Principles
Link by Type of Principle:
The difference between a guideline (or principle or rule of thumb or heuristic) and a rule is that a rule works (or is required) all the time (or has a few, definable exceptions), while a guideline is just a helpful hint that does not have the force of a rule - some guidelines work almost all the time - others to varying degrees of frequency. Principles help you figure out what to play when you don't know what to do; if analysis suggests a best move, that usually overrides principles. Another way of looking at this is that strategy usually tiebreaks equally safe moves.
"When there are no tactics, follow principles as best possible, but if there are tactics, principles are almost best forgotten"
For other sites' excellent list of principles, link to:
...and the Novice Nooks Opening Principles, Chess Principles and Common Sense, and Strong Principles vs. Important Principles
Kasparov on Siegbert Tarrasch and general principles (My Great Predecessors, Volume 1):
"Both in his play, and in his commentaries, Tarrasch aimed to follow general rules, and he methodically formulated them, completing Steinitz' work. Honor and praise to him for the fact that nowadays these rules are known by any graded player! Of course, some aphorisms sometimes provoke a smile - for example, 'if one piece stands badly - the whole game stands badly' or 'a knight on the edge of the board always stands badly'. In a number of cases it is possible to gain an advantage even with a 'bad' knight: we can recall, among others, the games Lasker-Schlechter (Vienna/Berlin 10th matchgame 1910...) and Kasparov-Karpov (London/Leningrad 16th matchgame 1986). However, Tarrasch's 'dogmas' are not eternal truisms, but merely instructional material presented in an accessible and witty form, those necessary rudiments from which one can begin to grasp the secrets of chess." [Emphasis mine]
"...Generally speaking, Tarrasch often carried over his popular ideas of chess philosophy, which were suitable for beginners, to crucial disputes with the world's leading players - and sometimes he was proved wrong..."
The difference between a guideline (or principle or rule of thumb or heuristic) and a rule is that a rule works (or is required) all the time (or has a few, definable exceptions), while a guideline is just a helpful hint that does not have the force of a rule - some guidelines work almost all the time - others to varying degrees of frequency. Principles help you figure out what to play when you don't know what to do; if analysis suggests a best move, that usually overrides principles. Another way of looking at this is that strategy usually tiebreaks equally safe moves.
"When there are no tactics, follow principles as best possible, but if there are tactics, principles are almost best forgotten"
For other sites' excellent list of principles, link to:
- Exeter (England) Chess Club's Quotes (tons here!)
- Steinitz's Theory
- Steinitz' and Vukovic' Rules of Attack
- Famous Chess Quotes
- GM Soltis' list of three famous chess principles that are not true
- Larry Kaufman's 2012 principles updating the average values of the pieces
- This interesting link has principles to help find tactics
- Scroll back through my 10,000+ tweets - About 4,000 are "Chess Tip of the Day" (2009-?) with tons of these principles and sayings, and much, much more! I now have over 5,300 followers
...and the Novice Nooks Opening Principles, Chess Principles and Common Sense, and Strong Principles vs. Important Principles
Kasparov on Siegbert Tarrasch and general principles (My Great Predecessors, Volume 1):
"Both in his play, and in his commentaries, Tarrasch aimed to follow general rules, and he methodically formulated them, completing Steinitz' work. Honor and praise to him for the fact that nowadays these rules are known by any graded player! Of course, some aphorisms sometimes provoke a smile - for example, 'if one piece stands badly - the whole game stands badly' or 'a knight on the edge of the board always stands badly'. In a number of cases it is possible to gain an advantage even with a 'bad' knight: we can recall, among others, the games Lasker-Schlechter (Vienna/Berlin 10th matchgame 1910...) and Kasparov-Karpov (London/Leningrad 16th matchgame 1986). However, Tarrasch's 'dogmas' are not eternal truisms, but merely instructional material presented in an accessible and witty form, those necessary rudiments from which one can begin to grasp the secrets of chess." [Emphasis mine]
"...Generally speaking, Tarrasch often carried over his popular ideas of chess philosophy, which were suitable for beginners, to crucial disputes with the world's leading players - and sometimes he was proved wrong..."