Author: martin fierz
Date: 11:52:59 03/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 18, 2002 at 14:12:19, Mike S. wrote: >On March 17, 2002 at 19:22:50, martin fierz wrote: > >>On March 17, 2002 at 18:31:26, Mike S. wrote: >> >>>(...) >>>1. Remove White's bishop from e4 by bringing the kingside pawns at the white >>>squares (h5/Kf7/g6/f5), so that with a black king at e5, the bishop wouldn't >>>defend White's d-pawn after an occasional Qc3, QxQc3. IOW, White couldn't play >>>e3+ then with an undefended Pd3. > >>white's d-pawn is defended by the pawn on e2 already, there is not much need to >>defend it with the bishop. (...) > >I probably didn't explain my idea good enough. After White's bishop looses >contact to d3 and after QxQc3 dxc3, Black's King goes to d4. Read my last >sentence above. Of course I saw that d3 is defended by e2 - that was part of my >idea (that this pawn wouldn't be able to move e3+ when it is the only defender >of d3). That's why I wanted to remove the bishop from there... > >Regards, >M.Scheidl i understood your post, but i wasn't clear enough in my reply :-) even if your king gets to d4 you cannot make progress, because your king has nowhere to go! after an eventual c3-c2 white plays ke1-d2 and again, all squares are protected. aloha martin
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.