Quick and accurate method of counting multiple captures?

Hi everybody,

I am wondering whether there is a quick and accurate method of counting multiple captures on the same square?

We all face the situation when multiple attackers and defenders (of different values) concentrate on the same field and the first capture leads to a sequence of captures (often more than 5) on this square.

How can I quickly and accurately know if the sequence is good for me or not?

Thanks!

GM tipp: always start your calculations with the largest piece of wood to capture first.

(to be exact, this is meant for calculating any sequences)

@Sarg0n could you please elaborate?

When you calculate a sequence with many branches start with the captures of the largest pieces of wood. So begin the calculation with taking a rook before a minor piece for example. Especially such sequences where both eat some pieces in a row.

@FxStorm

General rule:
1. If you want to capture sucessfully on a certain square you must have at least one attacker more than your opponent has defenders. But this alone is not sufficient.

2. Then you must check the sequence of the captures for both sides, Normally you start to take with your knights and bishops first and then with your rooks and then with your queen or even the king.

3. Sometimes a capture is not possible even if you have more attackers than your opponent has defenders. You also have to compare the value of the attackers with the value of the defenders.
example:
Black has an isolated pawn on d5, which he defends with 3 minor pieces (2 knights, 1 bishop)
White attacks this pawn with 2 minor pieces (knight and bishop) and with 2 rooks.
4 attackers against 3 defenders. Normally a capure should be possible ...
But in this case you can't capture the pawn because you would lose an exchange.

Edit : I guess that @Sarg0n misunderstood the question in #1. #2 and #4 don't seem to be an answer to the original question. These answers seem to fit to a more complex position (multiple captures/re-captures on 2 squares at the same time possible) where you have the choice to take either on square 1 a rook or on square 2 a knight/bishop.

@FxStorm
I reworked #5 to make it easier, at least I hope so.

Quick and accurate method of counting multiple captures on the same square

Rule 1: If you want to capture sucessfully on a certain square you must have at least one attacker more as your opponent has defenders.

Rule 2: If both sides also have pawns which are attackers or defenders, then the attacking side must have at least the same amount of pawns as the defender. (Maximum 2)

Rule 3: The attacker must have at least the same amount of minor pieces (knight/bishop) as the defender. (Maximum 3)

Rule 4: The sequence of captures depends on the value of the chess piece. You always start to take with your pawns, then with your minor pieces (knight/bishop), then with your rooks, then with your queen, and at the end with your king.
(note: Sometimes the attackers block each other which has an effect on the possible capturing sequence. E.g. 2 rooks on d1 and d2, queen on d3. All these major pieces attack d5. But only the queen attacks d5 directly, both rooks only x-ray attack d5. These things also have to be taken into account !)

All 4 rules must be fulfilled for a successful capture on a single square.

You only have to count pawns and pieces before the first capture. It is not necessary to calculate anything.

I propose that you create a study with some testing positions.

P.S. : The maximum amount of attackers and defenders which can target a single square at the same time is 8 for white and 8 for black.
2 pawns + 3 minor pieces + 2 rooks + 1 queen. And additionally maybe also the king, if you build a theoretical position.

P.S. : It will be interesting whether someone can find a position where these simple rules fail.

You can win a capture with equal or less attackers if your attackers have low value and the victim and/or defenders are high value, so rule 1 is wrong.

@norla
#7: I agree with your statement. But this doesn't mean that rule 1 is totally wrong.
It only shows that there are a lot of exceptions which are not covered by my simple rules.
In a position as you describe it, everybody has to calculate precisely.

Which theoretical position do you have in mind, where less attackers are sufficient ? Don't mention pawns, because that is logical.

@Bishop1964 Rook attacked by knight. Defended by bishop and knight.

@norla
This example is too simple, because here you simply win an exchange. That is crystal clear.

Take a postion where the attacked "piece" is an isolated pawn.