Talk:Tarrasch rule

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Chess (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chess on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

First sentence[edit]

The first sentecne of the article has been changed to say that the Tarrasch rule applies to certain endgames. Actually it applies to many endgames. It applies more often than not, I believe. Also, it is at least as applicable in middlegames. Do others agree with this? (Perhaps I overemphansised the few exceptions I found.) Bubba73 (talk), 17:30, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Tarrasch rule modification[edit]

In this article, as well as in the article Siegbert Tarrasch I find the following entry:

"Andrew Soltis quotes Tarrasch as saying "Always put the rook behind the pawn.... Except when it is incorrect to do so." (Soltis 1997:129)."

In fact, I found the text of the original modification by Tarrasch on this website: . It is in German however, but Tarrasch has written it in a very humorous and satirical style, rather unlike his usual writing. I recommend it to everybody with understanding of chess (and preferable German, but in any case you will understand much from his diagrams and the kind of exceptions that led him to modify his rule).

It turns out that Tarrasch's modification of the rule was inserted in the 4th edition of "Die moderne Schachpartie" (Leipzig 1924, page 419-424). This is mentioned in Kamm's Tarrasch biography on page 506-507 (pagenumbers from German edition) and is also explained in German on the website . --Sir48 11:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Importance rating[edit]

The Tarrasch rule is so widely cited and applicable to so many games that I think it should be rated at higher than "low importance". I'm changing it to "mid". If someone disagrees, then please change it (and explain). Bubba73 (talk), 02:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Mid importance is appropriate for this article. Quale 07:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)