FIDE CM Kingscrusher is the webmaster of Chessworld.net
Chessworld.net is a long established online chess site.

If you would like play relaxed, friendly online chess, then

or

And meet other Youtubers or perhaps even play me in a ChessWorld Simul
Support the Kingscrusher Youtube Channel: â–ºSupport via PayPal ($)

 
Chess World Online Chess Forum - Castling. A good thing or Bad thing to do ? Case Reopen

Chessworld Forum Topic


Play | Latest posts | IndexForum Name: Chess - General discussion
Forum goals: world chess events, international chess news, puzzles, OTB games
You are currently subscribed to this forum by Email - Click to unsubscribe
If you see anything that you find offensive, please report it to the Helpdesk forum

  Play ... Latest Forum Posts > Chess Forums > Chess - General discussion
  Castling. A good thing or Bad thing to do ? Case Reopen




Previous Page1 2 Next Page   
bwzins64

Chess rating: 2181





 Topics started


United States
Give chess goodie
Chess goodies: 1
Tue Aug 23 2016 8:47AM | MsgID: 19220394


Originally posted by: "_Oneironaut_"
I picked a really excellent book recently - "Startling Castling" by the Dutch GM Robert Timmer. That's right, a whole book on the subject. It's very entertainingly written, and covers all aspects. One piece of advice he gives is "castle when you want to, or when you have to, but never just because you can". There are lots of examples of good castling, and perhaps more amusingly of games which have been lost by castlng inadvisedly. I thoroughly recommend it to all.




Thanks for the suggestion! It was a very fun read. I didn't remember this post being this old, but the book was well worth the wait. I also highly recommend it. And just so people can find it, the U.S. edition was published by ICE under the title 'Castling To Win'. They probably thought putting the word "win" or "winning" in the title would help it sell better.







developer

Chess rating: 1930



 Topics started


Belgium
Give chess goodie
Fri Sep 1 2006 9:09PM | MsgID: 5070531


Well, most of the times I castle ASAP, just e.g. to have my rooks connected and it just finishes development.

Sometimes however I wait a little bit, just until the other one castles first. In some cases, e.g. when the other does kingside castling, you can nicely push the h-pawn and start a direct attack on the king.

Another reason to wait if I'm not sure which side I should go with my king (where does the other want to launch an attack).

But, most of the times I prefer castling. The king stuck in the middle can be horrible. He's standing in the way all the time, obstructing own pieces.







rick53

Chess rating: 2432



 Topics started


United States
Give chess goodie
Chess goodies: 3
Fri Sep 1 2006 5:18PM | MsgID: 5069008


Originally posted by: "BeerClark"
JulietJ

Excellent use of experience!

Something that is tough to change for players learning is to understand that moves aren't REQUIRED. Castleing, like 1.e4 or 34.Nd6, is just a move! Don't play it simply because "you should do it ASAP". Castle because its the best move at that point in the game.

BC




I think that to: "Castle because its the best move at that point in the game." is about the most succinct, and appropriate (Chess-related) quote I've heard in a long time...

Very nicely phrased!








BeerClark

Chess rating: 1668
LCF 1222




 Topics started


United States
Give chess goodie
Fri Sep 1 2006 5:12PM | MsgID: 5068980


JulietJ

Excellent use of experience!

Something that is tough to change for players learning is to understand that moves aren't REQUIRED. Castleing, like 1.e4 or 34.Nd6, is just a move! Don't play it simply because "you should do it ASAP". Castle because its the best move at that point in the game.

BC







JulietJ

Chess rating: 1595



 Topics started


United Kingdom
Give chess goodie
Fri Sep 1 2006 4:55PM | MsgID: 5068869


Like any tactic, it works when used at the right time. I played someone about a year ago (can't remember his name) whose method was to attack with pawns up the side on which I'd castled. He won our first game, but in the second I knew what he was up to and beat him easily - by not castling!

Equally, I am currently being hammered in a match due to castling because I couldn't think what else to do!

Generally, though, I would come down on the side of castling to get my Rook out into the game.

JulietJ







_Oneironaut_

Chess rating: 1979



 Topics started


United Kingdom
Give chess goodie
Thu Aug 31 2006 7:26PM | MsgID: 5062777


I picked a really excellent book recently - "Startling Castling" by the Dutch GM Robert Timmer. That's right, a whole book on the subject. It's very entertainingly written, and covers all aspects. One piece of advice he gives is "castle when you want to, or when you have to, but never just because you can". There are lots of examples of good castling, and perhaps more amusingly of games which have been lost by castlng inadvisedly. I thoroughly recommend it to all.

