Most good chess players say the best way to improve is to discover your weaknesses and work on them, but what if you already know your weakness and cannot find a way to remedy that problem? What if your weakness is so unique, so phycological, that convensional study, of say, endgames, tactics, openings, strategy, pawn structures, etc prove useless? I am that such a player!
How do I lose, well, I look at the games I do lose, they are so comical, that often I laugh out loud, as I see quite obviously what a terrible move THAT was... In most games that I lose, 99% of the time, the following happens, I build up a small advantage, get a better position, pressure my opponent and he's hanging by a thread, then I outright blunder/hang a peice in the most elementary of fashions. To be honest, I am a CHOKER, how can one study/improve to stop this?
I honestly don't know how, it's a phycological problem, it's also a bigger problem that losing constantly this way damages your spirit as a chess player. You gain more confidence winning games you have no business winning, then say, losing games you had no business losing. Losing hurts either way, but if I play like crap and lose, I honestly don't care, I deserved to lose, but when I throw away won positional games, which happens so very often, I don't know what to do to improve upon this.
It's phycological, no book will help. Take more time to think, get paranoid, and check over moves? I do that, the result? Time pressure in a won endgame for me, that I blunder off. Study tactics to see your opponents tactics? My problem isn't my opponents tactics, I just move peices right into geting captured, I see complicated tactics, I just noob blunder, LMAO!
So what to do about it? I don't know, any advice will help, but I'm starting to get very upset over losses like these that never seem to end in sight and have been going on, for a year running.
Originally posted by DeadBeSwallowedA book detailing how to spell psychological might do some good.
Most good chess players say the best way to improve is to discover your weaknesses and work on them, but what if you already know your weakness and cannot find a way to remedy that problem? What if your weakness is so unique, so phycological, that convensional study, of say, endgames, tactics, openings, strategy, pawn structures, etc prove useless? I ...[text shortened]... er losses like these that never seem to end in sight and have been going on, for a year running.
Originally posted by DeadBeSwallowedI have had the same thing. I quit chess for a year because of school and when I started to play again I was making stupid blunders all the time. But when I started playing more and more regular the blunders started to go away!
Most good chess players say the best way to improve is to discover your weaknesses and work on them, but what if you already know your weakness and cannot find a way to remedy that problem? What if your weakness is so unique, so phycological, that convensional study, of say, endgames, tactics, openings, strategy, pawn structures, etc prove useless? I ...[text shortened]... er losses like these that never seem to end in sight and have been going on, for a year running.
So play more and more regular😉
My “serious” rating is around 1980-2000. After reading deGroot’s Thought and Choice in Chess (OOP), I noticed weaker players looked at many more moves and tried to see further ahead than the masters. Weaker players always got befuddled over so many possibilities. Also, often in the first 2-3 moves the weaker players looked at, there was at least one move the stronger players also considered. So. I concluded: (1) Only consider the first 2-4 moves that pop into my head (2) Only look 2-3 moves ahead; if I don’t see how it loses a piece, play it. (3) Pick the move that looks the most threatening, even if it’s only in a general sort of way. (4) After your opponent moves and before you move, scan the ranks, files and diagonals. Amazing how much stuff you see, like the Rook that was hanging on a1. Also, get a book of unanalyzed tournament games; play over them (with a board, not on a computer) at 5-10 min. per game. You are going after quantity, not quality, so as to learn pattern recognition. American Master Ken Smith recommended this. You will then find (3) improves because you start zeroing in on opponent’s weak squares, loose pieces, things like that, and that is what chess is all about – tactics; at least below Master level. This works. My rating went up 200-300 points doing these things.
Repeat after me.
I'm a chessplaying knucklehead, for I don't respect the opposing pieces.
Again:
I'm a chessplaying knucklehead, for I don't respect the opposing pieces.
Again:
I'm a chessplaying knucklehead, for I don't respect the opposing pieces.
Remind yourself of this during a game and it'll work!
Dr. Regicidal
I once had a similar problem at times (in casual games) and true, it's psychological and comical. Specifically, two recurring themes.
1. The king is perceived as a piece that is weak, in need of protection. So what do I do? I place a piece right next to it to attack it as part of a combination. The mind wants the attack to succeed so badly that it overlooks/refuses to accept the fact that the king can capture it.
2. The queen is vastly more powerful than a pawn, so as part of an attacking plan one can shamelessly place it in a pawn's line of attack, right? Besides the queen is much taller than a pawn and perhaps the mind simply looks past it as if it did not exist.
Take the previous suggestions about not calulating as deep to save time. Then just move the piece to where you are planning to move it, keep your finger on it, and look at all the enemy pieces making sure none can capture it. After calculating you think so much about the long term that you don't notice the obvious. It sounds simple but it works, I have the same problem.
Originally posted by tmetzlersweet memories...
"Mateulose"
anyway best way to get rid of weaknesses is to play blitz and everytime before game you should promise to yourself not making particular mistake (like trading off your bishop pair for nothing or thinking too long per move..etc..) finally, after hundreds of games your unconscious mind prevent you from doing critical mistakes and you are suddenly GM-class player. this is not guaranteed, but it worked to me.
Originally posted by UmbrageOfSnowThis would work well in an offhand game, but with tournament rules you'd get killed by touch move. You can effectively do the same thing here with the analysis board.
Take the previous suggestions about not calulating as deep to save time. Then just move the piece to where you are planning to move it, keep your finger on it, and look at all the enemy pieces making sure none can capture it. After calculating you think so much about the long term that you don't notice the obvious. It sounds simple but it works, I have the same problem.
it is so me!! taking advantage in the oppening, and then .. a dummy mistake , i just can't believe i havn't seen it before. sometime i just underestimate my opponent, while is doing bad oppenning , i'm almost laughing, and then i pay less attention to his threat and .. BANG . i get screw. especially when they pull out the queen on the 2nd or 3st move, trying that pathetic mate in 4! sometimes they are good, they just don't know how to open. I used to play chess about 4 year ago for a period of 2-3 year. i 've restarted playing for a month now and i do those mistakes more then ever!! However, i think we've got good tricks with this thread, thx guys!
Originally posted by DeadBeSwallowedI looked at your games to see a pattern but there were only 4
Most good chess players say the best way to improve is to discover your weaknesses and work on them, but what if you already know your weakness and cannot find a way to remedy that problem? What if your weakness is so unique, so phycological, that convensional study, of say, endgames, tactics, openings, strategy, pawn structures, etc prove useless? I ...[text shortened]... er losses like these that never seem to end in sight and have been going on, for a year running.
finished games to see most of them against sub 1000's. The one
you played against reasonable competition, you won, a 1500 player.
So I don't have enough to go on advice wise, like I a am so much
better I should be giving advice, LOL~