You have a queen and rook nicely coordinated on f8, but Black guards the square twice, too. Still, imagine playing these things through to see what results. Your first thought might be 1. Rf8+, QxR (if Black instead moves his king, he loses his queen); 2. QxQ+, KxQ—losing a rook. But now pause after the first pair of moves. The queens would then be faced off against each other, and the only guard of Black’s queen would be his king. If you could give a check you might be able to pry the king away and leave the queen exposed to capture. You have a tool for the purpose in your light-squared bishop: 2. Bd5+. If Black moves his king to Kh8, 3. QxQ nets a queen for a rook.

You might think Black could do better by instead blocking the bishop check with Qf7; then play goes 3. BxQ, KxB, and Black seems to have taken another White piece in compensation for his queen. But be resolute in considering how the board would look at the end of any such sequence—and especially in looking for any fork that might then be executed as a kicker. In this case Black’s king would be left on f7, so White looks for checks against the king on its new square or any loose Black pieces to attack and finds Qf4+, winning the rook that is stranded on e3. White ends up with a queen against Black’s bishop and an easily won game.

These possibilities will repay some review. A lesson of them is to take care against rushing through an imagined sequence and automatically assuming that after 1. Rf8+, QxR must come the natural recapture 2. QxQ, KxQ. Throwing an “in between” move, or zwischenzug, into the sequence (2. Bd5+) turns it from a loser into a winner.