This is my first post in my blog. I'd like to start writing down some concepts that I've randomly thought about that are worth sharing. Some of these ideas may sound trivial but they give insight into how I look at the game. I don't doubt that many of these concepts have already been thought of but with different names (if they have any names). Enjoy!
Viewing a chess move as a probability exercise:
Think of the idea of moving a piece to an active square, or to move a piece where you will gain space. Moving a piece towards these goals essentially mean that these pieces will have a higher probability of doing something--whether getting closer to a mating attack; coordinating with other pieces in a tactic; etc. Oppositely, if you move a piece where it does not control a lot of squares or the potential to control squares, you are decreasing its probability of it being important in the game.
"Dynamic" or "Semi-forcing Moves"
When thinking of a set of candidate moves, there are moves that will force some sort of important decision by the opponent. Note that I'm not thinking of "forcing" moves, where the opponent has only one good way of responding. A semi-forcing move, or actually I prefer a dynamic move, is one that can change the current static nature of a position. This can be a move that leads to exchanges; it can even be a move that can be ignored in the next turn but keeps a tension that can possibly explode. An example of a dynamic move is move 2 by White in the classic King's Gambit opening: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 !?
https://lichess.org/study/rOyZO3qI/kPHoePjF
The inspiration for this concept is that I'm fascinated by pawn structures. I find pawn pushes to be some of the most consequential dynamic moves. Here is an example from a game (Bronstein - Botvinnik, 1951):
https://lichess.org/study/rOyZO3qI/hEl6vMIE
Black will play 7..c5, a dynamic move as it threatens a pawn and invites White to exchange pawns or ignore the tension for now. Nevertheless, this is a consequential move that will forever alter the structure of the pawns.
A "Coordinating Move"
Given two pieces, a coordinating move is where a piece moves to a square that will have the attacked squares intersect. Below, the position/move doesn't make sense; I just want to illustrate the concept:
https://lichess.org/study/rOyZO3qI/QOUIjzK1
In the above, Rg1 is a coordinating move as White's pieces will attack a common square. This type of move is commonly seen in puzzles/tactics. Generally it's a good idea to coordinate pieces to attack a square or squares where claiming that square or squares can weaken the opponent's position.
