Outpost Creation as it Relates to pawn structure

It has been awhile, but I seem to remember Icelandic chess talent Agust Karlsson giving a lecture at Exeter Chess Club on the topic of establishing strong outposts for Knights in particular. One of the more secretive United Kingdom club members defined an outpost to be any fourth, fifth, sixth, or seventh rank square that could not be attacked by enemy pawn.

In the following position, Egypt player player mary-wagih19, had played in a desultory(A Bisquier favorite term, he even told me once word originated from acrobat during a delay between rounds at a Goichberg tournament at Casino in Las Vegas) sequence of opening moves leaving his Queen side pieces uncoordinated with no hope of rapid development(a very difficult concept to define according to IM John Watson and GM Rowson)

So would you take the Queen on c5 with Rook or Pawn? The answer is easy if you think in terms of outpost creation! Any decision in chess has an attendant price which in this case would be a weakened Black pawn structure with the compensation being outposts at b6 and d6 squares. This harmonizes with Horse hopping to c4 to occupy either dark square. 

The stockfish software "believes" the pawn recapture is correct and I doubt children's chess teacher Amanda Mateer would disagree!

Positional Exchange Sacrifice

Chess GrandMaster Jacob Aagaard wrote an excellent instructive book which emphasized the theme of positional exchange sacrifice. I would like to think that Mr Aagaard hailing from Scotland would find the following diagrammed position a very illustrative example of offering a positional exchange sacrifice.

 The game was played at the internet chess club under a 3 minute blitz time control. LucianoPavez playing out of Australia was handling the Black pieces defending against the Catalan Opening. His b7 Bishop was looking worse than the infamous bad French Defense Bishop.



The squares c5 and d6 are potential strong points for White pieces provided the e7 Bishop guardian could be removed. Moreover, Black's Rooks at c8 and c7 are clumsily and ineffectively placed in a game where  no open files are imminent.

How does White exploit the passivity of Black's play obtaining an iron grip on the dark squares including complete hegemony on the d6 square?

I believe that Jeremy Silman would cream "fantasizing" about this one in the never ending tug of war between position and material!

Strong Point Leading to Effective Exchange Sacrifice

Offering your Rook for a Bishop or Knight is referred to as an exchange sacrifice in the game of chess. A Rooks is usually worth more than either minor piece in a wide open position whereas Knights can be stronger in closed positions where there are few open files.

In the following game played at the Internet Chess Club, Black played Qh4 threatening Qg3 check. Now should White accept the exchange sacrifice offered by Black at d3? If he does, Black will get an extra pawn plus a passed pawn at d3 AND chances against the vulnerable White King.



The possibility of the exchange sacrifice is partially due to the strong point/square at d3 supported by the c4 pawn. Jeremy Silman does an excellent job of sizing up the notion of material and when to give it up in his classic How to Reassess your Chess. If the reader is not absolutely convinced of the effectiveness of exchange sacrifices, given the necessary preconditions, after reading this great chess author's book, then he did not spend enough time with this magnificent, chess axiom spewing tome. Ask IM John Donaldson if you do not believe this dim light!