Developing Pawns instead of Pieces

Compare this game with a normal opening. I developed pawns instead of pieces. You see, every time you march a pawn, you gain space, and your opponent loses that much space. Space is a positional advantage!

Still, this strategy is very unusual. It only works here because:

• The position is closed (no tactics), with not even a single open file.
• My camp had no weak spots.
• There were no holes for enemy pieces.
• White had no useful pawnbreaks.

Something to remember: When you push your pawns, you loosen control of the squares they guard. Make sure that when you grab space you are not creating weak squares that can be captured.

Early on there was a hole on e6, and on move 12 another one on c6. Move 19 weakened c4, and White could have gotten some counterplay with a g5-thrust (Sacrificing the Bishop on h5 and pulling the Queen back to d1, though I'm not sure if this is a sound attack.)

In any case, White didn't fully exploit these moves, so the game was a good one. Congrats! Just don't be too greedy in your quest for more space with future games.

I maintain my own counsel. Regarding the squares above, there is no way White can put pieces there, so the "holes" may exist only in theory. As for a bishop sacrifice on h5, that would take some brutal tactics, which may not exist either. Unless if you can produce a concrete line (with computer analysis to back it up).

Philosophically, if one considers position (closed, blocked), the terrain favors static advantages (advanced pawns) rather than dynamic advantages (lead in development). This is the reason why I moved out all those pawns, because once I have space, I will be able to optimize the placement of my pieces. Conversely, White was forced into poor piece placement, because he had less space.

I have analyed the game extensively using Fritz. It is definitely a sound strategy, as far as computation is concerned. But I also believe it is philosophically sound, because the moves are chosen based on principle. White ultimately lost because of the following mistakes:

• Bg5
• c3
• h3
• 0-0-0
• a3
  

I am not saying that this game was played wrongly, only that you should be aware that gaining space is a big responsibility; it's not an easy advantage to keep.

If on move 12, White had played Nc4, you could not have chased his Knight away from the c4-square with permanently weakening the c6-square. White, however, played passively and thus you won a good game. No argument there.

Nice comments, very well written. Great game, thought too positional for my blood.

Fly a kite, tony. My style is rational and you can keep your snide remarks to yourself. Comment on the content, or be silent.

from my personal experience, it's pretty easy to beat someone who mostly pushes pawns in the opening. your opponent allowed you to get away with it because he made no attempt to open up the center and have all his minor pieces developed.

i just trade a couple pawns, or even sac one or two to open the position, and then i'm usually ahead in development.

@trigs: You're right. Moves like h3 and c3 gave Black all the time to set up a pawn empire.

But then again - modern Black players have been showing plenty of success with pawn-heavy openings. Let's hear it from the Sicilian (c5, d6, a6, e6). The power of pawns lies in their super-solidity - a quality which Black, as the defender, must appreciate.

As to your "sac one or two pawns" approach, I can testify that players from 1900 onwards are extremely difficult to crack in this manner. In fact, they may even encourage you to sac, like waving a red flag to a bull.

Well maybe you don't develop your pawns :P.

I personally like developing my pawns to open files.

Right, Tony, you said:

• The famous King's Indian pawn center...lol
• Jeez, another Einstein impression...

I didn't see anything in there about either philosphy or soundness. Suddenly you become all philosphical and even have arguments? Wow.

@eebster: Absolutely agree with you. I like developing pawns to open files, too. Of course, I like developing pieces, too, but pawn-based strategies get less attention at the moment, so I'm promoting it. (With the caveat that you usually need special situations and special care for that to be done successfully.)

Y'all do know that pawn moves are NOT developing moves I hope ?!  <gasp>

i think you are mistaken about the pawn moves, whisperwalk. however, i still understand your overall point. here's a game (in the wing gambit) that illustrates your intent i think:

I think you are missing the sarcasm there, whisper.

You by definition cannot have pawns on open files.

1. If u wanna play hyper - modern take up 'My System' by Nimzowitsch 

2. Game well played but don't usually take a provocative system like that (If you want i suggest you analyze Karpov or Petrosian's games) what if sum1 had actually played 6.d6 then you're positionally busted and white can then play your line with a very easy game.

3. Pawn moves take space a deprive the opponent of it, correct but the more advanced the pawn the more vulnerable it is (This is more dogma but it is more easily justifiable than the rest) what if sum1 starts the 'First restrain, then blockade, and finally destroy' strategy against you ?

4. I suggest you read the book  'Giants of Strategy'.

I would suggest a battle to the death but it might end up like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2TicMbH4OY

@eebster: Love the video.

Is this how 1800s on chesscube think?  I should be rated 2200 there

Or was this a bullet game?

Not really 2200 though... it wasn't a bad game, and yes space is important and a closed game does make development not as necessary.

Maybe it was the slight arrogance the comments were made with -- or maybe I just think of my games differently.  I like to look for what specifically was good or bad.

For example I don't think white was wrong to play on the queenside even after he castled there... he just got confused with moves like g4 and Rb1.  Your attack wasn't that dangerous with so many defenders available to white, and if the c file becomes open white can play against your c7 pawn.

If you open the queenside and white is ready, I think it could backfire on black.

Anyway it was a nice game, sorry to be so critical on a game posted in the showcase section.

[edit]

Actually I stopped watching around move 18, maybe the comments have a cumulative effect :)

White made many strategic mistakes.