Why is the Ruy Lopez a sensible opening for white?











up vote
9
down vote

favorite












As an amateur, I prefer the Scotch game as opposed to Ruy Lopez, since I feel that White loses tempo and Black seems to gain tempo with queenside counterplay in the main line.



 [title "Ruy Lopez"]
[fen "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 {Bishop retreat at the expense of black gaining one queenside counterplay} b5 5. Bb3 {Another bishop retreat at the expense of black gaining a good queenside counterplay}


At the end of White's fifth move, it looks like Black is couple of tempo ahead and already has queenside counterplay going. Despite this, why is this one of (if not the most) celebrated openings? Can someone offer an explanation at the level of an amateur?










share|improve this question




















  • 1




    Black might have gained some queenside space (though it's worth bearing in mind that, depending on the exact variation, it's also possible that black has simply created positional weaknesses), but the key point is that white has more control of the center than does black.
    – ATLPoly
    10 hours ago















up vote
9
down vote

favorite












As an amateur, I prefer the Scotch game as opposed to Ruy Lopez, since I feel that White loses tempo and Black seems to gain tempo with queenside counterplay in the main line.



 [title "Ruy Lopez"]
[fen "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 {Bishop retreat at the expense of black gaining one queenside counterplay} b5 5. Bb3 {Another bishop retreat at the expense of black gaining a good queenside counterplay}


At the end of White's fifth move, it looks like Black is couple of tempo ahead and already has queenside counterplay going. Despite this, why is this one of (if not the most) celebrated openings? Can someone offer an explanation at the level of an amateur?










share|improve this question




















  • 1




    Black might have gained some queenside space (though it's worth bearing in mind that, depending on the exact variation, it's also possible that black has simply created positional weaknesses), but the key point is that white has more control of the center than does black.
    – ATLPoly
    10 hours ago













up vote
9
down vote

favorite









up vote
9
down vote

favorite











As an amateur, I prefer the Scotch game as opposed to Ruy Lopez, since I feel that White loses tempo and Black seems to gain tempo with queenside counterplay in the main line.



 [title "Ruy Lopez"]
[fen "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 {Bishop retreat at the expense of black gaining one queenside counterplay} b5 5. Bb3 {Another bishop retreat at the expense of black gaining a good queenside counterplay}


At the end of White's fifth move, it looks like Black is couple of tempo ahead and already has queenside counterplay going. Despite this, why is this one of (if not the most) celebrated openings? Can someone offer an explanation at the level of an amateur?










share|improve this question















As an amateur, I prefer the Scotch game as opposed to Ruy Lopez, since I feel that White loses tempo and Black seems to gain tempo with queenside counterplay in the main line.



 [title "Ruy Lopez"]
[fen "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 {Bishop retreat at the expense of black gaining one queenside counterplay} b5 5. Bb3 {Another bishop retreat at the expense of black gaining a good queenside counterplay}


At the end of White's fifth move, it looks like Black is couple of tempo ahead and already has queenside counterplay going. Despite this, why is this one of (if not the most) celebrated openings? Can someone offer an explanation at the level of an amateur?







opening theory ruy-lopez






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 10 hours ago









Phonon

4,4551031




4,4551031










asked 11 hours ago









Leg

1814




1814








  • 1




    Black might have gained some queenside space (though it's worth bearing in mind that, depending on the exact variation, it's also possible that black has simply created positional weaknesses), but the key point is that white has more control of the center than does black.
    – ATLPoly
    10 hours ago














  • 1




    Black might have gained some queenside space (though it's worth bearing in mind that, depending on the exact variation, it's also possible that black has simply created positional weaknesses), but the key point is that white has more control of the center than does black.
    – ATLPoly
    10 hours ago








1




1




Black might have gained some queenside space (though it's worth bearing in mind that, depending on the exact variation, it's also possible that black has simply created positional weaknesses), but the key point is that white has more control of the center than does black.
– ATLPoly
10 hours ago




Black might have gained some queenside space (though it's worth bearing in mind that, depending on the exact variation, it's also possible that black has simply created positional weaknesses), but the key point is that white has more control of the center than does black.
– ATLPoly
10 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
8
down vote













Sure black's a6-b5 come with tempo, but let's say at a very basic level, if you just compare pieces, structure and development progress, you can see that white is:





  • Ready to castle whereas black hasn't yet developed either kingside pieces, so at least 2 tempi away from castling. This translates into white having a safer king 1-2 tempi earlier, which means white has the upper-hand in launching some sort of attack or push.


