-O O-O-O 16. h3 Nc4 17. Be1 Ne4 18. e3 f5 19. b3 Ba3+ 20. Kb1 Nb2 21. Rc1 Nc5 22. b4 Ncd3 23. Qb3 Nxc1 24. Qxa3 Ncd3 25. Qb3 Nc4 26. a4 Nxe1 0-1 --- 12 ... Bb4xc3?? 13 Nd4-b3! <DRIVES OFF> Black a5-queen defender of loose Black c3-bishop, winning ♗ for ♙. click for larger view click for larger view click for larger view [Event "ICC 3 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2007.12.27"] [Round "-"] [White "camelovich"] [Black "unkavalo"] [Result "1-0"] [ICCResult "Black forfeits on time"] [WhiteElo "3009"] [BlackElo "2771"] [Opening "Caro-Kann: anti-Caro-Kann defense"] [ECO "B10"] [NIC "CK.01"] [Time "23:08:20"] [TimeControl "180+0"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 e5 3. Nf3 Qa5 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. d4 Bb4 6. Bd2 exd4 7. Nxd4 O-O 8. Bd3 d5 9. cxd5 cxd5 10. e5 Ne4 11. O-O Nxc3 12. bxc3 Bxc3 13. Nb3 Bxd2 14. Nxa5 Bxa5 15. f4 Nc6 16. Rb1 g6 17. Kh1 Bb6 18. Rb5 Nd4 19. Rxd5 Nf5 20. Bxf5 Bxf5 21. h3 Rfd8 22. Qf3 Rxd5 23. Qxd5 Rd8 24. Qxb7 Rd2 25. a4 Be6 26. f5 Bd5 27. Qc8+ Kg7 28. f6+ Kh6 29. Rg1 Bxg1 30. Kxg1 Rxg2+ 31. Kf1 Rd2 32. Qf8+ Kg5 33. Qc5 Kf4 34. Qb4+ Ke3 35. Qc5+ Ke4 36. Qxa7 1-0 154 games, 1900-2016 Type I knight fork Game Collection: KCOD - Knights Create Overloaded Defenders 5 games, 1955-2009 Type II knight fork <TYPE II>: two tactical targets but the tactical base is defended, aka Game Collection: ACTS: ALIGNMENTS CREATE THREATENED SQUARES! 7 games, 1896-2009 Weakness is not weakness unless exploitable 6 games, 1958-2009 When a bishop is better than a knight 10 games, 1901-1978 When you don't have a clear target, GAIN SPACE! LazyPawn(IM) kibitzes: when you don't have a clear target, just gain space, that's the rule 2 games, 1979-2003

<< previous | page 6 of 6 | next >>