Advice when playing higher ranked players

With all this talk about trading pieces, I'd like to post some theory behind when to trade pieces and when not to, independent of your opponent's strength. (Disclaimer: I'm not the strongest player here by a long shot. I'm largely paraphrasing Reuben Fine, though, especially for the next two paragraphs.)

Trading pieces sucks the wind out of an attack. So if your advantage is of a temporary nature and requires an attack to take advantage of (i.e. advantages in development or space or an opponent's unsafe king) then you should probably avoid trades.

On the other hand, if you're trying to convert a more permanent advantage such as a passed pawn or material advantage into a win, you want the process to be textbook-simple. If there are no tactical complications then you'll win (okay, that's an oversimplification, but you get the idea). So you want to minimize the opportunity for screwups by simplifying the position and getting the scary attacking pieces off the board.

With material advantages, there's also the fact that an extra Knight looks a lot scarier when all the other pieces are gone: a 4-1 point advantage is bigger than 12-9 or whatever. So this is another way in which trades favor the player with a material advantage. Against players who appreciate this, you can even use the THREAT of a piece trade to your advantage: for instance it can be part of a fork, or it can force them to move their pieces to inferior squares. This opens up a lot of tactical options and, I think, is an important part of properly using a material advantage.

Obviously both of the above are reversed when you're the one with the disadvantage. And of course tactics are paramount: none of this applies if the particular trade is a stupid idea for specific reasons.

Does this mean that the previous conversation about trading pieces against a superior player is pointless? Of course not, but you have to take it in the appropriate context: there are positions in which, regardless of whom you're playing, there is only one correct choice. Now, grandmasters can use opening plans to try to ensure the type of position they desire, and you can try do do the same. For instance, gambits are likely to lead to sharp tactical positions where you would want to avoid trades and aim for complications (a situation people have suggested might be good against stronger players). But there are no guarantees.

I've found higher rated players can be overconfident. Play familiar openings in which you know the little tricks and traps and hope the opponent falls into them.

Just play your game- stick to your openings, make your middle game decisions based on what you understand on the board. If you lose you will learn something and you will be a tougher opponent then if you play some sideline trying to avoid their "book".

Agree with greenpawn, don't play any different than you would against other opponents.

Also follow his advice "always check every check". If at any point he exposes his king, think whether giving check will give you any advantage.

Have a look at any possible forks, even if it would take several moves to get there. Can you work your way towards the fork while creating other threats to distract your opponent?

Think about "if only" situations. You can see a killer move but he has a piece guarding that square. Is there anything you can do to block that piece, trick him into moving it, can you trade a piece for it or even sacrifice a piece to remove it?

I am a 1300-1400 player. On the few occassions I have beaten players ranked significanly higher than me it has been in highly tactical games, or because I have seen an "unexpected" mating combination involving a sacrifice.

I find the biggest disparity between my game and the game of higher ranked players is in the end game. I usually lose material and position quite badly in the end game against a better play, whereas I can usually keep thing about even through the middle game (assuming no blunders by me).

So, how do I improve my end game skills?

Originally posted by choochoo2247
I'm ranked in the low 1500s. Do you have any strategies for playing against higher ranked players, say 200 points higher than you?

One thought I keep in the back of my head is to trade pieces when given the opportunity. My rationale is that the higher ranked player can probably see the board better than I can (and can anticipate deeper move combinati ...[text shortened]... ns). So if I can take a lot of pieces off the board, that advantage is minimized.

Thoughts?

In my experience, higher rated players show their superiority better in the end game than any other phase (except perhaps tactically, tactics dominate every phase and MUST be practised, period!!) Obviously there are situations when trading into a superior ending is favourable. However, blindly seeking an ending without assessing whether you will be better in the resulting position is not advisable. If you want to beat stronger players, you need to put work in to make yourself a stronger player.