  • White has developed two minor pieces that stand quite well: Knight on f3 attacks e5 and has the potential to coordinate on f7 with the bishop on b3 already eyeing black's kingside. In contrast, black has only developed a knight, one that stands defensively on c6 covering e5.

  • Besides the e4 pawn, white has nearly kept all pawn advancement options still on the table (therefore, can opt for various pawn structures still), whereas black has made 2 additional commitments that cannot be undone, which can on the one hand, prove to have been self-inducing weaknesses, and on the other hand, be hooks (targets) for white's pawn advancements on the queenside, e.g. an a4 push, to which black has to react immediately.


These ways of reasoning can be adopted to conceptually assess nearly any opening you see, at least at a basic level.



The point on pawn commitments cannot be emphasized enough, they're the most committal moves in the game (trades come close but at least in principle a piece can be brought back to life with a promotion, but pawns cannot! :P ). Even at the highest level, for instance take a look at any of Caruana's openings in the match so far, where roughly speaking, he intentionally favours lines where he can delay unnecessary pawn moves and keep most of his options open. Examples:



Game 2:



 [title "Game 2, move 13, only 3 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
[fen "r1br2k1/pp3ppp/2n1p3/q1bp4/2P2B2/P1P1PN2/2Q1BPPP/3R1RK1 b - - 0 13"]


Game 4:



 [title "Game 4, move 13, only 2 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
[fen "r1bqr1k1/ppp2ppp/3b4/4p3/1P6/2BP1BP1/P3PP1P/1R1Q1RK1 b - - 0 13"]


game 6:



 [title "Game 6, move 13, only 2 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
[fen "r1b1kb1r/pppn1ppp/3pn3/3N4/3P4/N1P2P2/PP4PP/R1B1KB1R b KQkq - 0 13"]


game 8:



 [title "Game 8, move 16, only 3 pawns moved, compare to black!"]
[fen "1rbq1rk1/1p2b1pp/pN1p4/P2Pnp2/4p3/8/1PPBBPPP/R2Q1RK1 w - - 4 17"]


Anyhow I think the idea is clear now! It's important to add that in all these examples, the simple fact of having moved less pawns doesn't directly or necessarily translate into having a better position, chess is never that simple or linear. Partly, specially in this examples, it is a case of style and preference (and thus the adopted openings), but on the other hand it shows you the importance of diversity in pawn structures that can still be opted for as they translate into having more choices, abundantly clear even at the highest level.



I hope these ideas have shown you why the Ruy Lopez is such a liked opening, which I have only tackled from the white side in this post, and clearly, black's side has its own merits in the Ruy Lopez compared to alternative options that are available for black against 1. e4, but that's a discussion for another time.






share|improve this answer





















  • Greatly appreciate and thanks for a detailed explanation! Will wait for a few more answers before deciding on accepting, though the natural question is why not Italian or Scotch. Both seem to satisfy more of less the same criteria in terms of pawn structure and ability to castle immediately.
    – Leg
    9 hours ago












  • I see that you have answered my comment as well in my question, i.e., Black's pawn structure is now fixed.
    – Leg
    9 hours ago










  • @Leg "Why not Italian or Scotch", there is no real answer, all of these are perfectly playable but different approaches. That said, it may help to think in terms of the basic differences of these openings w.r.t. the Ruy Lopez: in the Scotch early trades are abound, e.g., the f3 knight and d pawn for white and the c6 knight and e pawn for black. In the Italian, Bc4 changes completely the dynamics already as it doesn't challenge the defender of the e5 pawn at all, in contrast to Bb5. So you see the emerging structures are of a completely different nature and at the end it's a matter of style.
    – Phonon
    7 hours ago


















up vote
3
down vote













Note that while black gains space on the queenside, the advanced pawns offer white some opportunities later on to undermine black's pawns with a timely a4-push. Moreover, the queenside expansion doesn't develop a piece, nor does it help black to contest the center of the board. Further, white's bishop is quite a happy camper on b3, being less exposed than it would be on c4 while at the same time being basically just as influential as it would be on c4. So while white has spent 3 tempi to get the bishop to b3, black has spent 2 tempi on a queenside pawn expansion that doesn't develop a piece.



