About Silman, he looks a little bit too full of himself in his books. But book is full of nice examples, chess principles (not HIS inventions BTW, like Steinitz knight rules, pawn pointing rules, weak pawn ideas etc.) So since Yasser Seirawan throughly reccomended this book, I will follow it. If it doesn't work within a year, I will switch to another one !
EDIT: I wrote this one accidentaly from my logged in cousin's account. Please, do not ban me 😛
ivan
Originally posted by diskamylyou are usually lost by blunders, BUT...it is much more likely to make those blunders in a tough position, where you are a bit worse strategically and it is very hard to defend...
oh please, this is Silman, right? it sounds exactly like him. I just hate the guy, and his annotations as well. He makes it look like one strategical idea ends the game, just like that. I stopped reading him just because of this. his annotations really gives you this kind of artificial feeling, because he never annotates the losing side's moves who in almos ...[text shortened]... where your opponent just squeezes a win out of you, or are lost just by upto 4-mover blunders.
in the difficult position a move that is a little inacurrate will make you loose the game...but when you have strategical adavantage and make an inacurate move you will probably not loose the game
That is what I wanted to point out. With nice position it will be harder to find weakness in your army. And if you cramp your opponent, you'll find some weakness to exploit tactically very soon. I remember one Fischer game from Chernev's Logical chess move by move. His opponent tryed all sorts of threats and tactics before even developing, Fischer continued to calmly develop. After 25 or so moves, he used all of his oppoenent strategic weaknesess to crush him like a bug with a many move combination resulting in smothered mate.
Originally posted by ivan2908Fischer on Logical chess?! I'm sure you mean some other book. But on Logical chess there is a game were Mieses over reaches in his attack and then is punished severely due to his strategical weaknesses.
That is what I wanted to point out. With nice position it will be harder to find weakness in your army. And if you cramp your opponent, you'll find some weakness to exploit tactically very soon. I remember one Fischer game from Chernev's Logical chess move by move. His opponent tryed all sorts of threats and tactics before even developing, Fischer continued ...[text shortened]... c weaknesess to crush him like a bug with a many move combination resulting in smothered mate.
Originally posted by ivan2908Ok.
Wait, Logical chess is book from '50. You're right! Capablanca ! Thanks for pointing that out!
I think I can have my game annotated the day after tomorrow. And I'm planning to start re-reading Logical Chess, and Bronstein On the KID so that we both can do this plan the right way.
Anyway good luck to you and good chess for you on the coming year.
Do not bump this thread, after my sudden rating raise I started to play fast without annotations or discipline again, and look what was the result 🙁
I am canceling my current RHP games offering draws in equal positions and resigning. So I hope for fresh new start soon. I will subscribe before I continue to play new games because lack of many games at once is what drags me into fast play in the first place.
Again; 🙁
Originally posted by ivan2908Ok Sorry.
Do not bump this thread, after my sudden rating raise I started to play fast without annotations or discipline again, and look what was the result 🙁
I am canceling my current RHP games offering draws in equal positions and resigning. So I hope for fresh new start soon. I will subscribe before I continue to play new games because lack of many games at once is what drags me into fast play in the first place.
Again; 🙁
In that case let me continue to post my progress and plan. I still have one game to annotate and post.
Take your time and when you subscribe don't enter too many tournaments at once. I did that and am now on a horrible game load.😞 At least horrible to me.