Answers.Body: <p>Most of what you said is true, but at the same time Black is up a knight for two pawns. This is a significant material advantage, and White's compensation isn't enough to balance the scales. He has active pieces yes, but his activity is nowhere near decisive. Black should manage to untangle and develop his queenside before White can muster enough of an attack.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-31T07:26:50.243Z
Answers.Text: This is the actual answer. All other things being equal, Stockfish (used by Lichess) would normally rate "two pawns for a piece" as more negative than -1.4. That means it thinks White has a positional advantage, but not enough to make up for the material.
Answers.UserDisplayName: BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-31T07:41:55.670Z
Answers.Text: @BlueRaja-DannyPflughoeft Agreed - if everything else is equal, a piece for two pawns should be a clearly winning advantage, so Stockfish would evaluate it accordingly. -1.4 is good for Black, but still in the range where it could plausibly be a draw or win if SF played against itself.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-29T13:07:16.743Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-10-29T13:07:16.743Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Answers.Body: <ol>
  <li>Include the positional strengths of you opponent in your evaluation.  For example Knight on d6 is nicely blockading your d-pawn.</li>
  <li>How will you take advantage of your well placed pieces?  What is the plan?  A good looking piece with nothing to do is not much advantage.</li>
  <li>Is your Bishop beautifully placed?  It has limited action and is blocked by your d-pawn. How will you unblock it?  c2-c4-c5?</li>
  <li>Unless you are a computer I suggest not using number evaluations.</li>
  <li>Include dynamic evaluation as well as static evaluation.  What are the plans for each side?</li>
  </ol>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-29T13:50:12.010Z
Answers.Text: 3. c2-c4-c5 is exactly how I did it. I lost btw
Answers.UserDisplayName: insipidintegrator
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-29T13:58:51.077Z
Answers.Text: I mean, the bishop stares at the king, isn’t that beautiful?
Answers.UserDisplayName: insipidintegrator
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-29T14:23:01.157Z
Answers.Text: @insipidintegrator the bishop is "biting on granite" as Brian Towers mentions in his answer.  Your d-pawn is protecting your opponents king.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Michael West
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-29T13:21:02.683Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-10-29T13:21:02.683Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Michael West
Answers.Body: <ol>
  <li><p>First and foremost, white is down material with no immediate prospects of attack.</p>
  </li>
  <li><p>The black knight perfectly and eternally blockades the pawn, leaving the white bishop to hopelessly eye a king that it will never influence. How will white remove the knight? c4-c5 may be stopped with b6. (Though there is admittedly a prophylactic a5 by white to stop b6.) Trading white's last remaining knight for the knight is fruitless -- particularly since black may replace it with another piece such as... the other knight! If it ever seems truly necessary, black may simply oppose the light-squared diagonal via Bf7. Or even just play Kh8.</p>
  </li>
  <li><p>Black also lacks accessible <em>weaknesses and targets</em>. It is not sufficient to have &quot;well-placed&quot; pieces if they do not fulfill any concrete roles in exploiting weaknesses.</p>
  </li>
  </ol>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-30T08:03:57.247Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-10-30T08:03:57.247Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Mateen Ulhaq
Answers.Body: <p>It has been well said that chess games are not won by creating good positions but by making good moves. Every comment by the OP about the position is true in a way. It describes the potential in the position but does not consider the moves needed to realise that potential. For the reasons given by Yifan, this position is entirely about the battle to play c5, although this is not immediately obvious. But that move is so strong that it is worth considering even such a slow move as Ba2, to enable b4 after first playing a5. I am not saying that Ba2 is good, just that there are good reasons to consider it. If it should turn out to be good, an annotator would be justified in calling it &quot;deep&quot;. Generously, let us suppose that the missing White Knight was a deliberate sacrifice. Could it have been made by a strong aggressive player? I think it could, but only if that player had
  not only seen the potential in the position, but had felt confidence that they would be able to find enough resources to unlock that potential. Can the good position be made even better?Tal might perhaps have felt that confidence. Lacking his genius, I must call the position unclear.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-30T15:51:45.123Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-10-30T15:59:56.703Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2022-10-30T15:59:56.703Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Philip Roe
Answers.Body: <blockquote>
  <p>The bishop is beautifully placed.</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>No, it isn't!</p>
  <p>It is semi-bad. There is a chess expression - &quot;Biting on granite&quot;. If Black had pawns on f7, e6 and d5 your bishop would be &quot;biting on granite&quot;. Your bishop is worse than that. It is biting on something harder than granite, namely your own blockaded pawn.</p>
  <p>Now if you had a dark-squared bishop that would be excellent. Just look at all those juicy weak dark squares round the black king. Add to that no black dark squared bishop and if you had one it would be a monster.</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>The knight will infiltrate</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>Really? Where? It is OK where it is. It can be supported by f4 when it will be very difficult to shift.</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>There is a discovered check for me</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>No, there isn't. A competent black is going to keep that useful white pawn on d5 as long as possible, maybe try and win it in the endgame but defintely keep it where it is for the middlegame.</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>My rook controls the semi-open file</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>Again, not true. The &quot;open&quot; refers to pawns not pieces. Controlling a semi-open file means having a rook on a file where you don't have a pawn but your opponent does. It does not mean a rook which is supporting one of your minor pieces on an otherwise completely open file.</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>Black has two undeveloped pieces.</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>And so? What is your practical plan for taking advantage of that? What are you calculations? You don't have any. Black is going to unravel and win unless they are the same standard as you.</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>Why am I worse here?</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>Because you are a piece for two pawns down.</p>
  <p>You've just played the mistake Ne5. Why are you moving a piece twice before completing your development? Oh, and Nd4 would have been much better. There your knight really can infiltrate to say e6.</p>
  <p>As you say, Black is marginally behind in development. So, you need to complete your development first by moving your queen to connect your rooks, centralize the a1 rook without losing the b2 pawn and only then launch your attack.</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>And I would like some general tips for analysing positions as a 1050 chess.com rapid player.</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>Do two things:</p>
  <ol>
  <li>Complete your own development before going on the attack</li>
  <li>Try and work out what your opponent's plans are (or should be) and try and stop them.</li>
  </ol>
  <p>One other thing. Sacrificing a piece for two pawns and a check is a very common way of losing games at lower levels. At your level just don't sacrifice until your tactical awareness is much better and you have a reasonable chance of calculating what is going to happen next.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-30T03:39:14.890Z
Answers.Text: I agree with part of what you've said, but some properties of White's position are true merits. E.g., the bishop on b3 is a good piece, as it can soon be opened if the d5-pawn advances, which could be done if the c-pawn runs to c5. The knight on e5 is also a nicely placed piece, it is centralized in Black's territory and on one of Black's weak dark squares. Black's bad development, and the king being on the b3-g8 diagonal, means he will have to spend a few tempi remedying this, which is worth something. Black is still of course better, but White's not outright losing.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-31T18:41:51.383Z
Answers.Text: Wait. What happened here @YiFan? Was there an exchange that I missed? Did InertialIgnorance’s comment get flagged?
Answers.UserDisplayName: insipidintegrator
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-29T14:14:19.540Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-10-29T14:14:19.540Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Brian Towers
Body: <p>In this position I thought I was winning with white, like +2 or +2.5. But Lichess Analysis shows evaluation as -1.4.</p>
  <pre><code>[Title &quot;Black to move after Ne5&quot;]
  [fen &quot;rn3rk1/1p1b3p/p2n1qp1/3PNp2/P7/1B5P/1PP2PP1/R2QR1K1 w - - 1 0&quot;]
  </code></pre>
  <p>The bishop is beautifully placed. The knight will infiltrate. There is a discovered check for me. My rook controls the semi-open file. Black has two undeveloped pieces. There is no immediate pressure on the f-file/f2-pawn.</p>
  <p>Why am I worse here? And I would like some general tips for analysing positions as a 1050 chess.com rapid player.</p>
  