In essence, white gets to develop a piece to a very good square, while black gets to expand on the queenside, which doesn't really aid in development very much and has a potential of weakening black's position in the future. So the expansion is not without drawbacks for black.






share|improve this answer





















    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "435"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f22954%2fwhy-is-the-ruy-lopez-a-sensible-opening-for-white%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    8
    down vote













    Sure black's a6-b5 come with tempo, but let's say at a very basic level, if you just compare pieces, structure and development progress, you can see that white is:





    • Ready to castle whereas black hasn't yet developed either kingside pieces, so at least 2 tempi away from castling. This translates into white having a safer king 1-2 tempi earlier, which means white has the upper-hand in launching some sort of attack or push.


    • White has developed two minor pieces that stand quite well: Knight on f3 attacks e5 and has the potential to coordinate on f7 with the bishop on b3 already eyeing black's kingside. In contrast, black has only developed a knight, one that stands defensively on c6 covering e5.

    • Besides the e4 pawn, white has nearly kept all pawn advancement options still on the table (therefore, can opt for various pawn structures still), whereas black has made 2 additional commitments that cannot be undone, which can on the one hand, prove to have been self-inducing weaknesses, and on the other hand, be hooks (targets) for white's pawn advancements on the queenside, e.g. an a4 push, to which black has to react immediately.


    These ways of reasoning can be adopted to conceptually assess nearly any opening you see, at least at a basic level.



    The point on pawn commitments cannot be emphasized enough, they're the most committal moves in the game (trades come close but at least in principle a piece can be brought back to life with a promotion, but pawns cannot! :P ). Even at the highest level, for instance take a look at any of Caruana's openings in the match so far, where roughly speaking, he intentionally favours lines where he can delay unnecessary pawn moves and keep most of his options open. Examples:



    Game 2:



     [title "Game 2, move 13, only 3 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1br2k1/pp3ppp/2n1p3/q1bp4/2P2B2/P1P1PN2/2Q1BPPP/3R1RK1 b - - 0 13"]


    Game 4:



     [title "Game 4, move 13, only 2 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1bqr1k1/ppp2ppp/3b4/4p3/1P6/2BP1BP1/P3PP1P/1R1Q1RK1 b - - 0 13"]


    game 6:



     [title "Game 6, move 13, only 2 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1b1kb1r/pppn1ppp/3pn3/3N4/3P4/N1P2P2/PP4PP/R1B1KB1R b KQkq - 0 13"]


    game 8:



     [title "Game 8, move 16, only 3 pawns moved, compare to black!"]
    [fen "1rbq1rk1/1p2b1pp/pN1p4/P2Pnp2/4p3/8/1PPBBPPP/R2Q1RK1 w - - 4 17"]


    Anyhow I think the idea is clear now! It's important to add that in all these examples, the simple fact of having moved less pawns doesn't directly or necessarily translate into having a better position, chess is never that simple or linear. Partly, specially in this examples, it is a case of style and preference (and thus the adopted openings), but on the other hand it shows you the importance of diversity in pawn structures that can still be opted for as they translate into having more choices, abundantly clear even at the highest level.



    I hope these ideas have shown you why the Ruy Lopez is such a liked opening, which I have only tackled from the white side in this post, and clearly, black's side has its own merits in the Ruy Lopez compared to alternative options that are available for black against 1. e4, but that's a discussion for another time.






    share|improve this answer





















    • Greatly appreciate and thanks for a detailed explanation! Will wait for a few more answers before deciding on accepting, though the natural question is why not Italian or Scotch. Both seem to satisfy more of less the same criteria in terms of pawn structure and ability to castle immediately.
      – Leg
      9 hours ago












    • I see that you have answered my comment as well in my question, i.e., Black's pawn structure is now fixed.
      – Leg
      9 hours ago










    • @Leg "Why not Italian or Scotch", there is no real answer, all of these are perfectly playable but different approaches. That said, it may help to think in terms of the basic differences of these openings w.r.t. the Ruy Lopez: in the Scotch early trades are abound, e.g., the f3 knight and d pawn for white and the c6 knight and e pawn for black. In the Italian, Bc4 changes completely the dynamics already as it doesn't challenge the defender of the e5 pawn at all, in contrast to Bb5. So you see the emerging structures are of a completely different nature and at the end it's a matter of style.
      – Phonon
      7 hours ago















    up vote
    8
    down vote













    Sure black's a6-b5 come with tempo, but let's say at a very basic level, if you just compare pieces, structure and development progress, you can see that white is:





    • Ready to castle whereas black hasn't yet developed either kingside pieces, so at least 2 tempi away from castling. This translates into white having a safer king 1-2 tempi earlier, which means white has the upper-hand in launching some sort of attack or push.


