Originally posted by wormwood
3 or 4 times, and 3 times here I think.

Quite routinely 🙂

Originally posted by heinzkat
This can't be the way to learn openings.

well, it's more an aid for learning than The Way. of course you need to understand the positions as well. but at least I've gone through the related books with much though several times, and in a month *puff* 90% of what I learned has evaporated from my head. having gone through that a couple of times, I wanted to make sure I'll retain most of it.

Originally posted by heinzkat
Quite routinely 🙂

it's gone to the point of "oh no, not this one again!", but at least I tend to win some time with it...

Originally posted by wormwood
well, yeah. but that's a symptom, not the cause. you can't get better by adressing a symptom, you need to address the cause behind it. the masters didn't see the whole board before getting good, anymore than we do. they see it because they've built up more experience, more patterns, more familiarity with their structures. which is summed up as a bett better what's where, and building up more patterns/structures/chunks into your head.

I don't disagree with you I just thought people who were unaware might be interested.

P.s. I've tried looking at the centre of the board and using peripheral vision in blitz and it seems to help a bit.

p.p.s. Heinzkat - the centre approach was refering to the immediate gaze on the board in a new position, not just staring at the centre of the board for the whole game.

Originally posted by jonrothwell
I don't disagree with you I just thought people who were unaware might be interested.

P.s. I've tried looking at the centre of the board and using peripheral vision in blitz and it seems to help a bit.

p.p.s. Heinzkat - the centre approach was refering to the immediate gaze on the board in a new position, not just staring at the centre of the board for the whole game.

Uhu, but when you get a "new position", the gaze immediately goes to the Kings

(at least for me)

Originally posted by heinzkat
Question: why is your playing strength not 200 rating points higher than it is now? What elements of chess are holding you back?

lack of practical thinking and being slow.

Originally posted by heinzkat
Uhu, but when you get a "new position", the gaze immediately goes to the Kings

(at least for me)

And thats why you are 200 points lower than you could be.....apparently.

Originally posted by heinzkat
This can't be the way to learn openings.

Obviously not, but I didn't know better. I still use CPT everyday though, it contains my full repertoire in the clearest, simplest way.

Originally posted by Maxacre42
Obviously not, but I didn't know better. I still use CPT everyday though, it contains my full repertoire in the clearest, simplest way.

do you have any idea why CPT sometimes duplicates lines? like 5 or 10 times in a row? or to be more precise, how to prevent that?

Originally posted by heinzkat
(it is still difficult for me to explain what exactly I am looking for, you see...)[/b]

Maybe this is what you're looking for.

A position from a past game of mine.I was playing the white pieces and just played Nd4-f5 to which black answered Rf8-e8.
Thoughts that cross my head
First "if I capture on e7 black no longer has the bishop pair".
Second "but my f5 knight is a very nice piece.At the moment it's better than his e7 bishop and it can only be dislodged by the g pawn causing a weakness in his king's pawn screen.It's probably better to develop my bishop instead of making this trade"
Third "Bf4 seems best because it puts pressure on the d6 pawn"
Fourth "but then he might play d5 opening up his bishop and I might end up with two bishops aimed at my king"
Then I just try to fantasise some sort of attack using the f5 knight.These are nothing but vague ideas and I know up front nothing will come of it but I keep doing it over and over again.
And then that last thought pops up again and I just grab the bishop without any further thought,even though I still feel and think it's the wrong move.

And this ridiculous excsuse for a thought process is what keeps me down.

Originally posted by wormwood
well I don't care to go looking, but from memory this one and close relatives come up quite often, as happens here on RHP as well. once you hit a dragon player as white, and the train gets rolling with Bh6, there pretty much only 1 crossroads before running out of theory. after ...e5, whether white takes the pawn right away or moves Ne2 first.

[pgn]

1 ...[text shortened]... fxg6 19. f4 e5 20. Nde2 Rxh1 21. Rxh1 Nxe4 22. Nxe4 Rxe4 23. fxe5 Rxe2 24. Qxe2 Qg5+ *
[/pgn]

I agree with this thinking. I think the type of opening has a big influence on how easy it is to learn it X number of moves deep, and I have an example from my own repertoire.

I have played the Sicilian Dragon and Alekhine's Defense in OTB play. In the case of the Dragon, the themes, recurring tactical motifs, and standard positions are are relatively clear and constantly reinforcing. For instance, in the Yugoslav Attack white does not make a significant variance until move 9 (usually 9. Bc4, 9. g4, or 9. 0-0-0), so Black pretty much plays the same moves and waits to see which way White will go. Since the "starting point" is effectively move 9, even hacks like me can play theory 20 moves deep almost by accident.

In contrast, Alekhine's Defense can give rise to a variety of positions, and the themes can vary considerably, and it has been more difficult for me to reduce it into "learnable chunks" that I can recall over the board. I've scored well with it, but I have rarely gone as much as 10 or 12 moves into theory in a game- and that's in part because the white players know even less, and vary early.

I think the number of moves of theory really depends on the opening. Twelve moves in the Ruy Lopez is nothing, while 12 moves in the Budapest may give you a miniature. The correct answer is like the only response that is the correct answer to every economics exam in college- "it depends".

Paul

Originally posted by wormwood
do you have any idea why CPT sometimes duplicates lines? like 5 or 10 times in a row? or to be more precise, how to prevent that?

I don't know what you mean? like when you're in training mode?

Originally posted by Ajuin
And this ridiculous excuse for a thought process is what keeps me down.

Maybe try Alexander Kotov's "Think like a Grandmaster", it describes such whacky thought processes, but it must be said I don't quite like the "solutions" he offers -- something along the lines that you would have to draw out some sort of tree of variations, it is going nowhere. But the written texts are worthwhile.

Originally posted by heinzkat
Maybe try Alexander Kotov's "Think like a Grandmaster", it describes such whacky thought processes, but it must be said I don't quite like the "solutions" he offers -- something along the lines that you would have to draw out some sort of tree of variations, it is going nowhere. But the written texts are worthwhile.

yeah, I really dislike Kotov's computerish lines, they're so irrational and random. 😛

seriously though, Kotov is plainly making things up just to be able to say something original. He keeps emphasizing that you must never jump from a variation to another and that you must calculate each variation only once, never coming back to it. Now I'd bet serious money on that he has violated those rules in every single game he has played, simply because they are impossible and wrong in principle. A good discussion about his approach is in Talisman's book, I recall.

Originally posted by philidor position
A good discussion about his approach is in Talisman's book, I recall.

User 330749?

But his texts and general observations are good, no? I have benefited from it anyway.
(I never do much with the diagrams and analyses . . .)