Tempo

All of us have learnt that a tempo is gain when we particularly move a piece in each turns. What I'm going to ask here is more into depth what a tempo really means. A dear friend once asked me to learn about development tempo, counting tempo and differential tempo. I couldn't find anything about those topics on the net. Really need some help here to make me understand more on those topics.

The 3 advantages/disadvantages in chess are:

a. Time- divided on a chessboard into tempos

b. Space - divided on a chessboard into controlled and uncontrolled squares

c. Material- defined on a chessboard as

1. Extra pawn or more

2. Extra piece or more

3. Minor Exhange - exchanged one or both of your Ns for opponent's B(s)

a. The B-pair are an attacking weapon that can efficiently hem in enemy pawns producing a SPACE advantage

b. There is the distinct possibility of transposing from the middle game to a winning or won endgame either R+B+p(s) vs. R+N+p(s) or K+B+p(s) vs. K+N+p(s). There are many factors to take into consideration in these type of endgames, but a major factor is that the B can gain or lose a TEMPO, the N CANNOT.

c. Bs can cross the board in one move, Ns CANNOT (this is a TIME advantage for the B)

d. Bs can gain or lose a TEMPO, Ns CANNOT

4. The Exchange - winning a R for a B or N in an exchange or tactical combination

There is a lot more. if your would like to know more, please let me know.

What about check? Can't a knight gain tempi with check?

Tempo advantage= #Useful developing moves by the first player-#Useful developing moves by the second player.

So if you develop a piece and simultaniously create a threat that must be parried by a non-developing move, you are said to be up a tempo.

That's pretty much it. Whether a certain tempo advantage is actually worth anything substantial depends on the position. However, if you are a large amount of tempos up in an open position, game-winning tactics tend to arise out of nowhere.

umbrella_corporation wrote:

Timothy_P wrote:

Yaroslavl wrote:

b. Bs can gain or lose a TEMPO, Ns CANNOT

What about check? Can't a knight gain tempi with check?

yes

________________________

A N check (+) is an intermezzo move that can be defended against in most positions directly or indirectly. Defended against directly most likely loses the initiative/attack, or indirectly and maintains the initiative/attack. In either case on the N's next move it cannot maintain the previous position intact concerning the essential factors (example "zugswang position" - a position where any move by the side which is in zugswang relinquishes the ideal defensive position and one or more of the threats by the other side can be executed.

The very fact that the N must change color squares prevents it from gaining or losing a tempo

Post a diagrammed position and explain how the N can gain a tempo with check.

Is it White to move or Black to move? You didn't post the explanation of how the N gains a tempo.

umbrella_corporation wrote:

Yaroslavl wrote:

Is it White to move or Black to move? You didn't post the explanation of how the N gains a tempo.

nope i didn't and i'm not going to.  good fight.

____________________

Could you post the position 2 moves prior to the diagrammed position.

umbrella_corporation wrote:

Yaroslavl wrote:

umbrella_corporation wrote:

Yaroslavl wrote:

Is it White to move or Black to move? You didn't post the explanation of how the N gains a tempo.

nope i didn't and i'm not going to.  good fight.

____________________

Could you post the position 2 moves prior to the diagrammed position.

so u won't admit u are wrong but now u are looking at the diagram to see if this is an unrealistic position.  this is a position i came up with on my own - not from an actual game - u come up with what u think the position two moves prior was if u care so much.  this is a legal position, doesn't look  that bizarre or artificial to me and shows that a knight can check with tempo.  just admit u were wrong.

__________________________

Ok, your same diagrammed position with Black to move. 1...c5. Can you gain or lose a tempo with the N?

You are confusing gaining or losing a tempo with a tactical combination made possible by a blunder by your opponent. Black's position in your posted diagram is not a position where Black is defending against all threats and White's next turn has to lose a move without changing the position in regards to White's threats and Black's defenses. Once White has made that move Black's turn upsets the adequate defensive position and one or more of White's threats is no longer defended against.

In either case the N cannot maintain the previous position intact concerning the essential factors of the position (example "zugswang position" - a position where any move by the side which is in zugswang relinquishes the ideal defensive position and one or more of the threats by the other side can be executed.

The very fact that the N must change color squares prevents it from gaining or losing a tempo

One more example that Bs can gain or lose a tempo, and this very fact can convert a winning position into a won position. For 300years it was believed by the best endgame analysts that K+2Bs vs. K+N was a draw. It is now well known that it is a forced win for the K+2Bs because the Bs can gain and lose a tempo.

Umbrella_corporation wrote

pond structure is important as well

________________________

Yes, you are right. Pawn structure is the key to all positions in chess.

whats tempo :D don kno wat it is hohohohoo

Piece activity compensates weaknesses.  It's said that three tempi are worth a pawn.  The great thing about having the initiative is you could convert it into a more permanent advantage.  Let's say you're piling pressure on their king, they are forced to make concessions and consolidate their weaknesses (at best) and at worst (for them) they'll be mated or lose material. 

Attacking/trying to convert our tempi into another advantage is fun, but we will be on the defense eventually, guarunteed (maybe not in one game but counting all of them we'll have some where defending is key).  I don't like calling the inferior side the "defender" since it creates confusion.  What if you're materially superior but they seem to have compensation in the form of an initiative, but accurately walk a tightrope and suddenly they're simply down a piece?  The defending side in that case is objectively superior. 

3 tempi for a pawn? 3? If I can make three moves before you make one, I think I could afford to give up a pawn.