    • White has developed two minor pieces that stand quite well: Knight on f3 attacks e5 and has the potential to coordinate on f7 with the bishop on b3 already eyeing black's kingside. In contrast, black has only developed a knight, one that stands defensively on c6 covering e5.

    • Besides the e4 pawn, white has nearly kept all pawn advancement options still on the table (therefore, can opt for various pawn structures still), whereas black has made 2 additional commitments that cannot be undone, which can on the one hand, prove to have been self-inducing weaknesses, and on the other hand, be hooks (targets) for white's pawn advancements on the queenside, e.g. an a4 push, to which black has to react immediately.


    These ways of reasoning can be adopted to conceptually assess nearly any opening you see, at least at a basic level.



    The point on pawn commitments cannot be emphasized enough, they're the most committal moves in the game (trades come close but at least in principle a piece can be brought back to life with a promotion, but pawns cannot! :P ). Even at the highest level, for instance take a look at any of Caruana's openings in the match so far, where roughly speaking, he intentionally favours lines where he can delay unnecessary pawn moves and keep most of his options open. Examples:



    Game 2:



     [title "Game 2, move 13, only 3 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1br2k1/pp3ppp/2n1p3/q1bp4/2P2B2/P1P1PN2/2Q1BPPP/3R1RK1 b - - 0 13"]


    Game 4:



     [title "Game 4, move 13, only 2 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1bqr1k1/ppp2ppp/3b4/4p3/1P6/2BP1BP1/P3PP1P/1R1Q1RK1 b - - 0 13"]


    game 6:



     [title "Game 6, move 13, only 2 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1b1kb1r/pppn1ppp/3pn3/3N4/3P4/N1P2P2/PP4PP/R1B1KB1R b KQkq - 0 13"]


    game 8:



     [title "Game 8, move 16, only 3 pawns moved, compare to black!"]
    [fen "1rbq1rk1/1p2b1pp/pN1p4/P2Pnp2/4p3/8/1PPBBPPP/R2Q1RK1 w - - 4 17"]


    Anyhow I think the idea is clear now! It's important to add that in all these examples, the simple fact of having moved less pawns doesn't directly or necessarily translate into having a better position, chess is never that simple or linear. Partly, specially in this examples, it is a case of style and preference (and thus the adopted openings), but on the other hand it shows you the importance of diversity in pawn structures that can still be opted for as they translate into having more choices, abundantly clear even at the highest level.



    I hope these ideas have shown you why the Ruy Lopez is such a liked opening, which I have only tackled from the white side in this post, and clearly, black's side has its own merits in the Ruy Lopez compared to alternative options that are available for black against 1. e4, but that's a discussion for another time.






    share|improve this answer





















    • Greatly appreciate and thanks for a detailed explanation! Will wait for a few more answers before deciding on accepting, though the natural question is why not Italian or Scotch. Both seem to satisfy more of less the same criteria in terms of pawn structure and ability to castle immediately.
      – Leg
      9 hours ago












    • I see that you have answered my comment as well in my question, i.e., Black's pawn structure is now fixed.
      – Leg
      9 hours ago










    • @Leg "Why not Italian or Scotch", there is no real answer, all of these are perfectly playable but different approaches. That said, it may help to think in terms of the basic differences of these openings w.r.t. the Ruy Lopez: in the Scotch early trades are abound, e.g., the f3 knight and d pawn for white and the c6 knight and e pawn for black. In the Italian, Bc4 changes completely the dynamics already as it doesn't challenge the defender of the e5 pawn at all, in contrast to Bb5. So you see the emerging structures are of a completely different nature and at the end it's a matter of style.
      – Phonon
      7 hours ago













    up vote
    8
    down vote










    up vote
    8
    down vote









    Sure black's a6-b5 come with tempo, but let's say at a very basic level, if you just compare pieces, structure and development progress, you can see that white is:





    • Ready to castle whereas black hasn't yet developed either kingside pieces, so at least 2 tempi away from castling. This translates into white having a safer king 1-2 tempi earlier, which means white has the upper-hand in launching some sort of attack or push.


