18 Dec '15 15:48 18 Dec '15 15:51 18 Dec '15 16:12Originally posted by UserChevyThis is a great reply! Thanks, you make a very good point. I have done Myers-Briggs and my type is INFJ, which would fit completely with my approach to chess. I am very much a big picture thinker, but this requires a certain inspiration for me to really perform at my best. I get effected by bad form, which can spiral into weeks of turgid, error ridden, appalling chess. I mean today has been even worse for me than when I wrote this original post, my confidence has just nose dived completely. I have done 20 or 30 puzzles and gotten only 1 right! Even on an average day I would expect to be around 50%. Something has gone very wrong, because only last week I played like this...
TL;DR version: Try to challenge how you currently look at chess and try a detail-oriented approach to complement your intuitive foundation.
I know I'm not the strongest player out there (just starting to get back into chess after hardly playing for 5 years while I went to pharmacy school, not really sure how strong I am now but was around 1750-1800 OTB ...[text shortened]... t you out of the doldrums that have already been described.
Hope this makes sense and helps!
18 Dec '15 18:02Originally posted by moonbusI think the mistake I made in this game was that I made the mistake from afar. As soon as I played ..dxe4, I had already worked out the whole line up until ..Qxe4+, the problem is that I assumed at that point that I was winning a rook, and failed to reevaluate the position before I played ..Nxg3, at which point I am now committed.
"...completely over looked the fact that black can defend the knight on g1 and trap my Queen."
Alarm bells should have been going off in your head that that R was poison!
18 Dec '15 18:501 edit 18 Dec '15 19:28Originally posted by vanderveldeI have considered this in the past. I'm not opposed to this at all, I enjoy working on chess so anything like this would of course be of benefit. My post is more about what causes these fluctuations in form. Why is it that my level can be 2000ish one day and 1700ish the next? I still know the same things, I still have the same technique, I play the same openings, but some days I just can't apply it. Other days, the pieces almost move themselves it's so simple. I see 22/2300 players play similar chess to that which I play when I am on form. They aren't doing anything particularly different, they just manage to maintain that level consistently, that is really the only difference between us. I am wondering if they are doing something to foster this consistency. This is the part that is missing, not specific knowledge (though obviously there are a million things I could improve).
There is an expression "this every Soviet /Russian/ pupil knows", and I think there is something in it.
It is partly connected with what UserChevy wrote.
But for that you must find some of old school coaches.
You will more likely improve skill to evaluate position than calculation skill. If you are inclined to make oversights in tactics, so you sh ...[text shortened]... oblem by yourself, you need to see some decent coach first. Pay him as you pay for yoga classes.
19 Dec '15 00:06 19 Dec '15 01:031 editOriginally posted by nimzo5Well focusing on what you suggest, I can say that I have been intending to study endings intensively for years but have done precisely nothing about it. I think the reason for this is because I don't have an easy way of doing this.
I don't care for blitz much (although I play a fair amount)
How you take care of yourself definitely influences your results. I had years of seesaw results because I wouldn't admit to myself that chess was my "relaxation" from my real job - which was super high stress.
In the last year I hit upon a path to improvement, but I can't suggest it would work ...[text shortened]... a large open tournament.
So find your weaknesses and work on them, good things will happen.
19 Dec '15 14:01Originally posted by MarinkatombWell, show me a GM, IM, FM or even expert who got that way just mainly playing blitz.
No I disagree with this actually. I have gained a lot from playing blitz. Even if you are not analysing very deep, as long as you are visualising the position a move or two further on in your head and can hold that 'picture' then you are doing good work imo. Since I moved away from Correspondence and started playing live game my ability to visualise has ...[text shortened]... at before. When I play longer games this is invaluable as you get more time to just look deeper.
19 Dec '15 14:311 editOriginally posted by sonhouseI agree, you must play long games, and I do! Don't underestimate the value of blitz though. I used to hold the same opinion, I played correspondence exclusively for 10 years, and you know what? My otb game sucked. I couldn't work things out in my head correctly. As i've mentioned before in this thread, I have played blitz (5+3 or longer) for a couple of years now, combined with doing thousands of tactics puzzles and now I can play without a board completely. Visualisation is essential if you are going to play well otb, correspondence just ruins that. When I played club chess I would play very slowly, couldn't visualise correctly and consequently never really did that well. Since then I have played maybe 5000 games, all of which have contained lessons. Just playing blitz is not enough, but analysing blitz games is enough, certainly to make a 2000 grade.
Well, show me a GM, IM, FM or even expert who got that way just mainly playing blitz.
I think you will find they got to their level by studying corr games and deep analysis.
I don't think you will find much deep analysis for blitz, since the original thinking could never go very deep in the very short time allotted.
19 Dec '15 16:492 edits 19 Dec '15 21:18Originally posted by MarinkatombIt sounds all like chemistry, which remains a highly individual cocktail as will be your solution or improvement. Exercise and diet are obvious things but lately more research indicates that circadian rhythms can be surprisingly influential regarding various chemical balances, tied as they are with the many clocks inside a body -- and not in every body in exactly the same way. Not only daylight duration influences those rhythms but also caffeine "resets", long artificial light exposure, screen glare and such things. Perhaps something to research or experiment with?
Yes I have tried a similar approach. I think sleep is a big thing, If I go to bed before 10pm one day, I am often quite sharp the next. All of the things you suggest are useful, definitely. What I find hard to understand is that I watch stronger players playing blitz, and they can maintain that higher level consistently.
Maybe you are right, maybe it ...[text shortened]... totally removed any competitive inclination. I wonder if there is another practise I could try?
21 Dec '15 11:37Originally posted by plopzillaWhen I first got to 1800 I couldn't touch a 1900 player, they were much much better. Since then I have tended to play higher rated players though. When I first made 1800 my average opponent rating was probably somewhere in the 1600's. These days I play against 1800+ generally (more often 1900+ these days), so it is harder to maintain an 1800 rating. I feel this is the only way to see if you are worth your grade. Anyone can just go and beat up on lower rated payers.
I could have written a lot of the same stuff about myself as you have written being stuck at 1800/2000. The one thing that irks me the most is that I know plenty of players around 1700/1800 who have never beaten or drawn with 2000/2200+ players, but like you I have managed this on quite a few occasions. So what I find confusing is how can we be only a bit ...[text shortened]... classic recently in a 80 move Sicilian a pawn down, its all about energy too - youth has energy.
Need some advice from some strong players
Back to Top