Ok, I am pretty sure that I can play at 1800 OTB or RHP level now but I am looking at my moves, I am looking at my games, I am looking at the moves and games of my high rated opponents and boy, those games are SOOOOOOOOOOOOO boring.
Even at higher level I rarely see two or three move combinations involving sacrifice to setup a fork, or simple skewer. (the type of combination that is rated 1300 on CTS and you solve it within a second there)
It seems that 1700-1800 "strong" players still lose their games because of stupid one move blunders, unspotted pin threats or something similar.
How far I have to progress to really spot those tactics better...? It seems that brilliant tactical opportunities occur way more rare than we would like to admit. That's just sad.
Don't say to me study more tactics. I am studying them too much already. 😞
3 1/2 years of "serious" chess and I still struggle just to keep my pieces.
I wanna start flashy combinations !!😠
Here's what I think I should do to rise my tactical play to the next level :
- learn the whole board. Good enough to be able to know where is every square, to know his characteristics and how it interacts with other squares, pieces... Learn the start-destination square (and its color) of every diagonal, file, rank. It's good feeling when you can recitate the whole game in algebraic notation because you recognize the square within a milisecond ) I guess your calculation then becomes easier too
- learn common patterns, weaknesess and traps in the openings you play (sometimes that's f7 square, sometimes it's Qa5+)
- solving tactical puzzles is fantastic (slow and fast) but solid foundations are needed. Study tactics by elements and build from there. Learn each piece in the isolation and slowly learn how to combine them to set up pins, skewers, forks, defender removal, intererences, decoys, everything. I think I will stick with chesstactics.org until I will have every example burried in my head.
- increase your spotting capabilities (CTS)
- increase your calculating skills ("Slow" tactic puzzles, try to calculate every reasonable looking variation and try to clearly visualize their outcome, even if it's very difficult.)
- when you become depressed because it doesn't get any better, take a look at some annotated master brilliancy, for example from book How to Become a Deadly Chess Tactician
by David LeMoir or something similar.
While writting this I just realized that I won't have much time to study endgames and openings at all. But three years of that plan and not many people will survive the middlegame against such working/learning plan. 😛
maybe it's because, as you say, those brilliant combination opportunities are a lot rarer than we'd like to admit...
one problem is that whenever anyone puts together a collection of master's games - or writes an article about a game - they usually pick out the most interesting games - after all, who wants to read an article about a routine game? So it's easy to get the impression that all (or most) games should be like this.
I find that some of the more interesting chess involves those seemingly routine positions -- where the positions are relatively even and there aren't any obvious lines of play for either side - but these are often the time when a game will be won or lost...each side needs to choose their moves very wisely.
I'm finding in my own games my opponents very rarely play sacrifices to start a combination even when they have a superior position, but I put this down to a lack of imagination on their part. When you have a better position the opportunities to play sacrifices/combinations become common, you just need to look thoroughly at forcing moves - captures, checks and threats. Look especially at moves that open lines to the enemy king or remove/deflect defending pieces.
Originally posted by ivan2908Looks like you've answered your own question. I would point out however that you are a strong enough player to know that games in Correspondence Chess such as RHP if frequently long, grinding battles, rather than the stuff of brilliant, flashy, combinations. Perhaps what you see as boring, others may see as well thought out tactical moves.😏
Ok, I am pretty sure that I can play at 1800 OTB or RHP level now but I am looking at my moves, I am looking at my games, I am looking at the moves and games of my high rated opponents and boy, those games are SOOOOOOOOOOOOO boring.
Even at higher level I rarely see two or three move combinations involving sacrifice to setup a fork, or simple skewer. (th ...[text shortened]... ot many people will survive the middlegame against such working/learning plan. 😛
Hi Ivan,
What a tale of woe.
Yes of course if either player plays good error free chess then
there should be no 'flashy' combinations.