    • White has developed two minor pieces that stand quite well: Knight on f3 attacks e5 and has the potential to coordinate on f7 with the bishop on b3 already eyeing black's kingside. In contrast, black has only developed a knight, one that stands defensively on c6 covering e5.

    • Besides the e4 pawn, white has nearly kept all pawn advancement options still on the table (therefore, can opt for various pawn structures still), whereas black has made 2 additional commitments that cannot be undone, which can on the one hand, prove to have been self-inducing weaknesses, and on the other hand, be hooks (targets) for white's pawn advancements on the queenside, e.g. an a4 push, to which black has to react immediately.


    These ways of reasoning can be adopted to conceptually assess nearly any opening you see, at least at a basic level.



    The point on pawn commitments cannot be emphasized enough, they're the most committal moves in the game (trades come close but at least in principle a piece can be brought back to life with a promotion, but pawns cannot! :P ). Even at the highest level, for instance take a look at any of Caruana's openings in the match so far, where roughly speaking, he intentionally favours lines where he can delay unnecessary pawn moves and keep most of his options open. Examples:



    Game 2:



     [title "Game 2, move 13, only 3 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1br2k1/pp3ppp/2n1p3/q1bp4/2P2B2/P1P1PN2/2Q1BPPP/3R1RK1 b - - 0 13"]


    Game 4:



     [title "Game 4, move 13, only 2 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1bqr1k1/ppp2ppp/3b4/4p3/1P6/2BP1BP1/P3PP1P/1R1Q1RK1 b - - 0 13"]


    game 6:



     [title "Game 6, move 13, only 2 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1b1kb1r/pppn1ppp/3pn3/3N4/3P4/N1P2P2/PP4PP/R1B1KB1R b KQkq - 0 13"]


    game 8:



     [title "Game 8, move 16, only 3 pawns moved, compare to black!"]
    [fen "1rbq1rk1/1p2b1pp/pN1p4/P2Pnp2/4p3/8/1PPBBPPP/R2Q1RK1 w - - 4 17"]


    Anyhow I think the idea is clear now! It's important to add that in all these examples, the simple fact of having moved less pawns doesn't directly or necessarily translate into having a better position, chess is never that simple or linear. Partly, specially in this examples, it is a case of style and preference (and thus the adopted openings), but on the other hand it shows you the importance of diversity in pawn structures that can still be opted for as they translate into having more choices, abundantly clear even at the highest level.



    I hope these ideas have shown you why the Ruy Lopez is such a liked opening, which I have only tackled from the white side in this post, and clearly, black's side has its own merits in the Ruy Lopez compared to alternative options that are available for black against 1. e4, but that's a discussion for another time.






    share|improve this answer












    Sure black's a6-b5 come with tempo, but let's say at a very basic level, if you just compare pieces, structure and development progress, you can see that white is:





    • Ready to castle whereas black hasn't yet developed either kingside pieces, so at least 2 tempi away from castling. This translates into white having a safer king 1-2 tempi earlier, which means white has the upper-hand in launching some sort of attack or push.


    • White has developed two minor pieces that stand quite well: Knight on f3 attacks e5 and has the potential to coordinate on f7 with the bishop on b3 already eyeing black's kingside. In contrast, black has only developed a knight, one that stands defensively on c6 covering e5.

    • Besides the e4 pawn, white has nearly kept all pawn advancement options still on the table (therefore, can opt for various pawn structures still), whereas black has made 2 additional commitments that cannot be undone, which can on the one hand, prove to have been self-inducing weaknesses, and on the other hand, be hooks (targets) for white's pawn advancements on the queenside, e.g. an a4 push, to which black has to react immediately.


    These ways of reasoning can be adopted to conceptually assess nearly any opening you see, at least at a basic level.



