In the begin position of a problem I see certain salient cues. I know that there are salient cues that are not readily be seen, but which reveal themselves when you apply some logic.
On the other hand, there are salient cues that are perfectly seeable already in the begin position, but which I do not see because I’m not looking for them. Those salient cues are the ones where I can make progress because they form my blind spots.
 |
| Black to move |
2r3k1/Q4n1p/p2Brpp1/1p1R4/4P3/2q2P1P/6P1/3R3K b – – 1 1
[solution]
What I did see:
- target: Bd6
- defenders: Rd5, Rd1
- overloaded Rd1 => Bd6 AND back rank
What I did NOT see:
- double attack Qe5 => h2 AND d6
- back rank defense by Qg1
- counter attack white Qd7 => Re6 AND Rc8
Scenarios
- Exchange on d6 until a LPDO is left
- Chase K to h2
- Prevent Qa7 from interfering
With hindsight, my blind spots are staggering and amazing. A training method must focus on these blind spots.
I can’t see what I’m not looking for. Initially, logic should guide my seeing. But I feel that is just a kind of side wheels for this position. Almost everything is salient in the diagram. Maybe only the difference between Qc1+ and Qa1+ should be found by reasoning. And the difference between 1. … Nxd6 and 1. … Rxd6. But then again, Qg1 as blockader is already perfectly visibible. When you look for it.
Discover more from reviewer4you.com
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
