Decoy (chess)

Last updated July 18, 2023

In chess, a decoy is a tactic that lures an enemy man off its square and away from its defensive role.^[1] Typically this means away from a square on which it defends another piece or threat. The tactic is also called a deflection . Usually the piece is decoyed to a particular square via the sacrifice of a piece on that square. A piece so sacrificed is called a decoy. When the piece decoyed or deflected is the king, the tactic is known as attraction. In general in the middlegame, the sacrifice of a decoy piece is called a diversionary sacrifice.^[2]

Examples

Honfi vs. Barczay, 1977

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Black to move

The game Honfi–Barczay, Kecskemet 1977, with Black to play, illustrates two separate decoys. First, the white queen is set up on c4 for a knight fork:

1... Rxc4! 2. Qxc4

Next, the fork is executed by removing the sole defender of the a3-square:

2... Qxb2!+ 3. Rxb2 Na3+ 4. Kc1

Finally, a zwischenzug decoys (attracts) the king to b2:

4... Bxb2+

After either 5.Kxb2 Nxc4+ 6.Kc3 Rxe4, or 5.Kd1 Nxc4, Black is two pawns ahead and should win comfortably.

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Example of attraction

In this position, after the moves 1.Rf8+ Kxf8 ( forced ) 2.Nd7+ Ke7 3.Nxb6, White wins the queen and the game. A similar, but more complex position is described by Huczek.^[3]

Vidmar vs. Euwe, 1929

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Position after 33...Qf4

In the diagrammed position from Vidmar–Euwe, Carlsbad 1929, Black had just played 33...Qf4, threatening mate on h2. White now uncorks the elegant combination 34.Re8+ Bf8 (forced) 35.Rxf8+ (attraction) Kxf8 (forced) 36.Nf5+ (discovered check) Kg8 (36...Ke8 37.Qe7#) 37.Qf8+ (attraction) 1–0 Black resigns. (If 37...Kxf8 then 38.Rd8#. If 37...Kh7 then 38.Qg7#.) The combination after 33...Qf4 features two separate examples of the attraction motif.^[4]

Dementiev vs. Dzindzichashvili, 1972

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Position after 61.g6

This example shows a position from the game Dementiev–Dzindzichashvili, URS 1972. White had just played 61.g6 (with the threat 62.Qh7+ Kf8 63.Rxf5+). However, Black continued with the crushing 61...Rh1+ (attraction) 62. Kxh1 (best) Nxg3+ (the white rook is pinned) 63.Kh2 Nxh5 and White has dropped his queen to the knight fork. In the game, White resigned after 61...Rh1+.^[5]

Petrosian vs. Pachman, 1961

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Position after 18...Rd8

Perhaps the most celebrated game featuring a decoy theme is Petrosian–Pachman, Bled 1961,^[6] which also involved a queen sacrifice. Pachman resigned after 19.Qxf6+ (attraction) Kxf6 20.Be5+ Kg5 21.Bg7! setting a mating net .

Menchik vs. Graf, 1937

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Position after 20...Ng4

In the game Menchik–Graf, Semmering 1937,^[7] Graf resigned after 21.Rd7, deflecting Black's queen. (If 21...Qxd7, then 22.Qxh5 with mate to follow; 21.Qxh5 immediately wins only a pawn after 21...Qxh2+.)^[2]

Ivkov vs. Taimanov, 1956

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Final position after 49.h6

Often a wing pawn serves as a decoy in endgames.^[8] In the game Ivkov–Taimanov, Belgrade 1956,^[9]^[10] Black resigned in the position shown because White has an easy win by using his passed a2-pawn as a decoy to lure Black's king away from the center and to the queenside , allowing easy promotion of the h6-pawn.

Related Research Articles

In the game of chess, perpetual check is a situation in which one player can force a draw by an unending series of checks. This typically arises when the player who is checking cannot deliver checkmate, and failing to continue the series of checks gives the opponent at least a chance to win. A draw by perpetual check is no longer one of the rules of chess; however, such a situation will eventually allow a draw claim by either threefold repetition or the fifty-move rule. Players usually agree to a draw long before that, however.

The Giuoco Piano is a chess opening beginning with the moves:

The Two Knights Defense is a chess opening that begins with the moves:

The zwischenzug is a chess tactic in which a player, instead of playing the expected move, first interposes another move posing an immediate threat that the opponent must answer, and only then plays the expected move. It is a move that has a high degree of "initiative". Ideally, the zwischenzug changes the situation to the player's advantage, such as by gaining material or avoiding what would otherwise be a strong continuation for the opponent.

The Philidor Defence is a chess opening characterised by the moves:

The Hungarian Defense is a chess opening that begins with the moves:

The Légal Trap or Blackburne Trap is a chess opening trap, characterized by a queen sacrifice followed by checkmate with minor pieces if Black accepts the sacrifice. The trap is named after the French player Sire de Légall. Joseph Henry Blackburne, a British master and one of the world's top five players in the latter part of the 19th century, set the trap on many occasions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Andor Lilienthal</span>

Andor Arnoldovich Lilienthal was a Hungarian and Soviet chess player. In his long career, he played against ten male and female world champions, beating Emanuel Lasker, José Raúl Capablanca, Alexander Alekhine, Max Euwe, Mikhail Botvinnik, Vasily Smyslov, and Vera Menchik.

