A Quote by Yasser Seirawan

Throughout chess history, great debates have raged about the pros and cons of hanging pawns. The debates are nonsense; the answer is cut and dried. If the pawns can be attacked and forced to move forward, they are weak. If they can be defended and remain where they are, they are strong.
He hated games they made the world look too simple. Chess, in particular, had always annoyed him. It was the dumb way the pawns went off and slaughtered their fellow pawns while the king lounged about doing nothing. If only the pawns would've united ... the whole board could've been a republic in about a dozen moves.
The world organization debates disarmament in one room and, in the next room, moves the knights and pawns that make national arms imperative.
In the ending the king is a powerful piece for assisting his own pawns, or stopping the adverse pawns.
The shortcoming of hanging pawns is that they present a convenient target for attack. As the exchange of men proceeds, their potential strength lessens and during the endgame they turn out, as a rule, to be weak.
To be sure, debates will linger about whether Medicare is too large or too small. Debates remain about the allocation of Medicare dollars. But December 8, 2003, demonstrated that there is no debate about this most fundamental fact: Medicare must survive.
The placing of the centre pawns determines the "topography" of a game of chess.
In a rook and pawn ending, the rook must be used aggressively. It must either attack enemy pawns, or give active support to the advance of one of its own pawns to the queening square.
If we don't have a responsive democracy, all the debates about charter schools, and fracking, and high-stakes testing, and the militarization of police forces - all of which are issues I care about – they aren't real debates.
Each player, it will be observed, has eight superior Pieces or officers, and eight minor ones which are called Pawns; and, for the purpose of distinction, the Pieces and Pawns of one party are of a different color from those of the other.
I think it's one of the challenges of modern politics, which is, how do you communicate who the candidate is, and what they really believe, in the short time period you have? And for me, the best opportunity was the debates, and I think I was in real trouble before the debates, and I think the debates helped me a lot.
The power of hanging Pawns is based precisely in their Mobility, in their Ability to create acute situations instantly.
Weak points or holes in the opponent's position must be occupied by pieces not Pawns
I think three debates [primary debates] is the right number. I think that, uh, they'll be extremely well watched. There are those who will say it will be one of the highest-rated shows in television history, if not the highest.
Conflicting views and contrasting ideas are the essence of all great debates throughout history, from the Greeks to the Oxford Union Debating Society. Today, we turn to television for the creative clash of ideas on matters that touch our lives.
In real life, the most practical advice for leaders is not to treat pawns like pawns, nor princes like princes, but all persons like persons.
'Ida' doesn't set out to explain history. That's not what it's about. The story is focused on very concrete and complex characters who are full of humanity with all its paradoxes. They're not pawns used to illustrate some version of history or an ideology.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!