1. Standard memberblack beetle
    Black Beastie
    Scheveningen
    Joined
    12 Jun '08
    Moves
    14606
    13 Nov '08 09:45
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    lol, i heard that its actually very high brow, you know for dudes rated around 2000, not little ol tweety pie village peasants like me who manage to scrape through to the endgame hoping that somehow a passed pawn will be created that i can push whilst supping my irn bru and eating a cold Gregs cheese a onion pasty. i have to admit beetle dude that i ...[text shortened]... ake is possible, perhaps not so in the end game, the importance of squares rather than pieces!
    This is exactly the reason why you have to get it -it's a pure struggle over space, therefore you have to think deep regarding moblility, therefore you are deep into dynamics.

    Dvoretsky shows how exactly you may achieve the highest degree of collaboration and mutual protection of the pieces. Then comes again the phase of potential accumulation because dynamism is, as you know my trustee feer, the potential activity of your pieces and your pawns.

    Hard! And who ever did claimed that chess is an easy task ye numptie?
    Go and get it. Dig it slowly, never hurry, it takes years. Practice hard, enjoy every move. Feel free to win and learn to loose, make no two times the same mistake. Every mistake of yours must be different.

    Have a good time afterall 😵
  2. London
    Joined
    04 Nov '05
    Moves
    12606
    13 Nov '08 23:38
    I've heard the capa quote before and to me it seemed self evident and to some extent what people do anyway. In order to play chess we have to understand what checkmate is so we must study an ending or two - such as the mate with two rooks and a back rank mate. Studying a wider range of endings gives us more objectives to aim and so informs our opening and middle game play. I haven't properly studied endings so my typical objective will be to obtain an overwhelming material advantage...maybe it's time for me to dust off my copy of Dvoretskys manual!
  3. Joined
    07 Jan '08
    Moves
    34575
    14 Nov '08 00:06
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Capablanca: In order to improve your game, you must study the endgame before everything else, for whereas the the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves, the middle game and the opening must be studied in relation to the endgame.
    ....
    I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand, endgame study teaches the most basic elements of piece coordination. It can also be quite complicated with fewer pieces out there. I can see what he means.

    However, this quote makes me think that Capablanca was kind of like some of the really great musicians I will run into. Being a great soloist doesn't often translate into being a great teacher. I know an overabundance of fantastic players that are lost when it comes to teaching the beginner. It's been so long that the experience is completely removed from them, or there are facets of basic learning that they've never endured. So what is escaping Capablanca is that for many players studying the endgame is useless because they never get there! They get outplayed and checkmated in the opening and middle games.

    In spite of what a great like Capa says, there must be a balance for the beginner.
  4. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    14 Nov '08 00:23
    Originally posted by Badwater
    I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand, endgame study teaches the most basic elements of piece coordination. It can also be quite complicated with fewer pieces out there. I can see what he means.

    However, this quote makes me think that Capablanca was kind of like some of the really great musicians I will run into. Being a great soloist doesn't often t ...[text shortened]... games.

    In spite of what a great like Capa says, there must be a balance for the beginner.
    yes badwater, I think it is generally the interested amateurs that make good teachers i would say, especially for beginners, i wonder if Paganini was a good teacher? or jimi Hendrix or Leonardo da Vinci?
  5. Standard memberblack beetle
    Black Beastie
    Scheveningen
    Joined
    12 Jun '08
    Moves
    14606
    14 Nov '08 06:07
    Originally posted by Badwater
    I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand, endgame study teaches the most basic elements of piece coordination. It can also be quite complicated with fewer pieces out there. I can see what he means.

    However, this quote makes me think that Capablanca was kind of like some of the really great musicians I will run into. Being a great soloist doesn't often t ...[text shortened]... games.

    In spite of what a great like Capa says, there must be a balance for the beginner.
    My friend Kazoe,

    It seems to me that the players which they are outplayed in the opening they suffer because their development is inferior than their opponent's (therefore no room for their pieces and/ or wrong pawn formation, which causes soft spots, lack of space control, lost tempi etc); and in the middlegame they are dead in the water due to the lack of collaboration and mutual protection of their pieces, along with the low potential of their chessmen overall (their strategy and their tactics are weak and so they are hooked on a lost position).

    But the endgame studies allow us to sharpen both our strategy and tactics, therefore one should begin his chess studies from the endgame, as Capa and Lasker proposed. Why not afterall, the endgame studies are pure fun!

    PS: Best regards to Osa and Ti Osa🙂
  6. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    14 Nov '08 14:27
    Originally posted by black beetle
    My friend Kazoe,

    It seems to me that the players which they are outplayed in the opening they suffer because their development is inferior than their opponent's (therefore no room for their pieces and/ or wrong pawn formation, which causes soft spots, lack of space control, lost tempi etc); and in the middlegame they are dead in the water due to the ...[text shortened]... . Why not afterall, the endgame studies are pure fun!

    PS: Best regards to Osa and Ti Osa🙂
    beetle dude, after some consideration there seems to be very simple ways of winning, correct me if i am wrong

    1.win space*- more maneuverability, more potential
    2.win time* - threats which our opponent must respond to without recourse to his own plans
    3.win material*, tactical sequences and combinations

    * space not always an advantage,
    * time not always an advantage
    * material not always an advantage

    thus rather than chess becoming difficult is should be rather easy, what say you?
  7. Standard memberblack beetle
    Black Beastie
    Scheveningen
    Joined
    12 Jun '08
    Moves
    14606
    14 Nov '08 15:00
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    beetle dude, after some consideration there seems to be very simple ways of winning, correct me if i am wrong

    1.win space*- more maneuverability, more potential
    2.win time* - threats which our opponent must respond to without recourse to his own plans
    3.win material*, tactical sequences and combinations

    * space not always an advantage,
    * tim ...[text shortened]... n advantage

    thus rather than chess becoming difficult is should be rather easy, what say you?
    Oh it's simple yet very tricky, tricky tricky tricky tricky; for a lead in development, superior pieces activity and accumulation of forces in a certain section of the board are really important, however only for a short time. So in some conditions every tempo is of crucial importance -these are the time influenced factors.

    In the endgame you see strange combinations arising seemingly out of the blue -out of the blue when you are not aware of the strategy and the tactics that you may apply, that is.

    For starters, in an endgame with pawns, you know that the stronger army gets the opposition in order to outflank the weaker army whilst the weaker gets the opposition in order to prevent this outflank.
    Now, if the opposition is not obligatory for the desired result but the player still goes for it, then his strategy is wrong; when the player goes correctly for the opposition but he cannot achieve nothing although his calculation is correct, his strategy is worthless because his position was ruined earlier; when the player has the right strategy but he miscalculates, his tactics need to be sharpen.

    But you see, my trustee feer, the "opposition" is just a quite basic prerequisit! So we understand that chess is hard and complicated because you have to be There. You have to make evaluations move by move till the bitter end. You have to make decisions all the time. But in the endgame any decision is futile if you know nothing about the exact technique required. In such a case you are ourplayed, no matter if your calculation ability can drive you 15 moves ahead;

    Desicion, a helluva task!
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree