Hello Everybody! My name is National Master Dave Mohan, and I'm an avid chess player with a true passion for the game. Recently, I decided to share my passion with the rest of the world by creating my very own YouTube channel. The sole purpose of the channel is education, so all of my videos are instructive. If you're looking to improve, my content is accessible to all experience levels from complete beginner to even experienced master! If you have any chess questions or suggestions, feel free to drop them in the video's comments and I can 100% guarantee a response. Look forward to seeing you all subscribe and join the Tower of Power:
@kingme saidEach one of us can "see" to some extent, it's just that it may not be a "conscious sight".
I watched the video on going from 1700-2000 and was interested by the comments on tactics/blindfold play and being able to "see" the board. When people are calculating can they actually see an imaginary chess board with the pieces moving on it? I certainly can't.
For example 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 without sight of the board but I know anyone 1500+ should be able to counter that.
I think the inability to picture how the board will look after a move or two is what prevents some from getting better.
When you realize that a certain road leads to disaster and choose a different less destructive road, you lose fewer games.
But then there are memorized positions as well, which is why some say to memorize instructive games.
Always using the same opening leads to making fewer bad moves if you can remember the results of time you played it earlier.
I guess what I am saying is that we all have different strengths. Memorized patterns can work, visualizing calculating can work. People usually stick to what works for them.
I use the well that looks pretty good method then lose accordingly.
@eladar saidMemorising games? What happens if playing a sharp line e.g. Benko gambit, dragon and your opponent deviates from the Fischer or Kasparov game you memorised? 🙂
When you realize that a certain road leads to disaster and choose a different less destructive road, you lose fewer games.
But then there are memorized positions as well, which is why some say to memorize instructive games.
I guess what I am saying is that we all have different strengths. Memorized patterns can work, visualizing calculating can work. People usually stick to what works for them.
@congruent saidI was told that memorizing games helps to recognize patterns. When you see this pattern you try this like the game so and so vs so and so.
Memorising games? What happens if playing a sharp line e.g. Benko gambit, dragon and your opponent deviates from the Fischer or Kasparov game you memorised? 🙂
You do not try this because it was refuted in so and so vs so and so.
Personally, I believe memorizing 100 games over a certain period of time simply identified people who can do it. If you are a coach trying to get people to a certain level, this identifies people with one useful skill. Most of the time novelties do not win games, being able to internalize what is in chess manuals and chess tactics wins most games.
That is not an exhaustive list of skills, but still very important if you want to compete at high levels.
@eladar saidAn improvement on then memorising games would be understanding ideas and concepts. I mentioned the Benko and Sicilian Dragon as examples if you understand these openings, then you should be able to give a good account of yourself assuming you are playing with players of a similar rating band.
I was told that memorizing games helps to recognize patterns. When you see this pattern you try this like the game so and so vs so and so.
You do not try this because it was refuted in so and so vs so and so.
Personally, I believe memorizing 100 games over a certain period of time simply identified people who can do it. If you are a coach trying to get people to a certai ...[text shortened]... is not an exhaustive list of skills, but still very important if you want to compete at high levels.
@congruent saidTo internalize it you must understand it. If you do not desire to be a master at some level, memorizing games is likely just a waste of time.
An improvement on then memorising games would be understanding ideas and concepts. I mentioned the Benko and Sicilian Dragon as examples if you understand these openings, then you should be able to give a good account of yourself assuming you are playing with players of a similar rating band.
@eladar saidSticking with my very specific examples of the Sicilian Dragon and Benko gambit, can you please give me examples of games one should memorise? The next question is how do you consider candidates for memorisation? Consider in your sample selection that the Benko is a good weapon for players under 2100.
To internalize it you must understand it. If you do not desire to be a master at some level, memorizing games is likely just a waste of time.
@congruent saidLol, you are certainly getting your panties in a wad for nothing.
Sticking with my very specific examples of the Sicilian Dragon and Benko gambit, can you please give me examples of games one should memorise? The next question is how do you consider candidates for memorisation? Consider in your sample selection that the Benko is a good weapon for players under 2100.
@congruent saidO.K., I'm with you in the Dragon, it's easy to avoid sharp lines there by playing the classical variation. There's no especial reason to go for the Yugoslav attack. Also, on the assumption we're allowed to see the board and it's a game with a sane amount of time, so our opponent's varied, so what? We're allowed to think for ourselves.
Memorising games? What happens if playing a sharp line e.g. Benko gambit, dragon and your opponent deviates from the Fischer or Kasparov game you memorised? 🙂
What bothers me is the notion that the Benko Gambit is a sharp opening. It's not, black gives up a pawn for the sake of long term pressure with his rooks. I don't agree it's sharp.