Why did he did so?
-
- Posts: 1356
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:52 am
Re: Why did he did so?
I don't think it is a bad move. It depends how he follows it up.
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
The author said it was
-
- Posts: 4826
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: Bideford
Re: Why did he did so?
I don't like the look of f5 because black will respond with ...e5, and he has a solid line of protected passed pawns in the centre. If you leave the pawn on f4, black's d4 pawn is much more vulnerable to attack.
-
- Posts: 3338
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
Does this author ever deign to explain himself?soheil_hooshdaran wrote:The author said it was
-
- Posts: 5833
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
"Does this author ever deign to explain himself?"
Perhaps the author thought it was obvious!
I'm not saying that's the right approach, but some do it...
Perhaps the author thought it was obvious!
I'm not saying that's the right approach, but some do it...
-
- Posts: 3048
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Re: Why did he did so?
Ah. Having consulted Stockfish there are some concrete drawbacks.
I was - and maybe the author too? - thinking about d3 in response. That does win an exchange via Bf2 but leaves white much better. However after the disgusting, inhuman response to f5 of exf5 white can't go Nxf5 as d3 is then really quite strong.
In fact its rather inconvenient for white to get organised. Probably enough so that its better to do something else to start with.
I was - and maybe the author too? - thinking about d3 in response. That does win an exchange via Bf2 but leaves white much better. However after the disgusting, inhuman response to f5 of exf5 white can't go Nxf5 as d3 is then really quite strong.
In fact its rather inconvenient for white to get organised. Probably enough so that its better to do something else to start with.
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
Why would White want to play f2-f4 in:
-
- Posts: 4826
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: Bideford
Re: Why did he did so?
Because it gives black the unenviable choice between (a) letting white play fxe5 and responding with fxe5, leaving him with a weak pawn on e5, or (b) letting white play fxe5 and responding with {piece}xe5, or playing exf4 himself, leaving white with control of the centre.
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
Wouldn't White's pawn structure be compromised in case of b, then?
-
- Posts: 4826
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: Bideford
Re: Why did he did so?
White's pawn structure is fine. What would be wrong with it?
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
He would have 3 pawn islands then, and e4-pawn would be isolated
-
- Posts: 3338
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
It is not often one comes across a literal, rather than metaphorical, example of somebody actually arguing that black is white.soheil_hooshdaran wrote:He would have 3 pawn islands then, and e4-pawn would be isolated
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
I am not arguing so.Richard Bates wrote:It is not often one comes across a literal, rather than metaphorical, example of somebody actually arguing that black is white.soheil_hooshdaran wrote:He would have 3 pawn islands then, and e4-pawn would be isolated
Re: Why did he did so?
You may think you are "not arguing so", however, because, from your own example position, you are confusing a resulting Black pawn structure - with three pawn islands and an isolated pawn on e5 - with a non-existant White pawn structure, you are indeed literally "arguing that black is white" and against yourself, due to a kind of chessical mental mirage in which your mind's eye is seeing a real Black pawn structure reflected onto an unreal White one. It is a just a trick of the light, and the dark.
Imagine that it is White to move in the position you gave, but with all the major and minor pieces removed from the board and with the White K on the square e3 and the Black K on the square e6, then after 1.f4 exf4 2.Kxf4 White has only two pawn islands, not three, and White's pawn on e4 is not isolated because there is a white pawn on d2. That is the opposite of what you argued.
Imagine that it is White to move in the position you gave, but with all the major and minor pieces removed from the board and with the White K on the square e3 and the Black K on the square e6, then after 1.f4 exf4 2.Kxf4 White has only two pawn islands, not three, and White's pawn on e4 is not isolated because there is a white pawn on d2. That is the opposite of what you argued.
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
Oh, forgot about d2