Bishops in chess can be tricky pieces to place correctly on the board in the opening game. Here is an example of a Queen Pawn opening blunder that involves the loss of White’s black-squared bishop. My opponent was the White player. 🙂
My opponent opened with d4 and I replied with Nf6. The first three moves suggested to me that White was playing a delayed Queen’s Gambit.
However, what followed was an ill-conceived string of bad Bishop moves that led White to disaster: 4. Bb5+ c6 (easily dealing with the checking Bishop, and completing Black’s pawn set-up)
5. Ba4 Bd6 (Black continues to develop.)
6. 0-0 Qc7 (eyeing Black’s h2 square and keeping the knight on f3 busy.)
7. Bd2 Nbd7
8. Bc3?? This is where things unravelled for White. Can you see WHY moving his bishop to c3 is a bad move here? Can you guess what Black did in response? What would you do if you were black?
Magnus Carlsen (white) played the Trompowsky Attack in the opening game of the World Chess Championship 2016.
Although World Chess Champion Magnus Carlsen has used the Trompowsky Attack before, it came as quite a surprise as it is not the most common way to continue after the moves 1. d4 Nf6.
The Trompowsky opening has less theory attached to it compared to other Queen’s Pawn openings, which may be one reason why Magnus Carlsen chose it for the first game of the championship.
Another reason, as he partially admitted in the post-match press conference, may have been that the name sounds like “Trump-owsky” and was a cheeky way to refer to Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election earlier in the week. Magnus Carlsen’s family certainly thought so. When asked if that had anything to do with his choice of opening he replied, with a grin,
I had achieved a decisive advantage against my regular opponent in a recent “over the board” game of chess, but he was hanging in there and not resigning, even though I was about to promote my pawn (see diagram, left).
There were just a few minutes left on the clock, so perhaps he was hoping to survive until the flag dropped, but at best it was a forlorn hope.
The game could be easily finished off in a couple of moves by Black promoting the e2 pawn to a queen and then moving the rook to f2, so this game is not really a perfect illustration of the title of this blog post, but what happened in this game did make me think about those occasions when it can actually be better to promote the pawn to a knight instead of a queen.
In this game, which I played on Gameknot against a player rated at the time in the lower 1600s (and with an all-time-high ranking of 1691), my opponent, playing Black, castled into danger on the kingside.
In the illustration, the critical moment has arrived. Black’s kingside pawn structure has been disrupted by an exchange of minor pieces, leaving an undefended Black pawn on g6. Now would not be a good time for Black to castle on the kingside, but that is exactly what Black did!
When it comes to castling in chess, we are usually taught to castle early, after developing some of the minor pieces.
The idea is that it can be dangerous to leave your king stuck in the middle of the back row where he may be exposed to an early attack. Generally speaking, it is more secure to get your king off to one side of the board, behind a barrier of pawns, and perhaps a knight, a rook and/or a bishop.
In the diagram both White and Black have castled early. White’s king is defended by three pawns, a knight and a rook. Black’s king is even more securely defended by three pawns, a rook, knight and bishop.
Quite often, however, other concerns cause one or both players to delay castling, or not to castle at all. In a situation where you have castled and your opponent has not, Jeremy Silman offers a “basic thesis” for you to follow, which is,