We’ve watched with enjoyment and amusement the argument between Jacob Aagard and John Watson, and along the way we’ve learned a thing or six. But in all the dust the two have kicked up, the fact that they’re not always arguing, but instead telling each other the same thing using different words, may get lost from the view of the improving player. So we’ve decided to point out something: Rules, or “general principles” as we prefer to think of them, are important (even vital) to the improving player.

As our recounting the quote Cecil Purdy wrote nearly a half-century ago should indicate, we don’t believe in the absolute authority of general principles. “Never end a sentence with a preposition” is a principle of the English language we learned long ago. Yet Churchill, when reminded of that “rule” is said to have responded, “That is the sort of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put!”

Our agreement with the attitude attributed to Sir Winston, however, does not alter the fact that the vast majority of sentences we write do not end with prepositions. Most sentences sound better to the ear (and the mind) if they don’t end with a preposition, still there are those few cases where a prepostion is the best word to end the sentence with.

It’s no different in chess. From the simple (”Rooks belong behind passed pawns”) to the complex (”Where there is a completely open file, and only one, it is no use trying to sidestep it. The game must be decided on it, whether you like it or not”) all general principles in chess have exceptions.

But the reason they are principles is they are correct far more often than they are wrong. Like the rules for good English, they are to be followed in the absence of a reason to break them. If you don’t have a good reason to put the Rook beside the pawn, put it behind the pawn; if the knight does not have a good reason to be on the edge of the board, don’t put one there.

When beginning to learn chess, the player should be made aware of the principles of chess. And the player should follow those principles during games; since they are correct far more often than incorrect, the result will be progress. The principles will be quite useful while the player polishes other skills required by chess: such as the recognition of tactical patterns and the ability to calculate variations.

As those skills improve, the student then needs to start expanding the search for a move. Test moves that break principles to see what can be gained by doing so. Gradually the player will learn how much compensation must be gained in order to make breaking the principle profitable.

The strength of these chess “rules” lies in the fact that when there is nothing to be gained by breaking them, nothing will be lost by following them. Until a player’s skills have improved enough to be able to find a reason break them, the principles should be followed.

This entry was posted on Friday, October 20th, 2006 at 7:55 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.