Kingside attack Chess Puzzles

Background reading

Chess strategy

Chess strategy is the aspect of chess play concerned with evaluation of chess positions and setting goals and long-term plans for future play. While evaluating a position strategically, a player must take into account such factors as the relative value of the pieces on the board, pawn structure, king safety, position of pieces, and control of key squares and groups of squares (e.g. diagonals and open files). Chess strategy is distinguished from chess tactics, which is the aspect of play concerned with move-by-move threats and defenses. Some authors distinguish static strategic imbalances (e.g. having more valuable pieces or better pawn structure), which tend to persist for many moves, from dynamic imbalances (such as one player having an advantage in piece development), which are temporary. Static imbalances—such as superior pawn structure or the bishop pair—tend to persist and shape long‑term plans, while dynamic imbalances, including a lead in development or active piece placement, often require immediate action before the advantage disappears. This distinction affects the immediacy with which a sought-after plan should take effect. Until players reach Master-level chess skill, chess tactics tend to ultimately decide the outcomes of games more often than strategy. Many chess coaches thus emphasize the study of tactics as the most efficient way to improve one's results in serious chess play. The most basic way to evaluate one's position is to count the total value of pieces on both sides. The point values used for this purpose are based on experience. Usually pawns are considered to be worth one point, knights and bishops three points each, rooks five points, and queens nine points. The fighting value of the king in the endgame is approximately four points. These basic values are modified by other factors such as the position of the pieces (e.g. advanced pawns are usually more valuable than those on their starting squares), coordination between pieces (e.g. a bishop pair usually coordinates better than a bishop plus a knight), and the type of position (knights are generally better in closed positions with many pawns, while bishops are more powerful in open positions). Another important factor in the evaluation of chess positions is the pawn structure or pawn skeleton. Since pawns are the most immobile and least valuable of the pieces, the pawn structure is relatively static and largely determines the strategic nature of the position. Weaknesses in the pawn structure, such as isolated, doubled, or backward pawns and holes, once created, are usually permanent. Care must therefore be taken to avoid them unless they are compensated by another valuable asset, such as the possibility to develop an attack.

Basic concepts of board evaluation

A material advantage applies both strategically and tactically. Generally more pieces or an aggregate of more powerful pieces means greater chances of winning. A fundamental strategic and tactical rule is to capture opponent pieces while preserving one's own. Bishops and knights are called minor pieces. A knight is about as valuable as a bishop, but less valuable than a rook. Rooks and the queen are called major pieces. Bishops are usually considered slightly better than knights in open positions, such as toward the end of the game when many of the pieces have been captured, whereas knights have an advantage in closed positions. Having two bishops (the bishop pair) is a particularly powerful weapon, especially if the opposing player lacks one or both of their bishops. Three pawns are likely to be more useful than a knight in the endgame, but in the middlegame, a knight is often more powerful. Two minor pieces are stronger than a single rook, and two rooks are slightly stronger than a queen. The bishop on squares of the same color as the opponent's king is slightly more valuable in the opening as it can attack the vulnerable square f7 (for White) or f2 (for Black). A rook is more valuable when doubled with another rook or queen; consequently, doubled rooks are worth more than two unconnected rooks. One commonly used simple scoring system is:: Under a system like this, giving up a knight or bishop to win a rook ("winning the exchange") is advantageous and is worth about two pawns. This ignores complications such as the current position and freedom of the pieces involved, but it is a good starting point. In an open position, bishops are more valuable than knights (a bishop pair can easily be worth seven points or more in some situations); conversely, in a closed position, bishops are less valuable than knights. A knight in the center of the board that cannot be taken, however, is known as a knight outpost and threatens several fork instances. In such a case, a knight is worth far more than a bishop. Also, many pieces have a partner. By doubling up two knights, two rooks, rook and queen, or bishop and queen, the pieces can get stronger than the sum of the individual pieces alone. When a piece loses its partner, its value slightly decreases. The king is priceless since its capture results in the defeat of that player and ends that game. However, especially in the endgame, the king can also be a fighting piece, and is sometimes given a fighting value of three-and-a-half points.

Space

Other things being equal, the side that controls more space on the board has an advantage. More space means more options, which can be exploited both tactically and strategically. A player who has all pieces developed and no tactical tricks or promising long-term plan should try to find a move that enlarges their influence, particularly in the center. In some openings, however, one player accepts less space for a time, to set up a counterattack in the middlegame. This is one of the concepts behind hypermodern play. The easiest way to gain space is to push the pawn skeleton forward. One must be careful not to over stretch, however. If the opponent succeeds in getting a protected piece behind enemy lines, this piece can become such a serious problem that a piece with a higher value might have to be exchanged for it. Larry Evans gives a method of evaluating space. The method (for each side) is to count the number of squares attacked or occupied on the opponent's side of the board. In this position from the Nimzo-Indian Defense (see diagram), Black attacks four squares on White's side of the board (d4, e4, f4, and g4). White attacks seven squares on Black's side of the board (b5, c6, e6, f5, g5, and h6 – counting b5 twice) and occupies one square (d5). White has a space advantage of eight to four and Black is cramped. Overextending the pawn structure can create long‑term weaknesses, especially if advanced pawns cannot be adequately supported by pieces. Many strategic errors arise when a player gains space but leaves behind weak squares or targets that the opponent can later exploit.

Control of the center

The strategy consists of placing pieces so that they attack the central four squares of the board. A piece being placed on a central square, however, does not necessarily mean it controls the center; e.g., a knight on a central square does not attack any central squares. Conversely, a piece does not have to be on a central square to control the center. For example, the bishop can control the center from afar. Control of the center is generally considered important because tactical battles often take place around the central squares, from where pieces can access most of the board. Center control allows more movement and more possibility for attack and defense. Chess openings try to control the center while developing pieces. Hypermodern openings are those that control the center with pieces from afar (usually the side, such as with a fianchetto); the older Classical (or Modern) openings control it with pawns.

Initiative

The initiative belongs to the player who can make threats that cannot be ignored, such as checking the opponent's king. They thus put their opponent in the position of having to use their turns responding to threats rather than making their own, hindering the development of their pieces. The player with the initiative is generally attacking and the other player is generally defending.

Defending pieces

It is important to defend one's pieces even if they are not directly threatened. This helps stop possible future campaigns from the opponent. If a defender must be added at a later time, this may cost a tempo or even be impossible due to a fork or discovered attack. The approach of always defending one's pieces has an antecedent in the theory of Aron Nimzowitsch who referred to it as "overprotection." Similarly, if one spots undefended enemy pieces, one should immediately take advantage of those pieces' weakness. Even a defended piece can be vulnerable. If the defending piece is also defending something else, it is called an overworked piece, and may not be able to fulfill its task. When there is more than one attacking piece, the number of defenders must also be increased, and their values taken into account. In addition to defending pieces, it is also often necessary to defend key squares, open files, and the back rank. These situations can easily occur if the pawn structure is weak.