Ulhumbrus: Nimzowitsch says of 9...Na3 <Played without finesse because now the black squares become weak>This suggests the question of why they become weak.
One example of an answer is that the black bishop defends these black squares whereas it is more difficult for White's queen's bishop to attack them as White's queen's bishop is occupied on the long diagonal.
So with respect to these other black squares Black's king's bishop can be said to do more useful work than White's queen's bishop can be said to do useful work.
This suggests that with respect to these other black squares Black's king's bishop can be said to be a piece of greater value than White's queen's bishop can be said to be a piece of value.
This suggests that with respect to these other black squares Black has got the worse of the bargain in this transaction.
This suggests that with respect to these other black squares it is as if Black has lost material in this transaction.
In the position after 15 0-0 one question is why instead of being weak on the black squares Black cannot organise a queen side pawn advance.
One example of an answer is that looking at the queen side White's pieces appear to enjoy an enormous lead in development over Black's pieces.
This suggests the question of whether Black can catch up in development.
Nimzowitsch gives one answer with 17 Bf5 preparing to make another profitable transaction by exchanging the bishop which cannot attack the black squares for a knight which can cover them.
Following this Maroczy appears to make no attempt to advance his c pawn. Nimzowitsch indicates that this is not possible. When Maroczy does finally manage to play ...c5 it is too late. His king side is smashed and he loses a pawn.
Kibitzing