    The point on pawn commitments cannot be emphasized enough, they're the most committal moves in the game (trades come close but at least in principle a piece can be brought back to life with a promotion, but pawns cannot! :P ). Even at the highest level, for instance take a look at any of Caruana's openings in the match so far, where roughly speaking, he intentionally favours lines where he can delay unnecessary pawn moves and keep most of his options open. Examples:



    Game 2:



     [title "Game 2, move 13, only 3 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1br2k1/pp3ppp/2n1p3/q1bp4/2P2B2/P1P1PN2/2Q1BPPP/3R1RK1 b - - 0 13"]


    Game 4:



     [title "Game 4, move 13, only 2 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1bqr1k1/ppp2ppp/3b4/4p3/1P6/2BP1BP1/P3PP1P/1R1Q1RK1 b - - 0 13"]


    game 6:



     [title "Game 6, move 13, only 2 central pawns moved, compare to white!"]
    [fen "r1b1kb1r/pppn1ppp/3pn3/3N4/3P4/N1P2P2/PP4PP/R1B1KB1R b KQkq - 0 13"]


    game 8:



     [title "Game 8, move 16, only 3 pawns moved, compare to black!"]
    [fen "1rbq1rk1/1p2b1pp/pN1p4/P2Pnp2/4p3/8/1PPBBPPP/R2Q1RK1 w - - 4 17"]


    Anyhow I think the idea is clear now! It's important to add that in all these examples, the simple fact of having moved less pawns doesn't directly or necessarily translate into having a better position, chess is never that simple or linear. Partly, specially in this examples, it is a case of style and preference (and thus the adopted openings), but on the other hand it shows you the importance of diversity in pawn structures that can still be opted for as they translate into having more choices, abundantly clear even at the highest level.



    I hope these ideas have shown you why the Ruy Lopez is such a liked opening, which I have only tackled from the white side in this post, and clearly, black's side has its own merits in the Ruy Lopez compared to alternative options that are available for black against 1. e4, but that's a discussion for another time.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 10 hours ago









    Phonon

    4,4551031




    4,4551031












    • Greatly appreciate and thanks for a detailed explanation! Will wait for a few more answers before deciding on accepting, though the natural question is why not Italian or Scotch. Both seem to satisfy more of less the same criteria in terms of pawn structure and ability to castle immediately.
      – Leg
      9 hours ago












    • I see that you have answered my comment as well in my question, i.e., Black's pawn structure is now fixed.
      – Leg
      9 hours ago










    • @Leg "Why not Italian or Scotch", there is no real answer, all of these are perfectly playable but different approaches. That said, it may help to think in terms of the basic differences of these openings w.r.t. the Ruy Lopez: in the Scotch early trades are abound, e.g., the f3 knight and d pawn for white and the c6 knight and e pawn for black. In the Italian, Bc4 changes completely the dynamics already as it doesn't challenge the defender of the e5 pawn at all, in contrast to Bb5. So you see the emerging structures are of a completely different nature and at the end it's a matter of style.
      – Phonon
      7 hours ago


















    • Greatly appreciate and thanks for a detailed explanation! Will wait for a few more answers before deciding on accepting, though the natural question is why not Italian or Scotch. Both seem to satisfy more of less the same criteria in terms of pawn structure and ability to castle immediately.
      – Leg
      9 hours ago












    • I see that you have answered my comment as well in my question, i.e., Black's pawn structure is now fixed.
      – Leg
      9 hours ago










    • @Leg "Why not Italian or Scotch", there is no real answer, all of these are perfectly playable but different approaches. That said, it may help to think in terms of the basic differences of these openings w.r.t. the Ruy Lopez: in the Scotch early trades are abound, e.g., the f3 knight and d pawn for white and the c6 knight and e pawn for black. In the Italian, Bc4 changes completely the dynamics already as it doesn't challenge the defender of the e5 pawn at all, in contrast to Bb5. So you see the emerging structures are of a completely different nature and at the end it's a matter of style.
      – Phonon
      7 hours ago
















    Greatly appreciate and thanks for a detailed explanation! Will wait for a few more answers before deciding on accepting, though the natural question is why not Italian or Scotch. Both seem to satisfy more of less the same criteria in terms of pawn structure and ability to castle immediately.
    – Leg
    9 hours ago






    Greatly appreciate and thanks for a detailed explanation! Will wait for a few more answers before deciding on accepting, though the natural question is why not Italian or Scotch. Both seem to satisfy more of less the same criteria in terms of pawn structure and ability to castle immediately.
    – Leg
    9 hours ago














    I see that you have answered my comment as well in my question, i.e., Black's pawn structure is now fixed.
    – Leg
    9 hours ago




    I see that you have answered my comment as well in my question, i.e., Black's pawn structure is now fixed.
    – Leg
    9 hours ago












