Chess lesson : square strategy theory - basic principles

Chess lesson : square strategy theory - basic principles

MSK Chess

11 лет назад

49,880 Просмотров

Ссылки и html тэги не поддерживаются


Комментарии:

@billyzip4627
@billyzip4627 - 20.03.2013 08:18

Someone has to say this, your chess videos are excellent. Thanks Robbie. Keep up the great videos.

Ответить
@MSKChess
@MSKChess - 20.03.2013 12:25

Hi Billy, thanks so much, if there are any subjects that you would like covered, please let me know - kind regards Robbie.

Ответить
@012345Gringo
@012345Gringo - 20.03.2013 12:29

At 12:11 I would have considered Bg5 challenging the knight. But now I can understand that the knight is influencing the light squares hence leaving it there is better for our dark squares strategy. Also we're employing an e4 strategy towards d5 leading us into 'occupying' the dark squares in that complex instead of taking bishop on the right side. Thank you Robbie. It's a strange delight in being able to think on one's own!

Ответить
@MSKChess
@MSKChess - 20.03.2013 12:41

Hi Gringo, yes, you are absolutely correct, the knight is influencing the light squares and its therfore better to leave it unchallenged. I must admit Gringo that the idea of occupying the squares of one colour and attacking those of the opposite colour gets confusing at times. We shall no doubt make some mistakes in errors of judgement but its a small price to pay to be intellectually independent and the more we practice the easier it will become - regards Robbie.

Ответить
@012345Gringo
@012345Gringo - 21.03.2013 06:30

It's strange to see certain exchanges and non exchanges. I had generally believed Rook to be more valuable than Bishop (Rook = 5; Bishop = 3) but at 15:58 we don't exchange our Bishop for enemy Rook. Now understand why: It's because of the value of the dark square bishop in continuing with our occupation on dark squares and exchanges on light squares. Magical I say!

Ответить
@MSKChess
@MSKChess - 21.03.2013 13:45

Actually Gringo you are absolutely correct, it was my mistake, rook should have went to g8 instead of f8, sorry for that - regards Robbie.

Ответить
@012345Gringo
@012345Gringo - 21.03.2013 16:42

Just for clarification. The rook move to f8 was faulty but we still don't exchange because our objective is the occupation of dark squares and not exchange? Looking at it differently could Black's rook move to f8 considered ingenious for enticing us into exchanging our strong bishop for a rook and a chance to weaken our control over dark squares?

Ответить
@012345Gringo
@012345Gringo - 22.03.2013 01:57

This is a great video. The more I watch the better I understand.

Ответить
@MSKChess
@MSKChess - 22.03.2013 02:17

Its a really interesting idea Gringo, sometimes depending upon the dynamics a bishop is better than a rook, especially if its powerful placed and there is little mobility for the rook, but sometimes even the rook will give itself up for a knight or a bishop to create weakness.

Ответить
@MSKChess
@MSKChess - 22.03.2013 02:22

Its a really interesting idea Gringo, sometimes depending upon the dynamics a bishop is better than a rook, especially if its powerful placed and there is little mobility for the rook, but sometimes even the rook will give itself up for a knight or a bishop to create weakness! In the position given , white had not a few ways to win, by the time the rook moved (the faulty move) the domination of the dark squares had reached its zenith. Maybe we could do a rook v a bishop video.

Ответить
@In-N-Out333
@In-N-Out333 - 14.11.2013 03:22

THEY'RE MAGICALLY DELICIOUS

Ответить
@1964PoorBoy
@1964PoorBoy - 03.03.2014 06:57

thank you

Ответить
@ronm8931
@ronm8931 - 21.03.2014 18:14

Thanks for providing some clarity for me in terms of squares, I've been aware of the concept for some time now and never quite understood the entire concept of squares, your video was very helpful for me and if you have any other insight into the idea of squares and there utilization, it would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks once again for you succinct style of presenting a topic.

Ответить
@jeffc4076
@jeffc4076 - 17.05.2014 09:59

can u please teach me sir

Ответить
@aoming1
@aoming1 - 11.06.2015 19:01

I'm watching all your videos one by one. I have never found any one person who has so many interesting videos up to the point. You can't watch this and not learn.

Ответить
@danno1800
@danno1800 - 14.09.2015 05:38

A very clear explanation of a very complex topic -- thanks, Robbie!

Ответить
@danno1800
@danno1800 - 15.09.2015 03:19

Thanks -- I'll look for it there

Ответить
@Maximus.diamond.hands.
@Maximus.diamond.hands. - 17.03.2016 20:48

you rock this helped my game so much thanks keep it up

Ответить
@lepredator189
@lepredator189 - 09.04.2017 13:32

Interesting videos on the squiar stratigiy thiiriy. I just don't like Bangiev's fixed, weird terminology so much, if someone could do a translation into normal chess-speak it would be a huge relief. Hans Kmoch's Pawn Power is more tolerable than this.

Ответить
@ryaghnaramansanthosh3140
@ryaghnaramansanthosh3140 - 05.11.2018 06:29

Wow...Excellent videos..

Ответить
@johnkilgallon207
@johnkilgallon207 - 16.11.2020 04:01

Someone has to say it.. This is absolute bollocks! Yes.. it is helpful to be able to highlight squares to illustrate lines of influence for particular pieces if it helps players visualize what is going on... but in terms of chess in actual play i would rate this as helpful as astrology.

Ответить
@sebavla1236
@sebavla1236 - 25.05.2021 23:38

Excelent vídeo!!! Thnx

Ответить
@sambelld1
@sambelld1 - 09.06.2021 13:30

Thank you Robbie for your excellent videos which have helped me to improve my game.

Ответить