Originally posted by sonhouseI have the life and games of Mikhail Tal!! Awesome book! I understand the way he plays better than most other GM's. He is the player i aspire to (or rather i dream to aspire too!!). The one thing about this book which isn't quite so useful is it is analysing the games but isn't a course in improving your chess.
Looking at your profile, the only thing I can suggest:
FINISH YOUR FRAPPING GAMES🙂
That big dump you took on your rating, long vacation?
Hope it wasn't like me and Kat, hospital. I was ok, only in for a couple
of days, got out of trouble on the clan games!
Seriously, have you looked at some of the links for improvement?
You are already pretty stron ...[text shortened]... yzed by a master would be even better, they would for
sure see stuff you missed. Good luck, eh.
I've read a book by Max Euwe also. It was about the middle game but i forget the exact title (i leant it to freddie..). End game study i have covered. I'm currently studying Dvoretsky's 'end game manual'. I doubt i'll need to study muh more on the end game once i have finished it. Not until i have improved my opening/middle game a little anyway. When i do make it to an ending, the game has generally already been lost or won in the opening/middle game already so most of my endings play themselves...
I think i'm going to focus on openings for a little while. I've done a little study, but this has generally been to cover the basic idea's in an opening. I need to learn some hard theory (ie, last night i lost because of one bad move in the opening. All the pressure that my opponent got came from this move, therefore i need to really learn the essential moves and which order they should be played in, etc...)
Thanks a lot for your advice, i really appretiate it. It's funny, a year ago i'd have been really happy if someone said i'd be hitting 1700 next year, but now i'm there it's just not good enouph!! 🙂
Originally posted by UmalakasI do play rather reclessly. I can't seem to play solid moves, only sharp tactical moves that either win with style or loose in 20 moves. I find slow positional games borring, which will probably mean i'll never reach any great heights in this game 😞
Work on your defensive play and focus on trying to avoid/protect postional weaknesses in your game. With no weaknesses in your position, you cannot lose, it's a win or draw. That's my advice.
Originally posted by stevetoddIf you look at my graph, here is a huge dip in it. At that time i had about 60 games also and just resigned them all as i wasn't playing properly in any of them. When i started again i stuck to 20 games for a while and hit 1700 for the first time. Duaring that period i developed a better technique for analysing my games (when you find a good move, keep looking!!!) which i still use now. I have more games on the go now, bu i only take on more once i know one of my games is technically won. I have about 12 games running at the moment that are completly won so i don't have a problem taking on more, as i know how these one's will end already... What you say has truth though, getting to this point has been difficult. The difference between 1600 and 1700 is a couple less losses (literally). I've also started playing 1600+ exclusively, hopefully playing stronger players only will improve my game 😕
Hiya, well although I'm 1800 ish I don't really feel qualified as I think any day now there will be a huge correction (but I must say I also thought that when I got to 1700). I too went through what you are (and I still am as I would like to get to 2000...but don't really think I ever will, but that isn't going to stop me trying). Anyway back to the po ...[text shortened]... bject slightly my first task is to get my otb game back its gone hopeless since playing on here.
1 edit
The things iv found most useful to improving my OTB play have been: CT Art, its basicly 1200 odd tactical problems in theme order. I had thought I was quite good tactically before I brought the program and tried some of the problems.....how wrong was I 🙂 It provides a good insight into where your tactical weaknesses are via looking at your % of correctly solved/mistakes in each theme. The must have books id recommend are "Modern Chess Strategy" by Ludek Pachman, you can pick it up from Amazon for about £3 - £6ish. It covers middle game strategy, positional concepts etc, very well wrote and easy to understand. If you find Modern Chess Strategy good, then consider getting Nimzowitsch's "My System" although be warned its about £50..ouch! Naturally "Art of Attack in Chess" goes into the pile too, its mainly devoted to the strategy of attacking the king.
Originally posted by whitedeerwithnohornsI've read My system already. Good book, though the words are all too scientific! I've read Secrets of Modern chess strategy as well (which is a re-write of Nimzo, forget the author) though i found it bafflingly complicated and far too advanced for a beginner like me.
The things iv found most useful to improving my OTB play have been: CT Art, its basicly 1200 odd tactical problems in theme order. I had thought I was quite good tactically before I brought the program and tried some of the problems.....how wrong was I 🙂 It provides a good insight into where your tactical weaknesses are via looking at your % ...[text shortened]... ck in Chess" goes into the pile too, its mainly devoted to the strategy of attacking the king.
Where did you get CT ARt from? Is it expensive or free or what? Sounds interesting. 🙂
Originally posted by marinakatombThink I brought it for £21 which is grossly over priced if you ask me.
I've read My system already. Good book, though the words are all too scientific! I've read Secrets of Modern chess strategy as well (which is a re-write of Nimzo, forget the author) though i found it bafflingly complicated and far too advanced for a beginner like me.
Where did you get CT ARt from? Is it expensive or free or what? Sounds interesting. 🙂
http://www.bcmchess.co.uk/softnewbie.html
It was designed by some Russian Correspondence GM if I remember correctly.
Despite its cost its been really good for my chess improvement.
Originally posted by marinakatombI understand, I hear you, I have the same problem OTB.
I do play rather reclessly. I can't seem to play solid moves, only sharp tactical moves that either win with style or loose in 20 moves. I find slow positional games borring, which will probably mean i'll never reach any great heights in this game 😞
OTB, I'm a measely 1600 rated player, but I know I am way better, and everyone in the club knows I am too. For the record, I have beat 2000 plus raters in the club, in tournies games, that counted, before, but I've lost to complete noobs OTB, 1400 rated, by going on my little fancy adventures and going for unsound sacrefices that just look nice.
