A Few Practical Chess Insights For Intermediate Players

@tpr
@GSP0113

4. cxd5 is the correct move in that situation, also played by stockfish. I think Jones is referring to a more complex situation, where black has already played c6 and e6, and white has played e3. Then it might be disadvantageous for white to play cxd5.

@nayf Thanks.

@nayf
Thanks for the defense of Igor.
However, in tpr's example, the exchange is still considered bad as it frees the bishop, although Berliner says it's good to fix a target. (A GM contradicting a GM, who should we believe?)
In the Slav, it's considered bad as you exchange the more advanced c4 pawn for the c6 pawn.
In a Philidor type position, it is considered wrong to exchange on e5 as it frees the bishop.

These examples are before black has moved the bishop. The examples of after black has moved the bishop usually involve the opening of a file which grants black counterplay on an open file. There is also the consideration that white can often push with good effect, but black can only push by causing some compromise.

@nayf #5, are you looking for the definition of strong moves and weak moves. I saw one of Seirrawan's lectures a few weeks ago and he said that when authors speak of strong moves, they are referring to moves that claim space. I don't remember his exact words, and he might have been over simplifying for 9 year olds. Check it out and see if it makes sense.

Thanks for the insights and the codification of general rules.

@jonesmh
True, it frees black's light bishop, but black has to be careful about taking out that bishop too early, especially before castling. He can get punished on the queenside, beginning with Qb3 by white, attacking the b7 pawn and d5. Or, if white pins the f6 N with Bg5, a common move of black is Nbd7, blocking his light bishop again. Maybe that's why theory still favours cxd5 despite potential freeing of the bishop. But true, it could be considered a disadvantage that has to be weighed against everything else.
In yet another variation, if black fianchettoes his dark bishop, if he later tries to develop his light bishop on g4, pinning whites N, h3 forces him to either run away (losing a tempo) or give up the B for the N. That's because with the fianchetto, there's a pawn on g6, so after h3 the light bishop can't retreat to h5, since g4 will trap its ass.
There's a guy, I think not quite a master, who gives good lectures on yt; I forget his name. He says that when playing black against Q's gambit, he's always happy to exchange his light bishop for the N on f3, because he's exchanging a problematic piece that's hard to develop for white's very active N. I on the other hand hate giving up a B for a N so early, but what do I know?
@JunoCunerino Is that the only kind of "strong move"? I wonder... I think there are strong positional moves that are strong for other reasons as well.

Heck @nayf, I did a search on Strong Move, and the intended definition is scarcely ever To Command Space.

@nayf

I said "often miss tactics" not just "miss tactics". Of course, even Grandmasters and powerful engines can miss tactics. What I mean by this is missing OBVIOUS TACTICS and missing tactics FREQUENTLY.

It's one thing to miss a several move combination starting with an absurd looking move deep tactic... and its only good if you play the perfect move each time. It's understandable for even GM to miss such a thing sometimes. They are only human. When I Say "Miss tactics" I'm talking about stuff that shouldn't be missed. I'm talking about not noticing a simple fork. I'm talking about walking into a knight fork that is unforced. I'm talking about hanging a back rank mate in 1 when it was a fairly equal position if only they had a little looft.

Some tactics should NOT be missed ever. (although understandable in severe time trouble)

There is a difference in not seeing something like... "If I sac 3 pieces right now starting with this absurd looking move I have a mating attack..." and "dum dee dum maybe I'll wander my king over to that square that his knight can attack and fork my queen."

@lurarose On this thread I'm mainly interested in understanding insights into how an intermediate player can improve. Your discussion seems more about beginners.

Mind you, sometimes you can beat a 1900+ player in 12 moves:

@nayf
Interesting that you condemn basic tactics, then you show an example of an intermediary falling for one.