Hi,
Since i'm having a hard time trying to better understand positional chess, i've decided to switch to 1.d4 for some time - that way, i'll have more opportunities to go wrong and i'll try to grasp some principles along the way
So here is it, i took with the knight instead of taking with the pawn (at move 5)
i know two principles:
- if you have an already developed piece don't move it twice in the opening
- if you have a choice between a pawn move and a piece move, choose a piece move
Could you help me take the right decision next time?
At move 10, i thought : if i take the knight it will take mine but it seems like i missed something
At move 12, i locked in my own bishop...
And at the end of the game, i didn't know how to defend against the rooks "tower" (on the e files)
In the QGD from black's side you know how you play
1.d4 d5 2.c4 and black's supposed to play e6 instead of nf6 because in the case that white plays cxd5 you wanna take with the pawn, otherwise you put your knight there and white can gain a tempo and win the center with e4?
In such (tactical?) cases I guess always take with the pawn. Sure there's other reasons too but I'm just a rookie and don't wanna complicate stuff.
So: in general I tend to look for a way to improve my piece - even if just temporarily. So in general I'll look if that new move puts my piece in a better location - like your capture with the knight does imo (closer to enemy camp).
I think you misinterpret your 2 principles.
Indeed, if you have a developed piece, then do not move it a second time: bring your other pieces into play first.
Indeed, it is generally better to put a piece into play than to move a pawn, except when the pawn move contributes to the center.
Now on move 5 these principles do not apply. Your opponent has captured, so you have to recapture. Of the 2 candidate moves neither 5 Nxd5 nor 5 cxd5 develops any piece, so both are equally good regarding piece development. Now regarding the centre 5 cxd5 occupies central square d5, i.e. you upgrade your flank pawn c4 to a central pawn d5. You could argue that with 5 Nxd5 you do not block the d-file and you get play against his backward pawn d6. However, you have to put your queen into play prematurely with the forced recapture 6 Qxd5. Black will then gain a tempo attacking your queen with ...Nc6, ...Nb4 or ...d6, ...Be6.
That is the reason why 5 cxd5 is generally preferred, though it is not sure or proven that it is better than 5 Nxd5.
Your 8 Ng5? transgresses your principle of not moving the same piece twice if other pieces are still undeveloped.
10 Qe4? violates this principle again moving your queen a second time. Indeed 10 fxe5! Bxg5 11 Bxg5 Qxg5 12 Qxd6 you trade your not so central Ng5 for his central Ne5 and you trade your undeveloped Bc1 for his developed Bg5. You even win a pawn temporarily.
Your 12 e3? not only locks in your Bc1, you also lose your pawn g5. 12 Bf4 was better, but your position was already bad.
Your opponent misplayed and gave you a tactical opportunity with 20 or 21 Qg3! attacking g7.
At the end of the game you are losing and you have no defence against the rooks on the e-file.
Thanks bakooza & tpr,
So i'll try to keep principles all the game along and not just from time to time... There's a huge difference between knowing a principle and applying it.
While we are at it, I'm wondering about the 9.f4 move
Looking back at it, i see that the pawn structure is going down the drain, so why is it not a bad move?
Indeed 9. f4 is rather a bad move if you ask me. 9. Bf4 accomplishes the same "dislodge the knight" threat, while developing your pieces and not weakening f2 / e3.
That being said, at this point the f7 tactics are what matter most, and if your pawn structure is damaged while you make strong offensive threats, that often is a fine tradeoff. Per tpr variation you almost win a pawn, I'd look into 10. fxe5 Bxg5 Qxd6 which looks fine to me... gaining material is often more valuable than preserving your pawn structure, and in this case, it's debatable (so f4 ain't too bad in this particular situation, is what I'm saying).
For your 5th move, I would have immediately chosen pxp (unless there was an exceptional reason not to)
By playing pxp you have a pawn on d5 that your opponent cannot attack with pawns, also, you will be able to follow up with e4
The pawn on d5 really cramps Black (Black has to be careful that it doesn't get to d6, which would make life for Black even more difficult), and there is little Black can do to get rid of that pawn
That pawn on d5 is pretty bad for Black in my opinion
By not playing pxN on move 10 you have both lost a knight, but you pawn is now on g5 rather than f4, a worse square, and I think you will lose that pawn
If you played pxN then you still exchange knights, but your pawn goes from f4 to e5, and e5 is an even better square for a pawn than f4, then you can do e5xd6, an even better square for you
So instead of being a pawn down, you are pawn level, or maybe even a pawn up, and at the very least, your pawn is on a better square this way
Your 8th move, Ng5
An early Ng5, like in the 2 knights defense or some King's gambit lines, is fine if your threat is sufficiently strong
When White plays an early Ng5, you probably want your light square bishop on c4
Here, Stockfish says Black's best response to Ng5 is Qe7, but Black couldn't do that if your bishop was attacking that square
In my opinion it's not really a threat if responding to it doesn't weaken or stretch your opponent in some way
"At move 12, i locked in my own bishop"
Sometimes this can't be helped, or, perhaps, there are compensatory advantages
Having a locked in queen's bishop is standard in the French Defense, it can really be a pain (for Black), however, Black accepts this for all the advantages the French Defense confers
"And at the end of the game, i didn't know how to defend against the rooks "tower" (on the e files)"
I thing you defended fine against the doubled rooks, a strong and obvious way to counter your opponents doubled rooks is to double your rooks
"While we are at it, I'm wondering about the 9.f4 move
Looking back at it, i see that the pawn structure is going down the drain, so why is it not a bad move?"
e5 is a good square for your opponents knight, you don't want your opponents pieces on good squares
f4 attacks the knight, Black has to respond, f4 attacks the centre: Stockfish says that f4 is the 2nd best move, a little worse than Bf4
9 f4 is a good move: it dislodges the strong Ne5 from its central post.
9 Bf4 does not work because of 9...Qa5+
That is another reason for not capturing 5 Nxd5: you have weakened the diagonal a5-e1.
Here is an example of how to play this.
After recapturing 5 cxd5, the white pawn on d5 keeps black's position cramped and the pawn soon becomes a passed pawn that ultimately wins the game.
There are differences whether you play for short-time effects or long-term advantages (structure). Accumulate or plunder?
It is not a matter of choice. Theoretically speaking 5 Nxd5 is better regarding structure: the backward black pawn on d6, while 5 cxd5 gives black a pawn majority on the queen's side. Chess is concrete. Point is that after 5 Nxd5 and the recapture 6 Qxd5 the queen is not comfortable on d5. Also note that 5 cxd5 is better than 5 Nxd5 and 6 cxd5 precisely because of black's queen's side pawn majority: White does better keep the knights on the board to capitalise on the central advantage. Nc3 also shields against ...Qa5+. Nf6 gone for black is good for black, as he can play ...Nb8-d7-f6, relieving the cramp.
This being said 5 cxd5 is also long term: planning e4-e5 to make d6 a passed pawn as in the above Carlsen game.