Tags: <analysis><beginner><evaluation>
Title: How to analyse positions more accurately as a total beginner?
ThreadText: # How to analyse positions more accurately as a total beginner?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2022-10-29)
  
  In this position I thought I was winning with white, like +2 or +2.5. But Lichess Analysis shows evaluation as -1.4.
  
  ```
  [Title "Black to move after Ne5"]
  [fen "rn3rk1/1p1b3p/p2n1qp1/3PNp2/P7/1B5P/1PP2PP1/R2QR1K1 w - - 1 0"]
  
  ```
  
  The bishop is beautifully placed. The knight will infiltrate. There is a discovered check for me. My rook controls the semi-open file. Black has two undeveloped pieces. There is no immediate pressure on the f-file/f2-pawn.
  
  Why am I worse here? And I would like some general tips for analysing positions as a 1050 chess.com rapid player.
  
  **Tags:** analysis, beginner, evaluation
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 5 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_6 on 2022-10-29. Score: 14 | Accepted answer
  
  > The bishop is beautifully placed.
  
  No, it isn't!
  
  It is semi-bad. There is a chess expression - "Biting on granite". If Black had pawns on f7, e6 and d5 your bishop would be "biting on granite". Your bishop is worse than that. It is biting on something harder than granite, namely your own blockaded pawn.
  
  Now if you had a dark-squared bishop that would be excellent. Just look at all those juicy weak dark squares round the black king. Add to that no black dark squared bishop and if you had one it would be a monster.
  
  > The knight will infiltrate
  
  Really? Where? It is OK where it is. It can be supported by f4 when it will be very difficult to shift.
  
  > There is a discovered check for me
  
  No, there isn't. A competent black is going to keep that useful white pawn on d5 as long as possible, maybe try and win it in the endgame but defintely keep it where it is for the middlegame.
  
  > My rook controls the semi-open file
  
  Again, not true. The "open" refers to pawns not pieces. Controlling a semi-open file means having a rook on a file where you don't have a pawn but your opponent does. It does not mean a rook which is supporting one of your minor pieces on an otherwise completely open file.
  
