Wrong. 2 Knights will only draw!
K+B+B vs. K is a win with the 2 Bishops
K+N+B vs. K is a win with the Knight and Bishop
K+N+N vs. K is a draw!
Attack the center in implicit ways to avoid forward strategy variations that can cause material imbalance producing losing control over the "a", "b", "g", "h" files and eventually creating weakness that will probably lead to unnecesary sacrifices threatening the most valuable piece.
@solstice021 You can checkmate with two knights, but it is not forced.
en.lichess.org/ojHvUBf7lla9Here is a 2 knight checkmate I did on myself
#13
True but with best play it's a draw.
#14
Black could have played Kf1 and then there is no mate! Kf1 Nh2+ Kxe2! The position you have with Nf2 mate is one of the possible positions to mate in a K+N+N vs K but it's not forced as the lone King only has to make sure that any next Knight move won't mate!
Still is possible to checkmate with only a knight + bishop.
[Variant "From Position"]
[FEN "8/5k1K/8/6n1/8/6b1/8/8 w - - 0 1"]
1. Kh6 Kf6 2. Kh5 Kf5 3. Kh6 Ne6 4. Kh5 Nf4+
5. Kh6 Kf6 6. Kh7 Kf7 7. Kh6 Bh4 8. Kh7 Bg5
9. Kh8 Ne6 10. Kh7 Nf8+ 11. Kh8 Bf6#
or with a lone bishop
[Variant "From Position"]
[FEN "3b3K/5k1P/8/8/8/8/8/8 b - - 0 1"]
1... Bf6#
or with a lone knight
[Variant "From Position"]
[FEN "5n1K/5k1P/8/8/8/8/8/8 b - - 0 1"]
1... Ng6#
and some help from the opponent as well.
Those 'untold rules' everyone is spouting are a waste of time. You want to get better quickly? Learn any true variation of Steinitz laws of chess. They are referred to generally as principled chess or methods of chess.
You simply see the principle then deeply analyse why it is so. One principle can explain roughly 5-10 of the above mentioned rules.
The principle of the center for example demonstrates development, defense and attack. Principle of attack explains when how why you attack. The principle of negation. Meaning stopping development or plans of your opponent is equal to execution of your plans or development.
^^ I don't consider myself an expert in any way, as a matter of fact, I've only been playing seriously for a short while, and have had to teach myself, so I have had little idea of where to start.
I do like your ideas of learning these principles, and I would like to learn this approach. Where should I go (on the internet) to learn these principles?
Well prior to today you had to search books. And you had to do it through mound and mounds of authors. Consistent was Capablanca and Lasker.
Today you can buy Igor Smirnov's video course and it covers everything short of walking you through positional motifs. They are more expensive than books.. but you don't need to search everything down and it's all in one series.
On another side you can choose a tutor. I for example teach similarly to Igor Smirnov in that I believe in his methods. Tutors can be expensive and you run the risk of a bad teacher. If you get someone who speaks to you then it can be very much worth the money.
You can try to Google Steinitz laws of chess and see if free material comes up as an alternative.
thanks you MeWantCookie! i create this topic to find some route for progress because i consider myself (when on the mood and when concentrating) on the level like 1600 and i feel stuck on this level and i was looking for this rules to check if i missed something in my stage or to learn more about this... because i am theoretical learner and i must understrand the theory behind something like tactics before i can do puzzles.. like yeah puzzles help me but i feel that they are not so helpful for me as it should be and even thou i do some of tactics very intuitive they are still not something that can improve my game a lot and so i hoped that this rules help me to improve little more than just do puzzles all day