I agree with rick53 to a degree. Quite often I delay castling so my opponent doesn't know where my king will be.

I've annotated a game "Hazards of not Castling" which you might take a look at too.







rick53

Chess rating: 2432



 Topics started


United States
Give chess goodie
Chess goodies: 3
Wed Aug 30 2006 12:28PM | MsgID: 5051826



I was surprised to notice that the case of "castling where opponent is not" (i.e. catching him "leaning in the wrong direction") did not arise.

Personally, unless placing the Rook "on a juicy file" is an immediate issue, I prefer to work on emptying the back rank and wait until his (or, her) pieces (especially Bishops) are deployed.

Then... castle the other way. Hopefully, I will have caused him (or, her) to "spend a little ChessTime" redeploying. Whilst I proceed with whatever I have brewing.

And, by that stage of the game, it might even be more clear as to whether it is prudent to castle at all!

This is an important topic. And, a "double-edged" one at that. With at least ONE undeniable fact - that it depends on what's occurring with the game at hand...

Hopefully, this thought aids in your assessment of the age-old question...








jim42078, Lord Ptarmigan

Chess rating: 2217
LCF 114 Fide approx. 1820






 Topics started


England
Give chess goodie
Chess goodies: 32
Wed Aug 30 2006 8:43AM | edited: 8:44:02 | MsgID: 5050912


Castling is as much a rook move as a king move, so if your kings is better off in the centre don't castle, play Kf1 or Kf2 instead and keep the rook on the h-file, or castle queenside to launch a massiv kingside assault, etc.

It depends on the position whether you castle or not, and as you get stronger you will be more able to realise when to and when not to castle and where.







BeerClark

Chess rating: 1668
LCF 1222




 Topics started


United States
Give chess goodie
Wed Aug 30 2006 5:17AM | MsgID: 5050453


Originally posted by: "Legendary Samurai"
I mean, you king is trapped in the corner or is it ??




Yes... but in a good way.

While it was Noble in the Old days for a King to LEAD his troops... it was also poor practice.

Picture your King safe in a bunker. He's 'trapped' from moving in 3 directions (front / right / left), but he also can't BE ATTACKED from 3 directions either. Up until the endgame, your King itself must think of defence first. Let the rest of your 'army' go into the thick of the fight. Staying in the middle also gives your opponent more oppurtunity to get a 'stray bullet' at your King with a possible tactic that would be less likely in the corner.

You might try to argue "Well in the corner, he can't escape from a direct assualt. There's no place to go!". True.. but not a concern. Since you are not likely outnumbered on the chessboard (if you are...you've got other problems!), any attack is doomed to fail. As the room around the King gets tighter for attacking pieces.. your defence becomes more effective.

Yeh...I'm rambling, but I hope it helps you understand better.









DocUnk

Chess rating: 2804



 Topics started


United States
Give chess goodie
Chess goodies: 7
Wed Aug 30 2006 1:37AM | edited: 1:39:25 | MsgID: 5049813


Well yes, but ...

Consider this (loose) analogy: some drivers refrain from seat belt use for fear they might be trapped in say a burning vehicle (which could really happen), but statistically more lives are saved than lost through the use of that device.

Similarly 'on the average' or 'generally' it is wise to castle, although there is always a chance later for the king to become entombed back there in the corner.

Early in the game both sides race to deploy their pieces effectively and efficiently. Since it is not usually clear at the outset how the conflict will unfold, the forces try to occupy posts in or near the center to facilitate rapid transfer to the main theater of action wherever that might turn out to be. With all that firepower in the middle, things could get too hot for his majesty.

Secondarily, castling helps to activate a rook, because it is usually easier to mobilize that piece via one of the two central (d- or e-) files where an early line-opening pawn exchange is more likely to occur. Rarely, a rook is 'lifted' into action via a3(a6) or h3(h6).

So generally, yes, castle. Once you have done so, be careful not to make unnecessary pawn moves that could create weak squares ('holes') in the king's field, and take measures to ensure your back rank does not become vulnerable to invasion by an enemy rook or queen.







Previous Page1 2 Next Page