  > Black has two undeveloped pieces.
  
  And so? What is your practical plan for taking advantage of that? What are you calculations? You don't have any. Black is going to unravel and win unless they are the same standard as you.
  
  > Why am I worse here?
  
  Because you are a piece for two pawns down.
  
  You've just played the mistake Ne5. Why are you moving a piece twice before completing your development? Oh, and Nd4 would have been much better. There your knight really can infiltrate to say e6.
  
  As you say, Black is marginally behind in development. So, you need to complete your development first by moving your queen to connect your rooks, centralize the a1 rook without losing the b2 pawn and only then launch your attack.
  
  > And I would like some general tips for analysing positions as a 1050 chess.com rapid player.
  
  Do two things:
  
  1. Complete your own development before going on the attack
  2. Try and work out what your opponent's plans are (or should be) and try and stop them.
  
  One other thing. Sacrificing a piece for two pawns and a check is a very common way of losing games at lower levels. At your level just don't sacrifice until your tactical awareness is much better and you have a reasonable chance of calculating what is going to happen next.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: I agree with part of what you've said, but some properties of White's position are true merits. E.g., the bishop on b3 is a good piece, as it can soon be opened if the d5-pawn advances, which could be done if the c-pawn runs to c5. The knight on e5 is also a nicely placed piece, it is centralized in Black's territory and on one of Black's weak dark squares. Black's bad development, and the king being on the b3-g8 diagonal, means he will have to spend a few tempi remedying this, which is worth something. Black is still of course better, but White's not outright losing.  
  > **username_0**: Wait. What happened here @YiFan? Was there an exchange that I missed? Did username_1’s comment get flagged?  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2022-10-29. Score: 10
  
  Most of what you said is true, but at the same time Black is up a knight for two pawns. This is a significant material advantage, and White's compensation isn't enough to balance the scales. He has active pieces yes, but his activity is nowhere near decisive. Black should manage to untangle and develop his queenside before White can muster enough of an attack.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_2**: This is the actual answer. All other things being equal, Stockfish (used by Lichess) would normally rate "two pawns for a piece" as more negative than -1.4. That means it thinks White has a positional advantage, but not enough to make up for the material.  
  > **username_1**: @username_2 Agreed - if everything else is equal, a piece for two pawns should be a clearly winning advantage, so Stockfish would evaluate it accordingly. -1.4 is good for Black, but still in the range where it could plausibly be a draw or win if SF played against itself.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2022-10-29. Score: 2
  
  1. Include the positional strengths of you opponent in your evaluation. For example Knight on d6 is nicely blockading your d-pawn.
  2. How will you take advantage of your well placed pieces? What is the plan? A good looking piece with nothing to do is not much advantage.
  3. Is your Bishop beautifully placed? It has limited action and is blocked by your d-pawn. How will you unblock it? c2-c4-c5?
  4. Unless you are a computer I suggest not using number evaluations.
  5. Include dynamic evaluation as well as static evaluation. What are the plans for each side?
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: 3. c2-c4-c5 is exactly how I did it. I lost btw  
  > **username_0**: I mean, the bishop stares at the king, isn’t that beautiful?  
  > **username_3**: @username_0 the bishop is "biting on granite" as username_6 username_6 mentions in his answer.  Your d-pawn is protecting your opponents king.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2022-10-30. Score: 2
  
  1. First and foremost, white is down material with no immediate prospects of attack.
  2. The black knight perfectly and eternally blockades the pawn, leaving the white bishop to hopelessly eye a king that it will never influence. How will white remove the knight? c4-c5 may be stopped with b6. (Though there is admittedly a prophylactic a5 by white to stop b6.) Trading white's last remaining knight for the knight is fruitless -- particularly since black may replace it with another piece such as... the other knight! If it ever seems truly necessary, black may simply oppose the light-squared diagonal via Bf7. Or even just play Kh8.
  3. Black also lacks accessible *weaknesses and targets*. It is not sufficient to have "well-placed" pieces if they do not fulfill any concrete roles in exploiting weaknesses.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_5 on 2022-10-30. Score: 1
  
  It has been well said that chess games are not won by creating good positions but by making good moves. Every comment by the OP about the position is true in a way. It describes the potential in the position but does not consider the moves needed to realise that potential. For the reasons given by Yifan, this position is entirely about the battle to play c5, although this is not immediately obvious. But that move is so strong that it is worth considering even such a slow move as Ba2, to enable b4 after first playing a5. I am not saying that Ba2 is good, just that there are good reasons to consider it. If it should turn out to be good, an annotator would be justified in calling it "deep". Generously, let us suppose that the missing White Knight was a deliberate sacrifice. Could it have been made by a strong aggressive player? I think it could, but only if that player had
  not only seen the potential in the position, but had felt confidence that they would be able to find enough resources to unlock that potential. Can the good position be made even better?Tal might perhaps have felt that confidence. Lacking his genius, I must call the position unclear.
  
  
  ---
  
  