The EAD thing doesn't work if the pieces attacking and defending aren't the same value. Say you've got a rook and queen attacking a knight, so it's attacked twice. Now imagine there's a pawn protecting the knight. The knight's attacked more times than defended, but are you going to take it?

My point is that figuring out counting tactics is often more complex than simply counting.

--Fromper

Ahhh... yes it does! What I am talking about is tactics. The two ingredients of tactics are targets and patterns. I can show you countless GM examples of sacrifices where two higher value Units attack a Lower value unit and win it. Look at the classical double bishop sacrifice for example. One bishop attacks the Black h pawn only defended by the king so the h pawn is EAD1. White takes it and Black recaptures. Now White swings out his Q to h5 with check and the Black king goes back to g8. Then comes the other bishop. It attacks g7 and Black defends it EAD1 again. Pow! White takes threatening mate on h8 so Black takes it and on we go.

The point is to look for all targets in both your camp and the opponents camp, ALWAYS. Tactics that win material will involve targets, guaranteed!

Yes, just because you see a target, you don't have to go after it. But it may be involved with a later tactic. Watch your computer play. It hammers targets relentlessly. Every tactic I miss is because I failed to look at some target, either in my camp or the opponent's.

Another target is a king that can be checked. It does not matter if the check is good or not (and usually it won't be), but it's a target never-the-less.

Look at 1.e4. It's a target. Now Black can attack it right away with either 1..d5 or 1..Nf6 (I am not saying these are good or not, but they do meet the requirements of the position). Or, Black can delay the attack a move and go 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 (or 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5), both with White HAVING to make a decision about his e pawn.

Or, Black may choose a different strategy and play 1..e5. Now what is considered White's best move here? 2.Nf3. Why? What are its pros and cons?

Here is a great instructional game:
Morphy - Duke of Brunswick [C41], Paris, 1858
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Bg4 4.dxe5 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 dxe5 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.Qb3 Qe7 8.Nc3 c6

White's targets: Ra8, Rh8, Pb7, Pf7, and king (it can be checked)
Black's targets: Ra1, Rh1, Pg2, Pe4

9.Bg5 b5

b5 is attacked 3 times with pieces and defended once with a pawn. It's not EAD but it is a target because it's attacked more than it's defended (which means it can be taken).

10.Nxb5! a classic example of sacrifice of material for time.

10..cxb5 11.Bxb5+

I'd like to insert a better material value system here.
Pawn = 3
Knight = 10
First Bishop to leave the board = 11; second Bishop = 10
Rook = 15
Queen = 29
King = 13

Using this system, the material imbalance is White gave 10 (the knight) for 6 (2 pawns). The difference is 4 in Black's favor.

BUT, the positional factors overwhelm the material ones.

11..Nbd7 12.0-0-0

Yes, white has less pieces than Black, but look at Black's rook on h8. When will it get into the game? For all practical purposes, it's as if Black does not have it in essence giving White a large material advantage!

12..Rd8 13.Rxd7 Rxd7 14.Rd1 Qe6 15.Bxd7+ Nxd7 16.Qb8+ Nxb8 17.Rd8# 1-0

It's good that you're looking for targets, but I still don't know about calling it EAD and keeping a running total of number of pieces attacking and defending. Personally, I just look for checks, captures, and threats (in that order) on every move, for both me and my opponent, and then I work out whether or not they lead to anything. Sometimes they do, even if the number of attackers is less than the defenders, and sometimes they don't even when the piece is attacked more times than it's defended. Every possibility needs to be examined. But as you say, it all starts with targets.

--Fromper

Ok, fine. Whatever works for you.

This is Beginner's Corner. Knowing how to identify targets becomes a habit after it's done a number of times. I attempt to clearly and specifically define what a target is and why it's important to know how to easily find them.

The Intrinsic Mobility (IM) of a piece (K, Q, R, N, or B) is the total number of squares it can influence on an empty board. For example, on an empty board, place a king on a1. It has a mobility of 3 (a2, b2, b1). Place it on e4, it has a mobility of 8. It is very interesting to make IM charts for all the pieces.

Here is one for a knight:

2 3 4 4 4 4 3 2
3 4 6 6 6 6 4 3
4 6 8 8 8 8 6 4
4 6 8 8 8 8 6 4
4 6 8 8 8 8 6 4
4 6 8 8 8 8 6 4
3 4 6 6 6 6 4 3
2 3 4 4 4 4 3 2

IM relates to force as well. The king's force is the same as it's IM. So a king on e1 has a force of 5. The force on f2 protects that pawn.

All pawns (except the a and h pawn) have a force of two. Their force is a diagonal force, one to the left and one to the right. Mini bishops if you will. After 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 the Black king is a target because it can be checked and the Black f pawn is now a target because it's EAD1.

Everybody knows these moves: 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 (creating new targets) 2..Nc6 3.Qh5 (attacking the targets) 3..Nf6 4.Qxf7 mate.

Like I said earlier, watch your computer play. It's a tactical monster. It creates and hammers targets like mad. That's how I want to play!

When I solve tactic problems, I first find all the targets. Then the solution becomes easier since it will always involve one or more of them. Try it!

It all depends on your rating level if you play 1. e4 or 2.d4.

If you are a beginner you should play only 1.e4 for some time because in the resulting positions existing chess principles can be demonstrated and learned
easier compared to positions emerging after 1.d4.

After some years you can switch to 1.d4 to enter a more quiet positional game that does not get on your nerves that much as 1.e4 games.
Older players prefer playing 1.d4 and many grandmasters do, because they don't like to play against the sicilian with the white pieces as Black is scoring well in the Sicilian defense.

This is the reason why 1.d4 is slightly more successful than 1.e4.