I would never guess it. I thought knights on the rim were denim.
denim? assuming negative.
I scrolled the board and got lost as to where you meant, but after reloading: 7. ... Bf5.
For the Knights moves you meant, I clicked on the link and going to your post-game loses which position you intended, hence this paragraph (embedded it shows what where we wanted, but easily lost).
The engine PVs there (post-game page), give, at move 8, that the best 2 for white are 8. Na3 then 8.Nh4.
Human explanation please you ask? My low-ling current thinking. I think in the context of outpost for knights, it is preferable for them to not be on the sides (because of their short reach, and mobility geometry, half of it gone, and little centre reach). Having it in the board strict interior would make it more "active" (if i did not misuse the word, always checking). If that is what you had in mind.
Otherwise, tactical opportunities, threat or as stepping stone to an outpost for example, should certainly make such moves acceptable. I think it is really important with principles and rules to be equally emphatic about the action value AND the context where it was meant to apply, at the moment of first exposure of such guideline.
I hope my 2-cents has some value. and any missing or wrong points would stimulate more posts in this thread.
Edit: also it is possible you refer to opening action guideline for Knight. I would apply the same autonomous reasoning I did for outposts, legal mobility rules for knights are geometrical, and so with more reach more dynamic opportunities later. When does the opening context stop? at least for that rule? I don't know. would like to hear about it too.
I scrolled the board and got lost as to where you meant, but after reloading: 7. ... Bf5.
For the Knights moves you meant, I clicked on the link and going to your post-game loses which position you intended, hence this paragraph (embedded it shows what where we wanted, but easily lost).
The engine PVs there (post-game page), give, at move 8, that the best 2 for white are 8. Na3 then 8.Nh4.
Human explanation please you ask? My low-ling current thinking. I think in the context of outpost for knights, it is preferable for them to not be on the sides (because of their short reach, and mobility geometry, half of it gone, and little centre reach). Having it in the board strict interior would make it more "active" (if i did not misuse the word, always checking). If that is what you had in mind.
Otherwise, tactical opportunities, threat or as stepping stone to an outpost for example, should certainly make such moves acceptable. I think it is really important with principles and rules to be equally emphatic about the action value AND the context where it was meant to apply, at the moment of first exposure of such guideline.
I hope my 2-cents has some value. and any missing or wrong points would stimulate more posts in this thread.
Edit: also it is possible you refer to opening action guideline for Knight. I would apply the same autonomous reasoning I did for outposts, legal mobility rules for knights are geometrical, and so with more reach more dynamic opportunities later. When does the opening context stop? at least for that rule? I don't know. would like to hear about it too.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.