What can happen when one attacks just because they feel aggressive

 For some reason the name Nicholas Ernest de Firmian flashed through my conscious after reviewing the following chess position illustrated in the diagram. I think Nick and GM Chistiansen were close back in the late 90s. Larry works for USCF and I think Nick distanced himself from the Royal Game. I was at a tournament in Florida when Larry, in a Jacksonville Hotel Bar, lamented the truth that the US is owned/run by insurance companies. He is a good guy one time giving a 60 board simul in Lubbock Texas pre Susan Polgar.  

After a few moments of ennui, I realized it was because Nick espoused/endorsed Jeremy Silman's famous work titled "How to Reassess Your Chess" where he made the term imbalance a wildly popular chess teacher word. Don't know if de Firmian made any money  off calling Jeremy's book the most seminal positional piece of chess literature since My System. 

ICC player extrauniversal2, from Denmark, commenced an unjustified attack which resulted in his King side pawns being maimed. White rejected winning material in favor of long term positional squeeze. The Danish player committed the chessic sin of attacking because he "just felt like it" and had to resign 12 moves later. 

Naked Pin Ends this game of Chess

 If naked pin is not a tactical motif, then it should be. What happened to American player WildRaven is actually called a deflection sacrifice

In the above diagrammed position, Black just played Rd5 protecting his b5 pawn and "keeping an eye" on White's far advanced d7 pawn. The winning  move is easy to discover if one realizes the simple truth that a Queen is invariably worth more than a Rook. HInt: What is the only move White can make to prevent Queen Pawn from becoming a lovely lethal lady? Alliteration for choice!

Incidentally, I have never understood why WildRaven has a USCF rating below 1600. He is such an uncompromising and principled player at the Internet Chess Club in Pennsylvania!

Also Kenny Lucky can tell your more about Naked Pin as it relates to Mary Wollstonecraft.

Hippopotamus In Reverse Catastrophe

 South African  chess player btropic played  soooo poorly with the White pieces that Black's seventh move Bf2 check leads to forced win.

In the diagrammed position, White his timidly set up what appears to be a Hippopotamus defense in reverse. Note that White's monarch is surrounded by its own forces in Epaulette fashion. He was duly punished with the attraction sacrifice Bishop capture King Bishop 2 pawn check in the old English descriptive notation. 

After Ng4 check, the a1 rook in the corner gets ingested and gets reactivated via c2 square. Would like to know if Alessio De Santis has ever essayed the Reverse Hippo and how he fared. 

Also why would a chess player play such a gutless, mindless opening with White?

Elegant Square Clearing Pawn Move

 Austrian Chess player Arsenal11 must have thought he stood no worse after the solid looking g6 pawn move. After all, his King on e6 had the opposition over its White counterpart on the e4 square.

However, he overlooked the game winning space clearance move pawn to f5 EXCLAM. So what space was cleared from this temporary pawn sacrifice? The f4 square, to be occupied by White Monarch, is the answer when Black finds himself in Zugzwang( German for NO move I think) 

Not only will Black's f5 fall, but the c5 pawn could be lost in some variations. Also if Black moves his pawn f6, White's g pawn jettisons Bruce Pandolfini! 

BTW, I have heard soccer goalkeeper Aaron Ramsdale has more than a mild interest in the Royal Game

Be very careful how you say Forking Knight

 The terse chess informant notation definitely applies to the following position. The Houston,Texas Master did not notice his King and Queen were forkable on the f2 and d2 squares or maybe he did but did not notice the f3 pawn was ABSOLUTELY pinned by the f5 Queen.

Hobart was more concerned about the weak c2 square which led to the blunder. He moved one of his rooks to c1 guarding c2, BUT allowing Ne4 forking King and Queen followed by resignation. His position was already loose with his King quite vulnerable. He fell victim to the burden of being the higher rated player by 600 USCF rating points. In this case, the first player was not going to accept a draw under any circumstances to a much weaker 1600 player.

The lesson to be learned is try to keep tabs on all weak squares even those induced by absolute pins. The informant notation(using a times/multiplication symbol) is (Xc2,e4)

Thematic King's Indian Bishop Sacrifice

 Was reminded of an old chess friend from Houston, Texas in the following game. Mick Bighamian(USCF rating of around 2400 at the time) said something that really stuck in my mind. The specificity of his claim made me realize that Chess players are really inveterate nerds. "when the unmoved c8 Bishop sacrifices itself at h3 the result of game is frequently, if not always, in favor of the second player". Now that may not be exactly the way Mick phrased it, but if he reads this I am sure he would agree with the paraphrasing. He had close to a photographic memory for positions which is a big part of the reason he was a senior master and one of the top 5 or so players in Bayou City. 

Another master from the region, Todd Thomas, penned an accurate quote in the Texas Knights monthly periodical stating that the late Robert Brieger was on chess nerd fringe in the same fashion that chess nerds are on the fringe of society at large. Todd was lampooning Brieger for making a big deal about the difference between the terms Zugzwang and Squeeze. Funny how certain things just stick in your head!!

So check out the position, arising from a Dutch Defense,  where Mick's always winning move wipes out Australian player Pritoka. After Bxh3, the f8 Rook occupies f3 square with fatal consequences. The Black king regicide is only avoided by the 9 pointer giving herself up. 

I do love this kind of position where an "undeveloped piece" is actually the most active force on the board! This actually shows how the nebulous concept of development as it is taught sometime in middle school as "just getting you pieces out" is quite mistaken.

Would like to close by paying tribute to the now defunct Dave's Chess Studio. Lotta good times there around 20 years ago, but alas the inconstancy of friendship and life getting in the way prevails. 

Take another look at this Drawn Bishop wrong color ending!!!

 Any chess neophyte can tell you that if the rook pawn is queening square that is not the some color as opponent's Bishop, the game will be drawn, BUT  let us not forget Lasker's infamous ceteris paribus(what does ceteris paribus mean from Latin-"all things being equal")

Well all things were definitely NOT equal in the following ICC 3 minute blitz game!!!

Note that Black's a6 pawn on a White Square would be Queening on the Black a1 square. Problem appears to be the stand impotent pair commentary since Black's prelate only guards White square diagonals!! 

So I doubt any of you would believe that Black to move it is mate in 10 in the diagrammed position. The give away hint is that Black must let White Queen his pawn on the a8 square.  This involves Black's Rook pawn becoming a Knight pawn and mating White King at a1 with pawn to b2 checkmate!!  Mind you White would have a just Queened pawn at a8 witnessing the Regicide. It is all about mating patterns and having the huge balls to count it out!!

Fortunately for Boaz1775,  this knuckleheaded American did not discover the mate in 10 and lost the game on time. 

Also please note that I am not referencing the dimorphic mating patterns as alluded to in scholarly effort by Guo-Hua Ding, Yun Tang, Zhi-Hua Lin, Xiao-Li Fan, and Li Wei