05 Dec 04
All right, so I am not exactly a chess master, in fact, I may play sloppy chess, that's why I want somebody's input...
I know in chess strategy is key, but as a player, I have no real strategy. Basically, I can not think up a series of moves with the idea of attacking the king with so many pieces on the board. Therefore, I resort to taking out my opponents pieces one after the other until a "real strategy" becomes more apparent to me. Basically I am wondering whether or not this is "sloppy chess", as I have been accused of playing using this "technique". I admit is is not exactly the neatest way of playing, but when playing human opponents (computer is a much different story), it can work quite well.
05 Dec 04
Originally posted by gardilooI think you're talking about "chop chop" or "chopping wood" chess? At least that's what some people call it. An attack where you just keep aiming every piece towards the opponent's king and then just lobbing them into the position like hand grenades. So you either win by forcing the king out and mating him, or you lose because you're so far down in material.
All right, so I am not exactly a chess master, in fact, I may play sloppy chess, that's why I want somebody's input...
I know in chess strategy is key, but as a player, I have no real strategy. Basically, I can not think up a series of moves with the idea of attacking the king with so many pieces on the board. Therefore, I resort to taking out my oppo ...[text shortened]... , but when playing human opponents (computer is a much different story), it can work quite well.
That works otb because so many people have a tough time finding the correct defensive moves. They get rattled when they get attacked. The reason it's so darn tough against a computer is because it can almost always find the right defensive move.
I can't and won't knock your chess style, but against higher rated opponents you'll find that chopping wood doesn't work. They just trade off material and leave you a piece or more down in the endgame.
05 Dec 04
Originally posted by gardilooThinking up a series of moves that lead to a concrete goal,is not strategy,that's a combination(tactics).It's the old,I do this,then he has to do that,then I can do this....
All right, so I am not exactly a chess master, in fact, I may play sloppy chess, that's why I want somebody's input...
I know in chess strategy is key, but as a player, I have no real strategy. Basically, I can not think up a series of moves with the idea of attacking the king with so many pieces on the board. Therefore, I resort to taking out my oppo ...[text shortened]... , but when playing human opponents (computer is a much different story), it can work quite well.
Strategy is a long term plan,with no immediate goal(except win the game,of course).A strategy could be to attack on the queenside,or the kingside,or maybe you plan a pawnstorm.Then you develop your pieces accordingly.It involves the pawn structure,piece placement and how to make your pieces co-operate best.Strategy is a general,overall plan.Tactics is the way you carry out that plan.That's the best I can explain it.Sorry if it's not very good,I'm no master and english isn't my first language either.
I understand from your post,that you play without strategy,just go for tactics.I think that's how most people play,me included.I do try to think of,and play according to,a strategy,but usually a game reaches a point where I lose my way(strategically),then I just try to generate favourable tactics.It works against equal players,because they have the same problem,but you pay the price against better ones.
It's not sloppy chess,it's normal.The better you get,the less 'sloppy chess' you will play 🙂