The Blackburne Shilling Gambit or the Schilling-Kostić gambit is the name facetiously given to a dubious chess opening, derived from an offshoot of the Italian Game, that begins:

In chess, a sacrifice is a move that gives up a piece with the objective of gaining tactical or positional compensation in other forms. A sacrifice could also be a deliberate exchange of a chess piece of higher value for an opponent's piece of lower value.

In chess, the exchange is a material difference of a minor piece for a rook. The side which wins the rook is said to have won the exchange, while the other player has lost the exchange, since the rook is usually more valuable. Alternatively, the side having a rook for a minor piece is said to be up the exchange, and the other player is down the exchange. The opposing captures often happen on consecutive moves, although this is not strictly necessary. It is generally detrimental to lose the exchange, although occasionally one may find reason to purposely do so; the result is an exchange sacrifice. The minor exchange is an uncommon term for the exchange of a bishop and knight.

In chess, a fortress is an endgame drawing technique in which the side behind in material sets up a zone of protection that the opponent cannot penetrate. This might involve keeping the enemy king out of one's position, or a zone the enemy cannot force one out of. An elementary fortress is a theoretically drawn position with reduced material in which a passive defense will maintain the draw.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Viacheslav Ragozin</span> Soviet chess grandmaster

Viacheslav Vasilyevich Ragozin was a Soviet chess player, writer and editor. He was world champion in correspondence chess and held the title of Grandmaster in both over-the-board and correspondence chess.

Borislav Ivkov was a Serbian chess Grandmaster. He was a World championship candidate in 1965, and played in four more Interzonal tournaments, in 1967, 1970, 1973, and 1979.

In chess, a desperado is a piece that is either en prise or trapped, but captures an enemy piece before it is itself captured in order to compensate the loss a little, or is used as a sacrifice that will result in stalemate if it is captured. The former case can arise in a situation where both sides have hanging pieces, in which case these pieces are used to win material prior to being captured. A desperado in the latter case is usually a rook or a queen; such a piece is sometimes also called crazy or mad.

In chess, a swindle is a ruse by which a player in a losing position tricks their opponent and thereby achieves a win or draw instead of the expected loss. It may also refer more generally to obtaining a win or draw from a clearly losing position. I. A. Horowitz and Fred Reinfeld distinguish among "traps", "pitfalls", and "swindles". In their terminology, a "trap" refers to a situation where players go wrong through their own efforts. In a "pitfall", the beneficiary of the pitfall plays an active role, creating a situation where a plausible move by the opponent will turn out badly. A "swindle" is a pitfall adopted by a player who has a clearly lost game. Horowitz and Reinfeld observe that swindles, "though ignored in virtually all chess books", "play an enormously important role in over-the-board chess, and decide the fate of countless games".

In chess, the Muzio Gambit, sometimes called the Polerio Gambit, is an opening line in the King's Gambit in which White sacrifices a knight for a large lead in development and attacking chances. It begins with the moves:

In chess, a windmill is a tactic in which a piece repeatedly gains material while simultaneously creating an inescapable series of alternating direct and discovered checks. Because the opponent must attend to check every move, they are unable to prevent their pieces from being captured; thus, windmills can be extremely powerful. A windmill most commonly consists of a rook supported by a bishop.

The Semi-Italian Opening is one of Black's responses to the Italian Game. It begins with the moves:

The McDonnell Gambit is a chess opening gambit in the King's Gambit, Classical Variation that begins with the moves:

References

↑ Hooper & Whyld (1996), pp. 102–03. decoy.
1 2 Hooper & Whyld (1996), p. 110. diversionary sacrifice.
↑ George Huczek (2017). A to Z Chess Tactics. Batsford. pp. 1–349. ISBN 978-1-8499-4446-5.
↑ "Master Games". Chess.com . Retrieved 2021-01-25.
↑ "Master Games". Chess.com . Retrieved 2021-02-02.
↑ "Petrosian vs. Pachman, Bled 1961". Chessgames.com .
↑ "Vera Menchik vs. Sonja Graf-Stevenson, Semmering 1937". Chessgames.com .
↑ Hooper & Whyld (1996), p. 103.
↑ Hooper & Whyld (1996), p. 184. Ivkov.
↑ "Ivkov vs. Taimanov, Yugoslavia–USSR match 1956". Chessgames.com .

Bibliography

Hooper, David; Whyld, Kenneth (1996) [First pub. 1992]. The Oxford Companion to Chess (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-280049-3.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

[1] Hooper & Whyld (1996), pp. 102–03. decoy.

[OCC_diversionary-2] 1 2 Hooper & Whyld (1996), p. 110. diversionary sacrifice.

[3] George Huczek (2017). A to Z Chess Tactics. Batsford. pp. 1–349. ISBN 978-1-8499-4446-5.

[4] "Master Games". Chess.com . Retrieved 2021-01-25.

[5] "Master Games". Chess.com . Retrieved 2021-02-02.

[6] "Petrosian vs. Pachman, Bled 1961". Chessgames.com .

[7] "Vera Menchik vs. Sonja Graf-Stevenson, Semmering 1937". Chessgames.com .

[8] Hooper & Whyld (1996), p. 103.

[9] Hooper & Whyld (1996), p. 184. Ivkov.

[10] "Ivkov vs. Taimanov, Yugoslavia–USSR match 1956". Chessgames.com .

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

Decoy (chess)

Contents

Examples

See also

Related Research Articles

References