    @Leg "Why not Italian or Scotch", there is no real answer, all of these are perfectly playable but different approaches. That said, it may help to think in terms of the basic differences of these openings w.r.t. the Ruy Lopez: in the Scotch early trades are abound, e.g., the f3 knight and d pawn for white and the c6 knight and e pawn for black. In the Italian, Bc4 changes completely the dynamics already as it doesn't challenge the defender of the e5 pawn at all, in contrast to Bb5. So you see the emerging structures are of a completely different nature and at the end it's a matter of style.
    – Phonon
    7 hours ago




    @Leg "Why not Italian or Scotch", there is no real answer, all of these are perfectly playable but different approaches. That said, it may help to think in terms of the basic differences of these openings w.r.t. the Ruy Lopez: in the Scotch early trades are abound, e.g., the f3 knight and d pawn for white and the c6 knight and e pawn for black. In the Italian, Bc4 changes completely the dynamics already as it doesn't challenge the defender of the e5 pawn at all, in contrast to Bb5. So you see the emerging structures are of a completely different nature and at the end it's a matter of style.
    – Phonon
    7 hours ago










    up vote
    3
    down vote













    Note that while black gains space on the queenside, the advanced pawns offer white some opportunities later on to undermine black's pawns with a timely a4-push. Moreover, the queenside expansion doesn't develop a piece, nor does it help black to contest the center of the board. Further, white's bishop is quite a happy camper on b3, being less exposed than it would be on c4 while at the same time being basically just as influential as it would be on c4. So while white has spent 3 tempi to get the bishop to b3, black has spent 2 tempi on a queenside pawn expansion that doesn't develop a piece.



    In essence, white gets to develop a piece to a very good square, while black gets to expand on the queenside, which doesn't really aid in development very much and has a potential of weakening black's position in the future. So the expansion is not without drawbacks for black.






    share|improve this answer

























      up vote
      3
      down vote













      Note that while black gains space on the queenside, the advanced pawns offer white some opportunities later on to undermine black's pawns with a timely a4-push. Moreover, the queenside expansion doesn't develop a piece, nor does it help black to contest the center of the board. Further, white's bishop is quite a happy camper on b3, being less exposed than it would be on c4 while at the same time being basically just as influential as it would be on c4. So while white has spent 3 tempi to get the bishop to b3, black has spent 2 tempi on a queenside pawn expansion that doesn't develop a piece.



      In essence, white gets to develop a piece to a very good square, while black gets to expand on the queenside, which doesn't really aid in development very much and has a potential of weakening black's position in the future. So the expansion is not without drawbacks for black.






      share|improve this answer























        up vote
        3
        down vote










        up vote
        3
        down vote









        Note that while black gains space on the queenside, the advanced pawns offer white some opportunities later on to undermine black's pawns with a timely a4-push. Moreover, the queenside expansion doesn't develop a piece, nor does it help black to contest the center of the board. Further, white's bishop is quite a happy camper on b3, being less exposed than it would be on c4 while at the same time being basically just as influential as it would be on c4. So while white has spent 3 tempi to get the bishop to b3, black has spent 2 tempi on a queenside pawn expansion that doesn't develop a piece.



        In essence, white gets to develop a piece to a very good square, while black gets to expand on the queenside, which doesn't really aid in development very much and has a potential of weakening black's position in the future. So the expansion is not without drawbacks for black.






        share|improve this answer












        Note that while black gains space on the queenside, the advanced pawns offer white some opportunities later on to undermine black's pawns with a timely a4-push. Moreover, the queenside expansion doesn't develop a piece, nor does it help black to contest the center of the board. Further, white's bishop is quite a happy camper on b3, being less exposed than it would be on c4 while at the same time being basically just as influential as it would be on c4. So while white has spent 3 tempi to get the bishop to b3, black has spent 2 tempi on a queenside pawn expansion that doesn't develop a piece.



        In essence, white gets to develop a piece to a very good square, while black gets to expand on the queenside, which doesn't really aid in development very much and has a potential of weakening black's position in the future. So the expansion is not without drawbacks for black.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 9 hours ago









        Scounged

        3,3441319




        3,3441319






























             

            draft saved


            draft discarded



















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f22954%2fwhy-is-the-ruy-lopez-a-sensible-opening-for-white%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            404 Error Contact Form 7 ajax form submitting

            How to know if a Active Directory user can login interactively

            TypeError: fit_transform() missing 1 required positional argument: 'X'