Not hooks, doorknobs!

A little terminological revision in the service of clarity.

If Russians can ruin the perfectly good word “blunder”, then I’m not going to feel bad about proposing my own alteration to the chess lexicon. I frequently explain the term “hook” to my younger students, referring to, say, a black pawn on h6 that gives White something to “grab” onto to open lines, say, with g2-g4-g5. By pushing the pawn to h6, Black gives the opponent something for his pawns or pieces to latch on to, that will help open the position.

Perhaps hook isn’t such a bad word, but there’s a better word: doorknob. We all know exactly what a doorknob is for, and how to use it. You grab a hold of it, turn it, and enter. And that’s what we’ll do with that pawn on h6: we’ll grab a hold of it, manipulate it, and walk through the open door to Black’s king.

What do you think: is this an improvement, or are there cases where hook is the more useful term - perhaps because we want to grab onto the pawn, but there’s no ensuing entry?

As for “blunder”, there’s no argument to be had. A blunder is a very bad move, it is not a transitive verb indicating that one overlooked something, especially when that “something” can be a minor point.

Correct: 29…Bxh2 was a blunder.

Correct: “I blundered on move 29.”

Incorrect: “I blundered 35.Bd2 in the line 32…h3 33.Kg4 Bg1 34.Kxh3 Bxf2.”

Correct: “29…Bxh2 was a blunder, because I missed/overlooked 35.Bd2 in the line 32…h3…”

Props to the first person who knows the game reference and writes it in the comments.