Board vision · unit 3

Counting attackers

How many pieces hit a square — fast enough that the answer arrives before you have finished asking.

Not started
clean = right, and inside the cap
What this unit is for

Every question in the seeds course reduces to this one. Is that piece loose? is "zero defenders." Is it underguarded? is "more attackers than defenders." If counting is slow or wrong, everything built on top inherits the error and you never find out where it came from.

So the target is not accuracy. It is accuracy under a clock. Counting correctly in forty seconds is not board vision — in a real game that budget is already spent on something else.

Not in this unit
Block 1Read · ~8 min

The rules

Rule 1 versus rule 1a

These pull in opposite directions and the difference is worth holding onto. Legality is about this position: a pin, a check, a king that would step into danger. Ignore all of it. Capture geometry is about the piece itself and never bends — a pawn cannot capture forwards in any position, so the square ahead of it is not attacked, not even a little.

Block 2Do · ~20 min

Practice — ten positions, with the answer shown

The clock runs but nothing is at stake. Feedback is full at first and thins out, so by the last three you get the answer and nothing else.

Block 3Do · ~12 min

The check — twenty positions you have not seen

Drawn fresh from a held-out pool, so a retake is a new set rather than a memory test. No feedback until the end.

The gate is 18 of 20, each inside its cap. Two misses is not generosity — it is the width of a bad day. A third means the rule has not automated yet, which is a reason to keep drilling and not a verdict about you.

Block 4Ask · open-ended

The misses are the useful part

Add anything you got wrong, or got right and did not trust. The button below assembles every added position into one block of text and copies it. Paste it into the tutor project and argue about it.

Ask for the rule, not the answer

You already have the answer; it is in the packet. The question worth asking is which rule you applied wrongly, and whether the mistake was the rule or the reading. Those need opposite fixes — a misremembered rule gets restated, a misread board gets drilled.