[Malkovich Chess] Kirby vs Krill

[Monadology]

This is the typical response in the modern defence against the classical development of W with both center pawns and both knights. I confess, I don't often end up in this position, so I'm not sure I fully understand it, other than that it aims to push the B pawn forward to B5. I take it this has two important results if I get the pawn to B5. One is that W's light bishop is becoming stifled, and another is that I'm developing a pawn chain that's putting indirect pressure on the center, and I'm also further opening up my queenside to develop pieces.

[Kirby]

I don't know what I'm doing... Hmm.

On one hand, being a beginner is fun, because I don't have habits to fall back on like I do with go. So I can try to think of each position more actively.

On the other hand, being a beginner is less fun. Because even if I think a lot about a position, my choice ends up seeming arbitrary at times. I don't have a clear plan, so I don't really know what I'm trying to achieve... So even though I can think more actively... What should I think more actively about?

I guess that's some pleasure I can derive from go: even if I have some habits that make things seem mundane, I can focus on having a clear plan. That's easier for me to do with go since I have some experience.

[dfan]

Both players are doing totally fine so far. Monadology's opening, the Modern, is rather sassy, daring White to come after him and planning to counterattack if White overextends himself. (Pawn to c5 is a good eventual aim, working with the bishop on g7 to target d4 and break up White's center.) It's not quite top-tier but totally playable up to almost the top levels, although for most intermediate players I'd recommend playing more traditional openings that uphold traditional principles. Kirby is doing the right thing in response by just developing all his pieces. Without much knowledge of middlegame strategy it may be difficult for him to formulate a good plan afterwards, but hopefully he will!

[Monadology]

The D4 pawn is no longer guarded by the queen, which means that this pin of the knight with my bishop becomes appropriate, since it eliminates the other guard. W now has a pawn that is at risk of being lost to my fianchetto'd bishop

[Kirby]

I guess I should think about what he is trying to do. Seems in this case that if I move the knight, he will get the queen. So I guess I should see if I can counter that or something?

Or maybe I should try to attack something on his side...

[Kirby]

I played my first full on chess.com yesterday.
I have a game of chess in progress (on chess.com).
I am playing (and losing) a game through PM right now.
And I'm playing this game right here.

Maybe playing chess was what I needed to appreciate go more. I was getting flustered by losing a lot, but maybe I was just being a baby.

[EdLee]

Kirby,

Of the family tree, I like chess the best --
not because of the 'arbitrary' rules ( same problems in all the variants ),
but because of the elegance and universality of the iconic design.
Historically, just too bad xiangqi and shogi settled on the characters design.

prestige.jpg (119.37 KiB) Viewed 18181 times

[Kirby]

I guess I'll just try to make him move his bishop away.

[Monadology]

Forcing me to capture the knight and lose my bishop. I'm fine with this. For one thing, the side to which W is most likely to castle now has a pawn out of place. It's not a huge weakness, but it's less ideal (or at least, so I understand from my chess studies). But more importantly, he must recapture, since I am threatening his queen (and if he just moves his Queen, obviously I can capture again, squeezing more out of my bishop before losing it). After the recapture, whether with the queen or G pawn (the latter would weaken the kingside castle further), the D pawn is left hanging and I can gain a minor material advantage by capturing it with my bishop. I could also develop my knight to F6, which allows him to defend, but my attack on it will be up a tempo compared to his defense. I'm not sure whether it's better just to take or develop at this point.

[Kirby]

I don't want to move the queen out, because it seems risky.

[tj86430]

I don't want to move the queen out, because it seems risky.

It's been more than 35 years since my last game of chess, but I would have taken the bishop with the queen. Perhaps that has something to do with my quitting chess?

[dfan]

I don't want to move the queen out, because it seems risky.

It's been more than 35 years since my last game of chess, but I would have taken the bishop with the queen. Perhaps that has something to do with my quitting chess?

You are correct. There's no risk to having the queen on f3, plus it would then be developed and could put pressure on points like f7 and b7. Instead, taking with the pawn weakens White's kingside hugely.

"Don't move your queen out too early" is standard advice to newcomers, but like all rules it is usually taken too seriously until one learns the real reasons behind it.

By the way, if Black takes the pawn, there might be some tricks with a discovered attack: 1...Bxd4 2.Bb5+ axb5 3.Qxd4 (both h8 and b5 are under attack) 3...e5 (defending h8 with tempo) and White is still a pawn down but may be able to harass Black's queenside pawns in the future.

[Monadology]

Oof, I think he should have taken my bishop with the queen, that's a doubled pawn there now. Though I suppose he has an open file for his rook if he doesn't castle? In any case, I decided to take with the bishop. I realized that if I move the knight to F6, he can just push the pawn forward, threatening my knight in the process! For some reason, I often forget to consider pawn moves like that. If this were a live game, I probably would have made the mistake. But as this isn't, I was instead able to lose sleep by thinking about the position last night.

[sybob]

Neither of us are sure if this would be a nuisance to folks on the board who just play Go, so if you think this thread is inappropriate or bothersome, let one of us know!

Ok.
Hereby, I let you know that I consider this thread to be inappropriate. In my eyes, this is a nuisance indeed.
I don't like chess. I don't mind chess. This forum is about go.
If you want to do Malkovich things, go to the Malkovich forum and discuss whether Malkovich chess is appropriate over there. Or preferably, move it to chess.com or something.
I don't mind other people playing chess and enjoying that game, but please don't bother me with it.
Sorry if I sound harsh.

[sybob]

\
Sorry if I sound harsh.

On second thought, not so sorry.
I think you display a disgrace to the founders, owners, operators/admins and users of this forum, a slap to their face, a total misuse of their hospitality and efforts.
Nobody deserves that. I would understand completely if an admin would delete your post altogether.