Is there a name for fork-protected pieces?
Sometimes the reason a piece should not be captured isn’t the recapture, but rather the threat of a fork because the capturing piece would find itself in just the wrong spot. The 1926 game between Stepanov and Romanovsky is full of this after 20. … R×f3+.
Is there a name for the situation where a piece is protected by the threat of a fork?
terminology
asked Apr 6 at 0:15
Roman OdaiskyRoman Odaisky
1182
add a comment |
Sometimes the reason a piece should not be captured isn’t the recapture, but rather the threat of a fork because the capturing piece would find itself in just the wrong spot. The 1926 game between Stepanov and Romanovsky is full of this after 20. … R×f3+.
Is there a name for the situation where a piece is protected by the threat of a fork?
terminology
asked Apr 6 at 0:15
Roman OdaiskyRoman Odaisky
1182
Just adding to the answers below. The situation you describe often appears as part of decoy/attraction/deflection tactics. For instance in chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1274410 after 29....Rxc4 the rook is a decoy for the white queen but is indirectly protected via the knight fork on a3.
– user1583209
Apr 6 at 7:47
add a comment |
Sometimes the reason a piece should not be captured isn’t the recapture, but rather the threat of a fork because the capturing piece would find itself in just the wrong spot. The 1926 game between Stepanov and Romanovsky is full of this after 20. … R×f3+.
Is there a name for the situation where a piece is protected by the threat of a fork?
terminology
asked Apr 6 at 0:15
Roman OdaiskyRoman Odaisky
1182
Sometimes the reason a piece should not be captured isn’t the recapture, but rather the threat of a fork because the capturing piece would find itself in just the wrong spot. The 1926 game between Stepanov and Romanovsky is full of this after 20. … R×f3+.
Is there a name for the situation where a piece is protected by the threat of a fork?
terminology
terminology
asked Apr 6 at 0:15
Roman OdaiskyRoman Odaisky
1182
asked Apr 6 at 0:15
Roman OdaiskyRoman Odaisky
1182
asked Apr 6 at 0:15
Roman OdaiskyRoman Odaisky
1182
asked Apr 6 at 0:15
Roman OdaiskyRoman Odaisky
1182
asked Apr 6 at 0:15
Roman OdaiskyRoman Odaisky
1182
1182
Just adding to the answers below. The situation you describe often appears as part of decoy/attraction/deflection tactics. For instance in chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1274410 after 29....Rxc4 the rook is a decoy for the white queen but is indirectly protected via the knight fork on a3.
– user1583209
Apr 6 at 7:47
add a comment |
Just adding to the answers below. The situation you describe often appears as part of decoy/attraction/deflection tactics. For instance in chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1274410 after 29....Rxc4 the rook is a decoy for the white queen but is indirectly protected via the knight fork on a3.
– user1583209
Apr 6 at 7:47
Just adding to the answers below. The situation you describe often appears as part of decoy/attraction/deflection tactics. For instance in chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1274410 after 29....Rxc4 the rook is a decoy for the white queen but is indirectly protected via the knight fork on a3.
– user1583209
Apr 6 at 7:47
Just adding to the answers below. The situation you describe often appears as part of decoy/attraction/deflection tactics. For instance in chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1274410 after 29....Rxc4 the rook is a decoy for the white queen but is indirectly protected via the knight fork on a3.
– user1583209
Apr 6 at 7:47
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
I agree with asdf regarding the idea that there isn't a name specifically attached to indirect protection of a piece stemming from a fork.
However, in general, pieces that are protected by any tactic, including forking, are said to be "indirectly defended."
As far as a name for the piece being indirectly defended, one might call it a "bait" piece, as it baits the opposing player to make a dubious move. In a specific opening line, there is a somewhat famous "poisoned pawn" - a pawn that looks like it can be taken without fear, but makes things positionally difficult in the long run. Thus, an indirectly defended piece might also be called a "poisoned" piece.
answered Apr 6 at 1:29
Brandon_JBrandon_J
83418
add a comment |
I don't know about English. In spanish we use The term "defensa indirecta" or "protección indirecta", but it does not refer specifiacally to indirect protection/defence by fork, it could be a threat of any kind what prevents the piece in question to be captured.
For example, after the silly moves 1.e4 d6 2.Nf3 Bg4 3. Bc4 g6 4.Ne5 and the queen is indirectly protected by a mate threat.
After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3, the d4 pawn is indirectly protected by a discovered attack in case it got captured.
And finally, relating back to your specific case: 1.d4 c5 2.dxc5 e6 3.Be3 Qa5+ 4.c3 is another case of indirect protection, this time by means of a fork threat in case of 4...Bxc5?
answered Apr 6 at 0:28
DavidDavid
2874
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "435"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f24124%2fis-there-a-name-for-fork-protected-pieces%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I agree with asdf regarding the idea that there isn't a name specifically attached to indirect protection of a piece stemming from a fork.
However, in general, pieces that are protected by any tactic, including forking, are said to be "indirectly defended."
As far as a name for the piece being indirectly defended, one might call it a "bait" piece, as it baits the opposing player to make a dubious move. In a specific opening line, there is a somewhat famous "poisoned pawn" - a pawn that looks like it can be taken without fear, but makes things positionally difficult in the long run. Thus, an indirectly defended piece might also be called a "poisoned" piece.
answered Apr 6 at 1:29
Brandon_JBrandon_J
83418
add a comment |
I agree with asdf regarding the idea that there isn't a name specifically attached to indirect protection of a piece stemming from a fork.
