Your thoughts on the chess principle to not move pawns except centre pawns and passed pawns

Hello Friends,

I am reading the book The Tao of Chess - 200 Principles to Transform Your Chess and Your Life by Peter Kurzdorfer. In it says:

Principle 5: Leave the pawns alone, except for center pawns and passed pawns

The idea behind this is:

a) if you move other pawns then once they move they no longer control the squares left behind

b) you play more with your minor and major pieces then pawns

This principle is of course just a guideline and if situation so demands one should move other pawns.

Can people please share their thoughts on this ie do they agree with it and if so then why? Or if you don't agree then pl share your reasons.

Thanks!

I disagree

Pawn moves allow for you to gain space, and gain contol of strategic squares

It all depends on the position. But in general, I agree!

I made mistake of playing pawn instead of developing and paid the price.

Here is the entire game:

I moved pawns (which could have been avoided) at least thrice in this game - I moved a, b and c pawns.

I think the reason for the suggestion in this book to not move pawns is:

1) In opening phase you rather focus on your minor and major piece development than moving pawns. The move 9. a3 is a good example.

2) When you move pawns then they leave behind weaknesses as they cannot protect the squares they have left behind. By moving b and c pawns I could no longer kick out black's bishop after it came to d4 square,

3) This is similar to pt 1 - rather than playing with your pawns play with your minor and major pieces - so move them instead of pawns.

And of course this principle doesn't mean you never move any pawn except center pawns and passed pawns - if situation demands it then you do it eg to prevent knight protecting castled king from being pinned by opponents bishop you might move the corner pawn.

So what this principle means is that move pawns other than center and passed pawns ONLY if you have a concrete reason for doing so.

Very good principle! Thanks to Tao of Chess book

pawns can and often do win games  they are the soul of chess , look after them they will look after you  , id agree that it depends on the position but also know a pawn never retreats so pushing them forward can leave holes in your defence but gaining space has merit too 

Looking after them could also mean not moving them without a concrete reason

Btw - this principle does not mean do not move pawns eg its similar to the principle of moving a piece only once in opening phase of game - this is very good advice but sometimes you might move a piece twice eg in Ruy Lopez when playing with white you are going to move your bishop again in the opening phase itself or in Italian Knight Attack (Fried Lever Attack) you are going to move you knight a second time (and a third if opponents makes mistake!) - but there are cases where a concrete reason is there to move the same piece twice.

So what this principle means is do not move those pawns unless a very good\concrete plan or reason is there.

You are among the few who have said they agree with this principle.

One query for you - which phase of the game does this principle apply to : pening, middle or  end game or to all of them?

Good question.
This principle applies only for the opening!

In one of my current daily games at this point I (white) had the chance to either play with my pawns or develop my minor pieces - my bishop and knight.

White to move. What do you suggest white do at this point ie advance his g and h pawns or get his bishop & knight to better positions?

Play bc3.

I think this principles applies the most for opening but it applies for other phases of the game too.

So in other phases of game what this principle means is:

i) instead of playing with your pawns give preference to playing with your minor and major pieces unless (so move pawns only if you see a concrete reason for it)

ii) do know that if you move your pawns you are leaving weak\unprotected squares which the pawn can now never protect.

The problem with moving too many pawns is that even though you're creating space, your position becomes vulnerable and especially your king might get in danger, because he has nowhere to cover, when you've pushed too many pawns

Yes!

Every Pawn advance leaves a string of weak squares behind it on both sides, like the wake of a motorboat.

Dang, I am the ultimate pawn pusher. I'm not sure what to think about this.

I'm pretty sure you are not the only pawn pusher here...

Your 4th game is Evans gambit and I see in your games that you play this quite often. In Evans its quite normal to push the b and then c pawn and no harm in it.

In remaining 3 games - in all 3 your queen side bishop, knight and rook are not yet developed. But your opponent also has not done proper piece development and I don't know if you forced him by your moves to not be able to development or you are just lucky he did not do development.

Maybe if you share the entire game for first 3 then it can be analysed.

How I will look at the game you have shared is that both sides did do piece development.