Originally posted by greenpawn34Great Post, GreenPawn. Can you -- or anyone -- tell me how to load a new game into ChessBass Light so that I can play it through in the program? Thanks a bunch.
Hi Catfood.
WW is correct.
At your level till you are 1800 tactics, tactics, tactics and then some tactics.
I cannot vouch for a tactical chess site as I never came up that way so I
can only tell you what I know without a doubt turned me into a,,,
"...tactically gifted player." note from a very old Scottish Chess.
First delete the word 'g ...[text shortened]... games part 2
http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=3
Tom
Hi Tom.
You print out the games and play them over a board.
http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=4
http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=3
I say again, this is what did it for me and I can only tell you what worked
for me.
You see every tactic in action, you see drastic examples of minor opening
mistake getting punished in very instructive ways. You get ideas.
Originally posted by AlzheimerI wasn't claiming Piaget is right, I don't know enough about the mr. and about the subject, to claim any such thing, but at least some of it makes sence to me and I think the point remains that it gives us a nice insight on how children learn, and learn chess for that matter. Do you agree about anything I said?
Piaget observed 4 main development stages:
Sensorimotor 0-2 years (sensory information gained through mouth and hands to learn about objects etc.)
Preoperational 2-7 years (children are influence by how things look rather than logical reasoning)
Concrete operational 7-11 years (children are now capable of using logical reasoning)
Formal operational 1 ...[text shortened]... re able to do on their own and what they could do with little help from someone more skilled.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Thx for your tips, gp. Of course you can only speak to what works for you, understandably. But it sure is a lot easier to plug them into a program and play them out that way. What's the drawback in that? Also, none of the games are annotated. I'm still at the stage where annotations go a long way. I'm working my way now through The Art of the Checkmate -- quite a fine collection of short games. It's not extensively annotated, but the few remarks are certainly helpful.
Hi Tom.
You print out the games and play them over a board.
I say again, this is what did it for me and I can only tell you what worked
for me.
Originally posted by bassoAs I said it works for me and I played them from the book onto a board.
Thx for your tips, gp. Of course you can only speak to what works for you, understandably. But it sure is a lot easier to plug them into a program and play them out that way. What's the drawback in that? Also, none of the games are annotated. I'm still at the stage where annotations go a long way. I'm working my way now through The Art of the Checkmate - ...[text shortened]... of short games. It's not extensively annotated, but the few remarks are certainly helpful.
I believe it helps you retain the information better.
Watching them flick past on screen is the easy way. Do it the way every great
player before 1985 had to. It works.
If you see anything you cannot understand have a bash at working it out.
The notes in 200 Miniatures are very light so you are not missing much.
You have to ask yourself why after every move.
Why has he done that. Why?
Especially if you know it's the losing move. Go back and try and see what
the guy was thinking. This is you disecting a game and picking up loads
of tactical tricks. Why? Why? Why?
I envy you.
You are going to see Aikins-Jacobs for the first time and rub yours in
total disbelief. If you don't think one game of chess can give you pleasure.
Wait till you hit that game.
You are going to see Craddock v Miese and see Mieses play Rb8 setting one
of the most cunning traps that was ever set on a chess board and it requires a
reasonable player to fall into it. (one who did not look deep enough into the
position).
That game scared the hell out of me.
How on earth am I going to come up with ideas like that over a chessboard?
If still stuck then post on here there are a number of guys that will help.
Originally posted by greenpawn34also the wrong way. even on the computer.
Watching them flick past on screen is the easy way.
you train on 2d board exactly like you do on a real set, moving pieces around, trying out different things, working the position until you get it. if you just eyeball it, close to nothing will stick. muscle memory is the key, even when you're moving the pieces with the mouse.
Originally posted by wormwoodmmmm, i like to print the position off, go away and sit down with a board and make notes. i just started to do this and its quite amazing, the only problem is when i come back to enter my move and my opponent is on-line i cannot resist blitzing through the moves.
also the wrong way. even on the computer.
you train on 2d board exactly like you do on a real set, moving pieces around, trying out different things, working the position until you get it. if you just eyeball it, close to nothing will stick. muscle memory is the key, even when you're moving the pieces with the mouse.
You are right WW.
It used to take me ages to play over a game I wanted to know. I'd totally
rip it to pieces.
Also watch the good players analysing a game they have just played in a
tournament. Recently saw Rowson, Hebden and Motwani doing post analysis.
There were at it for hours.
Never done much screen work. I did all my graft before the computer came along.
I still have my doubts. Maybe OK for going over a game but for studying a
White to play and win position, a tough one. That would fry my eyes staring
at the screen for 20 odd minutes.
Had this argument with Aagaard. he said it's just the same as solving from a diagram.
Told him I'm crap at solving from a diagram as well. (I am).
Not to keen on DVD's either.
Think the brain is so use to watching crap on telly it switches into TV mode and
nothing sinks in.
Anyway one day we will have used up all the electricity so it will be back to
book and board method again and I'll come on here and tell everyone
I told you all this would happen......er........(ignore that last bit).
Originally posted by greenpawn34maybe you need a new prescription? your eyes shouldn't tire watching the monitor, unless your eyes don't focus right or maybe the monitor's refresh rate is too low? or it's too bright or something. - I can watch mine as long as I please, there's never any problem.
That would fry my eyes staring
at the screen for 20 odd minutes.
Had this argument with Aagaard. he said it's just the same as solving from a diagram.
or maybe you've just conditioned so thoroughly to playing on a real set, that you simply don't get into the right mood with monitor? or a diagram.