I need to treat my OTB like correspondance chess. In one game, we have like what? 3 hours each? Frankly, time isn't a factor, it's at the same pace as RHP when I play 6 games simul, I move at the same rate here that I COULD move OTB for a single game. I need to put more thought into my OTB games and realize the rules are the same, chess is chess.
But here is the catch 22, players like you and I, despite all our shortcomings of engaging in unsound tactics, have an edge to become great players if we ever do learn to control ourselves and accept the truth of the position. A good positional player, that's solid, and has been around 1800 for 50 odd years, devoid of tactics, has no chance of geting better, you do. Tactics merely give us a useful little weapon, call it a sidekick, to take better advantage of even/solid positions. Players like you and I, have the advantage of, if we show patience and learn defense, to play those positional masterminds to a tee, move for move, and just wait for them to make a slight error to pounce on tacticly.
Think of it this way, playing a solid positional game defensively, then using a tactic to win a pawn in an endgame, is a much easier way to win then to go on a kingside attack, macho sacrefice, Tal like adventure.
I do not recommend players study Tal at all, you have made an error here IMO. Studying Tal can be very frustrating for us amateurs, as a lot of his intuitive sacrefices, that seem unsound after DEEP analysis of say 10 moves ahead, make us pull hairs and say, "I don't understand this at all, WTF, argh!" I've also seen many annators simply analyze Tal's games wrong. Many times I studied Tal, the annator would say something like, "black is FORCED to play this or this that loses in 6 moves, what a nice convincing tactical win by Tal". Then I look at the board with glaring eyes, say to myself, "why the f*** can black not play THIS?" (Something the annator didn't consider), and surely enough, as often the case, after 15 moves of difficultly, Tal's opponent saves himself to at least a draw, that his opponent of course missed, and the annotator missed too. And e-mailing the said authors of these Tal game books complaining about it is mute point, they'll just laugh at you.
But take heart, even Grandmasters experience the same with Tal. Josh Waitzkin, on Chessmaster, recommends you don't even pick up a Tal book, he states, "if your experience is anything like in my youth when I frustratingly studied Tal games, I can tell you it won't help your chess. If you want to learn how to attack, study classic attacking principles and tactical puzzles." Lasker quote: "Common sense in chess is the best advice I can give amateurs, chess is economic, Tal is exception.", etc... So as addictive as it may be, please, for your sanity, throw out your Tal books or give them to someone else.
Back on topic, our general tactical ability is an extra weapon, that allows us to play those "boring" positional solid games (a weapon that many positional players don't have, and usually stay contempt with their postional game, expecting nothing), and turn draws into endgame wins.
At least that is what I have found out, the hard way, with chess and with my few games on RHP. You don't need to force things, just ask yourself, "what is weak?", fix the weakness, even if it seems rediculous and overdefended, play good positional moves, and feel comfortable you have tactical shots at your fingertips to win a pawn or two if you hang in there, with a solid/equal position, devoid of weakness. It's not dramatic, but most chess games are lost, not won, every game I won in my short RHP career, I didn't even make one brilliant move. There's no "!" marks when I insert my games for analysis into Fritz, but then again, there are no "?" either, a few "?!" mind you. You don't need to get "!" to win games, just avoid the "?".
Originally posted by UmalakasWOW, rec for you! I am guilty of trying to play beutiful chess when solid chess is required. I played a game against a woman last season who was graded 62 (which is crap, in case you're wondering, let's say 1000 elo). She hung her e-pawn on the 4th move, but i turned it down to develop a surprising kingside attack. A few moves later i could have won a piece, but i turned that down also to SACRAFICE a piece instead. My position was still good, her king was in no-mans land but i got careless and hung a rook!! Two pieces down now, my attack has dwindled and i'm left wondering how the hell i got into so much trouble. Luckily she didn't fancy playing an ending with an extra rook and bishop and offered me a draw!! There are two lessons i feel.
I understand, I hear you, I have the same problem OTB.
OTB, I'm a measely 1600 rated player, but I know I am way better, and everyone in the club knows I am too. For the record, I have beat 2000 plus raters in the club, in tournies games, that counted, before, but I've lost to complete noobs OTB, 1400 rated, by going on my little fancy adventures and ...[text shortened]... either, a few "?!" mind you. You don't need to get "!" to win games, just avoid the "?".
1.Never under estimate anyone!! (Especially women, i ALWAYS have trouble against the fairer sex...)
2.Never turn down material, ESPECIALLY if you intend to sacrafice a piece instead. When i looked at it after, i could have won her piece, and sacraficed a piece on the next move with even better results!! I was looking for the flashy mate, and wanted it to be more spectacular than the position allowed.
Needless to say my captain had some words to say to me after that game. But it highlights my problem well. I want to play a stunning game, EVERY game, but i only achieve it 1 in every 5 or 10. The others are hard battles where i often have to recover material, which will no doubt stop me from becoming a more consistent, stronger player.
I guess i feel that, even if i loose a lot of games now, over all i'll be a better player in the long run if i'm willing to experiment and play dairing moves, but i may be misunderstanding the nature of this game. Looking at the top players here, they often seem to be correcting, as you say, rather than creating (though obviously they do create a sh;t load better positions than i do!!). A balance is needed in the force, but i'm probably too inexperienced to find this for a few years yet, i fear.
Originally posted by zakkwylderYou sound so angry in your profile...what gives? Sincerely, Trains44
theres no evidence to support that. my rating is nothing compared to some, yet i know how to play chess and do have some semblance of strategy. if you'd like a game, id be more than happy to play one with you so you can practice, and who knows, maybe i might say something insightful. its up to you. i play people well above my rating and people well below ...[text shortened]... pens. and there is a lesson right there. never underestimate anyone. send me a game if you like.