My advice (not necessarily speaking as a stronger player) would be to spend 1/2 to 1 hour studying tactics every day and to also study basic end game positions. For a 1500 player, these areas will provide the most rapid development. Yes you can study middle game/strategy/positional play, but if your tactical vision is short, you'll lose to tactical complications. Also, when you are deciding whether to make a pawn move or not in the opening/middle game, i solid end game understanding will stand you in good stead. Middle game technique grows out of tactics/end game technique. 😉

Originally posted by SmittyTime
I am a 1300-1400 player. On the few occassions I have beaten players ranked significanly higher than me it has been in highly tactical games, or because I have seen an "unexpected" mating combination involving a sacrifice.

I find the biggest disparity between my game and the game of higher ranked players is in the end game. I usually lose material an ...[text shortened]... ough the middle game (assuming no blunders by me).

So, how do I improve my end game skills?

Here's a very efficient way that worked for me.

First, learn king and pawn vs king, and rook and pawn vs rook- in particular, the Philidor and Lucena positions (you can look both of these up in wikipedia.com, and learn them cold in one night, or a weekend at the most).

Second, I look to my openings to direct my endgame studies.

I learn my openings from books of complete annotated games. Each kind of opening has it's own "thematic" endings, with nuances and tendencies unique to it. For instance, the Colle and related systems tend to have queenside pawn majorities, Sicilian players tend to have an extra center pawn (but may have sacced the exchange for a pawn), etc.

I took my opening book, turned to the first game, and went to the first diagram that looked like it was an ending or was about to become one. I then studied the position and played carefully through the end of the game. Then I went to the next one. Pretty soon, you start seeing patterns in the endings, and you get a feel for how the games normally end.

if you really want to get savvy about it and you have chessbase, you can take a database of games from an opening, and chessbase will break down every type of ending found in the database, so you can see what kinds of endings you are more likely to see, and start there.

And don't forget to look for mate, even in simplified positions. People relax when they shouldn't- as Dr. John Nunn says, never play positionally when mate is available!

Edit: Here's an example from a game of mine that I had already shown in a club forum on the site, where I am playing for an ending and the mate just sort of "popped up":

My advice is very simple:

Learn chess backwards


* from simple to complex
* from structures to variations
* from strategies to tactics
* from endings to openings

Learn how to handle every simple position involving pawns alone; then introduce minor pieces; then swap them for rooks and learn a little about rooks & pawns. Set up middle game positions from GMs but remove all the pieces; just look at pawn structures. And so on....

🙂

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
Here's a very efficient way that worked for me.

First, learn king and pawn vs king, and rook and pawn vs rook- in particular, the Philidor and Lucena positions (you can look both of these up in wikipedia.com, and learn them cold in one night, or a weekend at the most).
...

I'd add that its worth studying K+N vs. K+P and K+Q vs. K+P too. They are easy to learn and important, too, in the sense that there are a few (but only a few) hidden draws

But I agree with the general idea. Mine own progression was:

K+P vs K, K+piece vs. K+P, K+P endgames with more pawns, Lucena position and other rook endgames, and then more complex endings coming from the study of complete games. Almost identical.

Originally posted by atticus2
My advice is very simple:

[b]Learn chess backwards


* from simple to complex
* from structures to variations
* from strategies to tactics
* from endings to openings

Learn how to handle every simple position involving pawns alone; then introduce minor pieces; then swap them for rooks and learn a little about rooks & pawns. Set ...[text shortened]... positions from GMs but remove all the pieces; just look at pawn structures. And so on....

🙂[/b]

This is exactly how I approach things.

Originally posted by atticus2
My advice is very simple:

[b]Learn chess backwards


* from simple to complex
* from structures to variations
* from strategies to tactics
* from endings to openings

Learn how to handle every simple position involving pawns alone; then introduce minor pieces; then swap them for rooks and learn a little about rooks & pawns. Set ...[text shortened]... positions from GMs but remove all the pieces; just look at pawn structures. And so on....

🙂[/b]

rec'd!

I would think buying the higher ranked player an extremely delicious refreshment might cause them to lose on time since they might be sipping away merrily and dreaming of how great a drink this is only to discover that woops time is up.

This technique is especially effective at the pub or coffee shop when playing blitz chess.