However, in general, pieces that are protected by any tactic, including forking, are said to be "indirectly defended."
As far as a name for the piece being indirectly defended, one might call it a "bait" piece, as it baits the opposing player to make a dubious move. In a specific opening line, there is a somewhat famous "poisoned pawn" - a pawn that looks like it can be taken without fear, but makes things positionally difficult in the long run. Thus, an indirectly defended piece might also be called a "poisoned" piece.
answered Apr 6 at 1:29
Brandon_JBrandon_J
83418
add a comment |
I agree with asdf regarding the idea that there isn't a name specifically attached to indirect protection of a piece stemming from a fork.
However, in general, pieces that are protected by any tactic, including forking, are said to be "indirectly defended."
As far as a name for the piece being indirectly defended, one might call it a "bait" piece, as it baits the opposing player to make a dubious move. In a specific opening line, there is a somewhat famous "poisoned pawn" - a pawn that looks like it can be taken without fear, but makes things positionally difficult in the long run. Thus, an indirectly defended piece might also be called a "poisoned" piece.
answered Apr 6 at 1:29
Brandon_JBrandon_J
83418
I agree with asdf regarding the idea that there isn't a name specifically attached to indirect protection of a piece stemming from a fork.
However, in general, pieces that are protected by any tactic, including forking, are said to be "indirectly defended."
As far as a name for the piece being indirectly defended, one might call it a "bait" piece, as it baits the opposing player to make a dubious move. In a specific opening line, there is a somewhat famous "poisoned pawn" - a pawn that looks like it can be taken without fear, but makes things positionally difficult in the long run. Thus, an indirectly defended piece might also be called a "poisoned" piece.
answered Apr 6 at 1:29
Brandon_JBrandon_J
83418
answered Apr 6 at 1:29
Brandon_JBrandon_J
83418
answered Apr 6 at 1:29
Brandon_JBrandon_J
83418
answered Apr 6 at 1:29
Brandon_JBrandon_J
83418
83418
add a comment |
add a comment |
I don't know about English. In spanish we use The term "defensa indirecta" or "protección indirecta", but it does not refer specifiacally to indirect protection/defence by fork, it could be a threat of any kind what prevents the piece in question to be captured.
For example, after the silly moves 1.e4 d6 2.Nf3 Bg4 3. Bc4 g6 4.Ne5 and the queen is indirectly protected by a mate threat.
After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3, the d4 pawn is indirectly protected by a discovered attack in case it got captured.
And finally, relating back to your specific case: 1.d4 c5 2.dxc5 e6 3.Be3 Qa5+ 4.c3 is another case of indirect protection, this time by means of a fork threat in case of 4...Bxc5?
answered Apr 6 at 0:28
DavidDavid
2874
add a comment |
I don't know about English. In spanish we use The term "defensa indirecta" or "protección indirecta", but it does not refer specifiacally to indirect protection/defence by fork, it could be a threat of any kind what prevents the piece in question to be captured.
For example, after the silly moves 1.e4 d6 2.Nf3 Bg4 3. Bc4 g6 4.Ne5 and the queen is indirectly protected by a mate threat.
After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3, the d4 pawn is indirectly protected by a discovered attack in case it got captured.
And finally, relating back to your specific case: 1.d4 c5 2.dxc5 e6 3.Be3 Qa5+ 4.c3 is another case of indirect protection, this time by means of a fork threat in case of 4...Bxc5?
answered Apr 6 at 0:28
DavidDavid
2874
add a comment |
I don't know about English. In spanish we use The term "defensa indirecta" or "protección indirecta", but it does not refer specifiacally to indirect protection/defence by fork, it could be a threat of any kind what prevents the piece in question to be captured.
For example, after the silly moves 1.e4 d6 2.Nf3 Bg4 3. Bc4 g6 4.Ne5 and the queen is indirectly protected by a mate threat.
After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3, the d4 pawn is indirectly protected by a discovered attack in case it got captured.
And finally, relating back to your specific case: 1.d4 c5 2.dxc5 e6 3.Be3 Qa5+ 4.c3 is another case of indirect protection, this time by means of a fork threat in case of 4...Bxc5?
answered Apr 6 at 0:28
DavidDavid
2874
I don't know about English. In spanish we use The term "defensa indirecta" or "protección indirecta", but it does not refer specifiacally to indirect protection/defence by fork, it could be a threat of any kind what prevents the piece in question to be captured.
For example, after the silly moves 1.e4 d6 2.Nf3 Bg4 3. Bc4 g6 4.Ne5 and the queen is indirectly protected by a mate threat.
After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3, the d4 pawn is indirectly protected by a discovered attack in case it got captured.
And finally, relating back to your specific case: 1.d4 c5 2.dxc5 e6 3.Be3 Qa5+ 4.c3 is another case of indirect protection, this time by means of a fork threat in case of 4...Bxc5?
answered Apr 6 at 0:28
DavidDavid
2874
answered Apr 6 at 0:28
DavidDavid
2874
answered Apr 6 at 0:28
DavidDavid
2874
answered Apr 6 at 0:28
DavidDavid
2874
2874
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Chess Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f24124%2fis-there-a-name-for-fork-protected-pieces%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Just adding to the answers below. The situation you describe often appears as part of decoy/attraction/deflection tactics. For instance in chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1274410 after 29....Rxc4 the rook is a decoy for the white queen but is indirectly protected via the knight fork on a3.
– user1583209
Apr 6 at 7:47