First of all, let me say that i know there is no ONE way to improve your game.. It's all relative to your needs and abilities, etc.
But I've been giving alot of thought to it lately, and in my desire to come up with a way for me to personally improve, I wrestled with the question; Should I replay my all my old games looking for blunders and such, or should I study the games of the masters? The topic has been subject to a wide variety of opinions over the years, but here is what I came up with , theory wise: I have OFTEN heard it said that the best way to teach people who work as cashiers and such to recognize counterfeit bills, is to have them study, NOT counterfeits, but rather, AUTHENTIC bills. Thsi way, the theory goes, if they know the real thing inside and out, they will EASILY spot a bogus bill.
Well, I said to me, perhaps the same principle applies top chess. I.E., if study the GOOD moves, then you will have no trouble spotting a klinker. Am I making any sense?
So with that in mind, I have a renewed enthusiasm to go over the games of the masters, and to look at them move by move, asking myself what move I would make in any given position, then see how my assescment holds up to their conclusion.
I think I'm going to start with Paul Morphy, who I always have admired for his clear, logical and sometimes artistic elegance in moving.
Do you all suppose I'm on the right track here, or do you feel I'm misguided in my theory, and if so, then why?
I appreciate your input.
Originally posted by Svin1If the bad move is the move you are about to make then you should eliminate all bad moves for the set of all possible moves leaving you with only good moves. Thus you find the good moves through a process of elimination. With experience this sorting should become faster. Although I do agree with the statement starring "blindly" at GM games will waste time. It's better to spend a bit a time researching overall ideas (not lines) of openings then stare at GM games (IMHO).
While it might help you spot bad moves, I'm not sure it will help you *find* a good move. Unless you have some theoretical and strategic insight, I doubt that starring blindly at GM games will help much.
Something I am working on because it was suggested to me is the ability to see combinations. Some folks say playing the "best move" is the key, but the best move to someone that only sees the next move isn't getting the best picture. A lot of my screw ups happen when I fail to look for combinations of moves not only that I can execute, but that my opponant is looking at also. I am sure there are books out there with extensive combination drills and excercises. I know most chess software worth recommending has tutorials that have some focus on this area also...it is the literally the next level, and its not an easy one to learn without a lot of hard cold realities...mainly that you have to get spanked a lot.
Originally posted by kingisdeadI started going over my own games about a month ago, and I believe it has helped me improve my play. One reason is that I am learning why some of the mistakes I made are mistakes. By studying others' games I cannot learn this. I do think master games are well worth studying, but I think my own games have been at least as beneficial.
... I have a renewed enthusiasm to go over the games of the masters, ...
I try to mix my studies between my own games and master games. And I study my games using a computer program so they are always replayed accurately.
I don't know why y'all got the thought that I was going to stare "blindly" at the masters games.I did not indicate that in my original post. What I said was that I was going to replay the games, move for move ananlysis, see what moves i would have made in each position, then see what moves the masters actually made, then extrapolate why what they did was better, thus hopefully getting inside their head and thinking processes (as much as is humanly possible, of course) then take what I learn from them and apply it to my own games.
It's kind of analogous to another couple things in my life. I play guitar and I also perform magic shows. some of the best things I learned came from studying great guitarists and also from studying other great magicians. By seeing what they are doing with their hands, I learned a "standard", so to speak, that I tried to aspire to. I learned things by getting "inside their heads" that it would have taken me YEARS to learn stumbling along on my own. I believe Tony Robbins calls this process "modeling". I don't see why it can't apply to chess.