Pawn Power in Chess has 89 ratings and 6 reviews. Gary said: This book gives great insight into the strategies one should employ based on the type of paw. Chess. Profoundly original discussion of pawn play isolates its elements and Hans Kmoch played with distinction in several international. “One of the few books which, at a glance, one can recognize as an immortal.” — Chess. Profoundly original discussion of pawn play isolates its elements and.
|Published (Last):||8 March 2006|
|PDF File Size:||2.51 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.57 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Only Chess : Pawn Power In Chess (Kmoch)
Public Forums Search Recommended. Mark Adkins Only Chess 08 Dec ’07 I once came across this title in a used bookstore. I very much wanted to get it because the idea of a book devoted to pawn play — a subtle but very important aspect of chess — is something that I need to improve in my own play like so many things. The problem was that the author has invented his own nomenclature, which is eccentric, sesquipedalian, and not surprisingly has yet to be adopted by any other chess writers.
It isn’t just an occasional problem but runs throughout the entire book. It just wasn’t worth the effort for me, and made it poser to even assess the actual content of the book. Was this something containing the secrets of pawn play, or merely a collection of verbose truisms? Apparently a re-issue is in the pawm but instead of cleaning it up they seem determined to further muddy the linguistic waters: Originally posted by Mark Adkins I once came across this title in a used bookstore.
The problem was that the author has invented his own nomenclature, which is eccentric, sesquipedal Pawn structure chess by Soltis is supposed to be a very good book along the same lines. Or at least I didn’t notice such a statement. Did I miss something?
Anyway, I haven’t read PPIC, but everyone I’ve talked to including the reviews I’ve read seem to think that the book is so good that it’s worth wading through the arcane terminology. Originally posted by Talisman Pawn structure chess by Soltis is supposed to be a very good book along the same lines. I’ve read the books by both Kmoch and Soltis and I agree completely that Soltis’ book was far more useful.
Kmoch got the “props” because it was the first of it’s kind, on it is a very generalized book with a lot of bizarre terminology, most of which was never adopted by the chess world though a mkoch terms were e.
Soltis has chapters for various common structures which are arrived at from specific openings and I found the book very useful.
Another good book with this theme but with a much narrower scope is “Winning Pawn Structures” by Baburin, which only deals with IQP positions. Thanks for the link for the glossary.
I’ve recently bought this book and have been put off by the terminology described in the first chapter. I’ll take another look Originally posted by Mad Rook I’m confused.
Pawn Power In Chess by Hans Kmoch
A quick scan led me to believe that the title was to be reissued for its 50th Anniversay in a special addition which would add bonus material — the “new pages”. Imoch day this book arrived was a rollercoaster ride of emotions. The anticipation of a sought after book finally satisfied.
The evocative oower of the opening paragraphs followed by this: Lee and luff taken as a measure, we have kn we call innerpawns and rimpawns. A rimpawn ordinarily called a rook pawn, has no lee side, covers only one square insead of two and is consequently inferior to an innerpawn.
The lack of the lee side is a disadvantage which often shows up in the endgame, in that a rim pawn draws where where an innerpawn would win.
Examples to the contrary are exceptions.
It is usual to maintain the terms Q-side and K-side throughout the game, but they virtually fail to make sense when castling on the queenside has occurred. We therefore use the alternate terms of home side for the castled side and ranger side for the uncastled side, distinguishing accordingly between home pawns and ranger.
A half free pawn with inadequate help is no true candidate but a faker.
Pawn Power In Chess by Hans Kmoch – Algebraic Edition
In the position of PQ4 vs PK3, for instance, both pawns a fakers, each on lacking the necessary helper. PKB3; this helper needs a helpers helper, e. PKB2, which assures the consecutive crossing of K5 and Q6. No wonder they used to think people who play chess are clever!
Originally posted by Mahout The day this book arrived was a rollercoaster ride of emotions. Lee and luff taken ive crossing of K5 and Q6. Superbly expressed, my dear fellow. But we mustn’t forget this excerpt from page How on earth has this chap managed to secure a place of classical importance in the history and analysis of chess when, at best, only a powet of individuals have had the patience to suffer through his impossibly obscure prose?
Originally posted by Mark Adkins Superbly expressed, my dear fellow. Cess the book would make more sense after a few beers and several readings of Jabberwocky. Originally posted by Mad Rook Maybe the book would make more sense after a few beers and several readings of Jabberwocky. Already today I’ve had generous servings of rye whiskey and yet the text remains as abstruse as ever.
What on earth are you up to here? What does kmodh matter to you? Ragnorak For RHP addons In the chapter to define what a combination is, 10 pages long. But the element of surprise is lacking, and it is better not to classify this maneuvre among combinations, for otherwise we could not draw the line of demarcation between maneuvres and combinations. The latter coming within the general category of the former, it is necessary to make a sharp distinction.
We may go further and say that combinations based on chfss which are too well knows, indeed hackneyed, are not real combinations, since the idea of the unforeseen is on. A well-known air pawj made popular on the street-organs loses thereby much of it’s charm” Lawn gave up about 3 pages later. But the element of surprise is lacking, and it is better not to classify this maneuvre among combinations, cgess otherwise D I’ll admit that the Z-B quote is windy, but at least it’s intelligible.
BTW, I can’t quite figure out what that icon of yours is. It looks like a pile of graphite shavings with an egg sitting atop. Reset password New user. Sign up or Connect to Play Chess.