English Chess Forum

The theme for this weeks schools chess clubs (that I operate at least!) is pawns (and Kings).

At each school I run an all-play-all tournament with Kings and six pawns each.

Each player decides where he/she wants their pawns to start the game but they must be placed on the second rank for each player.

King starts on the normal starting square....

The soon develop notions about the power of the King plus how to create a passed pawn or two.

I'm not convinced that very young players and beginners get much benefit from always starting their games from the normal starting position.

If you haven't already then I would suggest having a look at Mike James' Journey through chess

http://www.chesskids.me.uk/newcourse/journey.pdf

At School we've introduced iPads this year and I have found a free app Knightvision quite interesting. It is not a completely 'polished' app, but I am not sure that matters too much. I find it a useful tool for looking at the movement of the pieces.

Matthew Turner wrote:If you haven't already then I would suggest having a look at Mike James' Journey through chess

http://www.chesskids.me.uk/newcourse/journey.pdf

At School we've introduced iPads this year and I have found a free app Knightvision quite interesting. It is not a completely 'polished' app, but I am not sure that matters too much. I find it a useful tool for looking at the movement of the pieces.

Written by me, not by my brother!

The CSC course, also written by me, follows a very similar approach.

There is a nice extra on vol 2 of Nick Pert's "Killer Endgames" DVD. Gary O'Grady explains the "three pawns game" which he found in a 1894 James Mason book. Each side starts with K on Ksq, and KRP, KNP and KBP on their starting squares. If I recall correctly Gary says it's a forced win for one side (but not easy). Get the DVD and beat the kids every time!

Richard,
Apologies, I think I must have got you confused with that chap who wrote a book with Richard Fox

Matthew Turner wrote:Richard,
Apologies, I think I must have got you confused with that chap who wrote a book with Richard Fox

I don't mind as long as you don't confuse me with Mike Basman.

One class I have are not as advanced, and were learning about how the rooks move one week. They worked out that a rook can move to 14 squares on an empty board.

They did bishops the following week, and worked out that on an empty board, it can move to 7, 9, 11 or 13 squares depending on which square it is on on the board. (If you imagine four square rings starting from the outside and working in, it can move to more squares. It's a nice pattern they can colour in...)

Armed with that information, "Which piece do you think is more valuable?", I asked them.

"The Bishop!!!" they cried, in unison.

Alex Holowczak wrote:One class I have are not as advanced, and were learning about how the rooks move one week. They worked out that a rook can move to 14 squares on an empty board.

They did bishops the following week, and worked out that on an empty board, it can move to 7, 9, 11 or 13 squares depending on which square it is on on the board. (If you imagine four square rings starting from the outside and working in, it can move to more squares. It's a nice pattern they can colour in...)

Armed with that information, "Which piece do you think is more valuable?", I asked them.

"The Bishop!!!" they cried, in unison.

Of course they did! The Rook moves 14 squares but the Bishop can move 7, 9, 11, or 13, which sounds a lot more simply because there are more numbers!

Alex Holowczak wrote:One class I have are not as advanced, and were learning about how the rooks move one week. They worked out that a rook can move to 14 squares on an empty board.

They did bishops the following week, and worked out that on an empty board, it can move to 7, 9, 11 or 13 squares depending on which square it is on on the board. (If you imagine four square rings starting from the outside and working in, it can move to more squares. It's a nice pattern they can colour in...)

Armed with that information, "Which piece do you think is more valuable?", I asked them.

"The Bishop!!!" they cried, in unison.

I just asked a beginner (in a Gifted & Talented group) whether she thought the rook or the bishop was more valuable. "The bishop." "Why?" "Because it can move along diagonals but a rook can't."

Children of this age have little understanding of logic, which is why most of them fail to make any progress.

My training method (in a secondary school) is to let play chess! It seems to work quite well.

Neill Cooper wrote:My training method (in a secondary school) is to let play chess! It seems to work quite well.

That's what I do, most of the time, in primary school clubs. My experience, back in the days when I was doing a lot of primary school clubs, was that the less 'training' I did and the more I just let them play (but in divisions with promotion and relegation, not just casual games) the more they enjoyed it and the better they got.

At a higher level we did very little 'training' at RJCC, but lots of serious competitive play in match conditions, with different time limits and often using set openings.

Mike Gunn wrote: Each side starts with K on Ksq, and KRP, KNP and KBP on their starting squares. If I recall correctly Gary says it's a forced win for one side (but not easy). Get the DVD and beat the kids every time!

4k3/5ppp/8/8/8/8/5PPP/4K3 w - -

I would have thought that drawn with either player to move.

Push the pawns up the board and the defending king to one side, then you win by advancing the central pawn. I'd be reasonably sure I first saw this in Golombek's introductory Penguin book.

2k5/5ppp/8/5PPP/4K3/8/8/8 w - -

Roger de Coverly wrote: 2k5/5ppp/8/5PPP/4K3/8/8/8 w - -

I don't see how white's meant to win this position after 1.g6 fxg6.

(Put the white king on a slightly less unfortunate square - and move the black king to the b-file or below the 5th rank - and it works, though.)

IM Jack Rudd wrote:I don't see how white's meant to win this position after 1.g6 fxg6.

(Put the white king on a slightly less unfortunate square - and move the black king to the b-file or below the 5th rank - and it works, though.)

Yeah, I learnt it as something like this where neither king has any influence on the pawns:
[FEN "8/k4ppp/8/K4PPP/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 3"] 3.g6! ( 3.g6! hxg6 4.f6!! gxh5 ( 4...gxf6 5.h6 ) 5.fxg7 ) 3...fxg6 4.h6!! gxf5 ( 4...gxh6 5.f6 ) 5.hxg7

Richard James wrote:

Neill Cooper wrote:My training method (in a secondary school) is to let play chess! It seems to work quite well.

That's what I do, most of the time, in primary school clubs. My experience, back in the days when I was doing a lot of primary school clubs, was that the less 'training' I did and the more I just let them play (but in divisions with promotion and relegation, not just casual games) the more they enjoyed it and the better they got.

At a higher level we did very little 'training' at RJCC, but lots of serious competitive play in match conditions, with different time limits and often using set openings.

I have a similar pattern: at lunchtime chess club they play chess (sometimes with a ladder or UK Chess Challenge to make it competitive) but no training; after school club once a week is graded rapidplay; occasional looking at Shredder chess problems at http://www.shredderchess.com/weekly-chess-problems.html; lots of inter-school chess matches; some playing club/county chess and a few congresses and beyond.