How Not To Play Chess

I have got to be one of the worst blitz players around. It's fun and exciting as hell, but I am just terrible at it. Then I chanced to pick up a book today that's been sitting around the house, titled "How Not To Play Chess." The first lesson of the book is: "Avoid mistakes," followed by the second lesson: "Do not make the opening moves automatically and without reflection."

Now, it seems to me that blitz chess could not be more perfectly designed to foster an abundance of blunders, as well as force the players to make all sorts of moves "automatically and without reflection." So I have to wonder if working at improving my blitz play would run counter to my various efforts to improve my overall game, and in the end make me a poorer chessplayer, not a better one.

Originally posted by basso
I have got to be one of the worst blitz players around. It's fun and exciting as hell, but I am just terrible at it. Then I chanced to pick up a book today that's been sitting around the house, titled "How Not To Play Chess." The first lesson of the book is: "Avoid mistakes," followed by the second lesson: "Do not make the opening moves automatically and witho ...[text shortened]... mprove my overall game, and in the end make me a poorer chessplayer, not a better one.

I don't like blitz chess because I don't like to lose on time or anyway. I lose enough games when I have plenty of time to plan my moves. I want to learn to play good chess and I believe playing slow deliberate games is the best way to learn. However, blitz chess may be beneficial in making you concentrate and speeding up your thinking and reaction time. Also if you lose enough games the same way, you may learn to make different moves like a rat in a maze learns.

Originally posted by RJHinds
However, blitz chess may be beneficial in making you concentrate and speeding up your thinking and reaction time. Also if you lose enough games the same way, you may learn to make different moves like a rat in a maze learns.

Blitz is also fun.

Originally posted by basso
I have got to be one of the worst blitz players around. It's fun and exciting as hell, but I am just terrible at it. Then I chanced to pick up a book today that's been sitting around the house, titled "How Not To Play Chess." The first lesson of the book is: "Avoid mistakes," followed by the second lesson: "Do not make the opening moves automatically and witho ...[text shortened]... mprove my overall game, and in the end make me a poorer chessplayer, not a better one.

If any book tells you to avoid mistakes, throw it out. You don't get paid for this, so it had better be fun.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
If any book tells you to avoid mistakes, throw it out. You don't get paid for this, so it had better be fun.

Winning is fun.

Playing a good game is fun - win or lose. It is no fun winning against someone who drops a piece to you via an obvious blunder.
Playing a lot blitz games is a great way to get your mind looking at lots of chess positions in a short period of time. You can further improve if you go over and study your blitz games - try to learn from every game you play or see.

Originally posted by basso
I have got to be one of the worst blitz players around. It's fun and exciting as hell, but I am just terrible at it. Then I chanced to pick up a book today that's been sitting around the house, titled "How Not To Play Chess." The first lesson of the book is: "Avoid mistakes," followed by the second lesson: "Do not make the opening moves automatically and witho ...[text shortened]... mprove my overall game, and in the end make me a poorer chessplayer, not a better one.

I took up playing blitz about two weeks ago , I got fritz 13 and play on playchess.com . I get hammered most of the time ,but I've played more games of chess in the last two weeks than in 3 years here and its the most fun I've had out of the game. I bought Blitz Theory by J Maxwell ,its really funny and completely unethical ,well worth a read.

Originally posted by basso
I have got to be one of the worst blitz players around. It's fun and exciting as hell, but I am just terrible at it. Then I chanced to pick up a book today that's been sitting around the house, titled "How Not To Play Chess." The first lesson of the book is: "Avoid mistakes," followed by the second lesson: "Do not make the opening moves automatically and witho ...[text shortened]... mprove my overall game, and in the end make me a poorer chessplayer, not a better one.

How Not To Play Chess by Znosko-Borovsky

Znosko is a good chess author and this book is short and easy to read. Wouldn't
be a bad idea to go through it. You might pick up something useful. Take the first
two lessons for example.

Avoid Mistakes

Znosko gives this example



A well known mating pattern but Knosko isn't advocating that you memorize this
combination, rather he wants you to understand the underlying theme that makes
this combination possible, which is the cramped position of black's king.

Avoiding putting your king into a position like this, is the mistake Znosko wants you
to avoid. Not only will you end up avoiding this trap but you will also avoid falling
prey to simlar combinations.

At the very least, from this first lesson you have learned a useful trap that should
net you a few blitz victories. Ask any of the experienced blitz players on this site
and they'll tell you that they've caught countless victims in similar traps.

The thread titled "Checkmate in under 10 moves" has at least one example.

Do not make opening moves automatically

Here Znosko gives us this



Established opening theory. These moves have been played thousands and thousands
of times. But do you really understand the reason behind black's last move?

Here's the position with white to move



Can't white now win black's pawn on d5? It's attacked twice and black's knight on f6
is pinned.



How many players with the white pieces would even consider taking the d pawn?
And how many would realise they couldn't?
How many players with black would know that a queen sac would net them a whole piece?

Znosko's point; if you don't understand the reason behind the moves in the opening,
you may be unprepared for something like this.

At the very least, you've learned another trick that might aid you in a future blitz game.

Anyway, it's a good short book even if you just thumb through it.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I don't like blitz chess because ...

Chess is just checkers is just tic-tac-toe. Blitz is the human element. Or something.

Originally posted by kbear1k
Playing a good game is fun - win or lose. It is no fun winning against someone who drops a piece to you via an obvious blunder.
Playing a lot blitz games is a great way to get your mind looking at lots of chess positions in a short period of time. You can further improve if you go over and study your blitz games - try to learn from every game you play or see.

I have never saw anyone at the chess club go over a blitz game. They are to anxious to start the next one. Anyway, they don't have time to record the moves and I doubt they have that good a memory. But they do seem to have fun just seeing who can move the fastest, win or lose. I am all for winning!

Originally posted by KneeCaps
[b]How Not To Play Chess by Znosko-Borovsky

Znosko is a good chess author and this book is short and easy to read. Wouldn't
be a bad idea to go through it. You might pick up something useful. Take the first
two lessons for example.

Avoid Mistakes

Znosko gives this example

[pgn]1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 d6 4. d4 Bg4 5. Nc3 h6 6. dxe ...[text shortened]... z game.

Anyway, it's a good short book even if you just thumb through it.[/b]

The point is that one should have a good and quick working knowledge of the openings before playing any blitz games, if you expect to win them, right?

Originally posted by RJHinds
The point is that one should have a good and quick working knowledge of the openings before playing any blitz games, if you expect to win them, right?

No.

Yes. There is no MCE.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I have never saw anyone at the chess club go over a blitz game. They are to anxious to start the next one. Anyway, they don't have time to record the moves and I doubt they have that good a memory. But they do seem to have fun just seeing who can move the fastest, win or lose. I am all for winning!

"I have never saw anyone at the chess club go over a blitz game. They are to anxious to start the next one. Anyway, they don't have time to record the moves and I doubt they have that good a memory."

Sorry, it that is true (100% of the time )then the clubs you attend must have very, very weak players. Most club's I have attended and most speed games played when i was at university had the strong players going over most of the speed games - it is a way to teach!!!

Originally posted by kbear1k
"I have never saw anyone at the chess club go over a blitz game. They are to anxious to start the next one. Anyway, they don't have time to record the moves and I doubt they have that good a memory."

Sorry, it that is true (100% of the time )then the clubs you attend must have very, very weak players. Most club's I have attended and most speed games playe ...[text shortened]... iversity had the strong players going over most of the speed games - it is a way to teach!!!

There are no master chess players regularly attending either of the two. So I think they are very weak. Georgia and South Carolina are not known for having strong chess players.