Badly placed knight protecting weak square
Moderator: Ras
-
Henk
- Posts: 7251
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:31 am
Badly placed knight protecting weak square
In the second half of a game my knight was on b2 because it had to protect a strong enemy square. Otherwise black might have a knight or a bishop on c4. I don't know whether it would have been better to develop the knight on b2 because it looks like you play the game with a knight less.
-
Daniel Anulliero
- Posts: 773
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 4:55 pm
- Location: Nice
Re: Badly placed knight protecting weak square
Again ,a post without a diagram or an exemple game mean nothing .
-
Henk
- Posts: 7251
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:31 am
Re: Badly placed knight protecting weak square
It's about general rule. I am not interested in one position.
So question is what is worse a badly placed knight (protecting weak square) or an enemy outpost.
So question is what is worse a badly placed knight (protecting weak square) or an enemy outpost.
-
Henk
- Posts: 7251
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:31 am
Re: Badly placed knight protecting weak square
Don't think piece square table catches long term effects. A badly placed knight for a move or three may not be harmful but if it stays there all the time. Maybe comparable to a trapped knight.