The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1901-02-24


".stronger'' than a rock, or knight, or
I#bishop, and that each OF these is greatly
superiorsto a. pawn in .s.strengt tn. =
because the stronger piece captures more
hostile men, and gives checkmate more
easily than the inferior one. That is
probably about all that the normal chess
player Will find out il left to his own
resources.
STRENGTH OF PIECES:
In its maybe 900 years Of existence
the theory OF chess has, Of course. devel-
oped very far beyond this rudlnenatry
stage. Probably there was in former
times only a kind OF intellectual haze,
OUT Of which formed itself slowly liz
lue;i or yaIue, or attack and defense, and
OF development. All this part of Eevolus
lion is unfortunately covered with utter
darkness. The man who first had the
idea that piece in chess has certain
aycra ge value or strength must have
been a philosopher in his way. At least
the idea is very general one. The
notion Of strength was generally adopted,
and probably long ago this scale was
made:
1.-Two rocks or three minor pieces.
2.-G;ueen.
Brook and minor piece.
4.-Rook or minor piece and two pawns.
! 5.-Minors piece or three pawns.
This scale represents five different
grades of strength, in a decreasing order.
With minor piece is designated q bishop
| or knight.
The conceptions of attack and defense
in chess develop naturally from the
extremely frequent occurrence Of cap
lures and threatened captures. If 4
strong piece-for instance, the queen or
-fcs i'm or, l..
q piece of minor value it is forced to
move away, or else will be lost It was
attacked" and it's defense was flight.
There are still other means of defense
1or instance, attack on q hostile man of
equal or superior value, or maybe the
tfreat OF queening a pawn, or of obtain
ing great advantage in position
NoWadaNs a Threatened capture is no
more called an attack, but only a threat.
An attack, as it is now understood, is
Always {; long series of moves, in the
course of which all the forcing comes from
ONE side. 1t is often difficult to deter
mlne which side is the aggressive side:
in fact the conception of attack is some
what Infsty There is such a thing as
being forced to attack which is ifrecon-
cilable with the original idea of attack.
ATTACK
pioS uune1S AI0 very
L'ond of what they call attack. In the
commencement Of the game, for instance,
they invariably bring out the queen, and
say another piece, probably the far
reaching bishop, I'm order to attack twice
!the hostile l1ing-bisllops pawn. If the
queen succeeds in capturing that pawn
early in the game, protected by a friend
ly man, the hostile king is usually check
mated Immediately. But THE other play.
er will soon find out that trick, and stop
it by osstructing the files of the queen or
the blsrop, attacking the king-bishop's
PAWN BY attacking the hostile queen,
and driving it iron one position to an
other, ha will develop" his pieces, bring
them quickly into play, exchange hostile
gpawns, that is capture them by pawns,
to remove the distractions for his pieces,
and make "a counter attack with better
right and success than his adversary.
The chess-players of the continent, es-
pec.aE NY of the Latin 1nceS, seem to have
revelled in ATTACKS At least they in
vented a large number of words that are
in relation to the idea OF attack. For in
stance they speak of the ''verve" Of an
attack, OF an impetuous attack, of a. long
lasting" (nachalugen) attack, of an ''ele-
CANT attack, of an over-rushed "<ube,-
sturzt') attack, of the reaction" after
the attack
STEINITZ'S THEORY.
The English language speaks only OF
strong attack of u premature attack, and
of a counter attack. But it created a
combination of words that is hardly trans
latable into other languages, namely po-s
sition Judgment This aPpa rently slight
circumstance is not without importance.
1t was indeed by a IMAM who lived the
greater part of his life in England that
the philosophy or theory of chess receiv-
ed u complete change. And probably the
ideas of this man were guided by the ma
tional instincts of the English race. His
name was William Steinitz, chess cham
plon OF the world LION g years.
The old theory of chess knew only the
few terms alluded to above, some of
which are only partially tenable. Steinitz
improved the whole theory by modifying
the irea of attack, replacing it to a large
extent .by that of position, and by
creating the conception of the weak
points, The essence of his theory may
be given in a few principles.
LIN the initial position the "balance
of position" is complete.
2.-Do not attack when you have not
tangible advantage in position.
3-Attack the weak points"
1t would be interesting to enter into
a fuller discussion of Steinitz's theory,
but space would fail US, wherefore we
must leave this to another opportunity.
NEWER SCHOOL.
Steintz was undoubtedly right in his
general views on chess, except III one
particular, where he went to extremes.
It is remarkable, almost incomprehensible
that he did not admit the necessity for
quick development. He carried these
wrong views into practice, and that was
the reason of the defeats he suffered
during the seven or eight last years of
his life. It was not alone the loss of
and energy entailed by age
which caused him to lose his high posi-
ton, but the springing up of a newer |
school of chess players, who appreciated |
Steinitzs theory, but combined it with |
what was good in the old theory.
Nowadays, by a few of the very first !
masters" the theory Of chess above |
alluded to is applied, and their games are
published i'll books and newspapers and |
are widely Known. There are hundreds |
Of thousands of ss-players distributed |
all over the globe, in South Africa as well |
as in north Africa, in New Zealand, in |
in India, at the court of the !
King of Siam and the Shah of Persia |
Wherefore comes this universal fascina-