I had a quick run through some of your games. There are wee pieces
of 'flashyness' but you let some interesting idea sacs pass on by.
Do you not play out the positions that may have shots in them on your board?
If you had not doubt you would seen that in game Game 5842357
you had a much better move than meekly retreating an attacked piece.
13.Bg3?
Since I've been on here my board has seen some truly fantastic positions
and I've often taken the longer way to win because it looked pretty.
But I have to admit [greenpawn losses his bottle[/b].
I swear if it had not been a team game I would have
played the sac 18...Rxb2+ in this position v Attila the Horn.
(Black me to play).
Within lurks a truly brilliant finish and I feel I have betrayed myself
for not playing it.
There is a mundane win of a Knight on c3 (which is what I played)
so I give you what never happened.
Two things to note: After 21....Nxf4 Black is threatening Ne2 or Nd3
double check mate.
What destroys the cute variation is 21.Re3 instead of the perfectly
plausible 21.f4.
(I feel Black is still on top but it's starts to get messy especially when
there is a simple win of a piece in the position).
When the final position appeared on my board I thought "Oh No".
I've lost games chasing the beautiful win in the past and this looked
too good to be true.
I looked again and found 21.Re3 (a defensive idea which actually
happened in the game Game 5958081 after I nicked the Knight ).
If I put in as much time and energy into my 'normal' moves in
'normal' positions I would get into the mess I usually find myself in.
So here is the 'flashy' win.
And yes I'm in deep water if Attila plays 18.g4! instead of 18.Qxc6??
Moving too fast, too many games on the go, not setting the position
up on a standard set, not doing your own pre-move error check
before you 'click' send...etc...etc...
Lovely one that to let slip.
The should be a book of all these 'might have beens';
Unheard Melodies
Originally posted by greenpawn34Flashy brilliance aside, what did you have against 27. ... Bc5#?
[Event "Edited game"]
[Site "RHP League GAme"]
[Date "2009.02.07"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Attila The Hun"]
[Black "Greenpawn the Chicken"]
[Result "0-1"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4 d6 3. Nf3 g6 4. e3 Bg7 5. Nc3 O-O 6. e4 Bg4 7. h3 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 c6 9. Bc4 Nbd7 10. O-O-O b5 11. Bd3 Qa5 12. Kb1 Nb6 13. Rhe1 Nc4 14.Bxc4 bxc4 15. e5 Nh5 16. Bh2 dxe5 17. dxe5 Rab8 1 ...[text shortened]... 2+ 23. Nxe2 Bxe3+ 24. Rd2 Qxd2+ 25.Kb2 Rb8+ 26. Ka3 Qa5+ 27. Qa4 Qc3+ 28. Nxc3 Bc1
Originally posted by MeadowsNo. We are looking for' flashy' stuff. Not the mundane moves.
Flashy brilliance aside, what did you have against 27. ... Bc5#?
As I said I often take the longer prettier way.
I doubt if it would have happened, Attila would have resigned
when the mate in one appeared.
Remember - it's a might-have-been.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Ah well that's ok then. Fortunately, I managed to miss 26. ... Qb4# the first time round so that made it a little longer.
No. We are looking for' flashy' stuff. Not the mundane moves.
As I said I often take the longer prettier way.
I doubt if it would have happened, Attila would have resigned
when the mate in one appeared.
Remember - it's a might-have-been.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Oh, you are right, a simple 0-0 was enogh 🙄
If you had not doubt you would seen that in game Game 5842357
you had a much better move than meekly retreating an attacked piece.
13.Bg3?
Originally posted by ivan2908He means 13. Qh5! that wins the game.
Oh, you are right, a simple 0-0 was enogh 🙄
Also, instead of 12. 0-0 how about 12. Bxf6!?
It may not be completely sound, but did you consider it? Calculate it?
Doing this is critical.
Also, annotate games like these, and then see if an engine agrees with you.
Edit:
11. 0-0! is better then 11. Qf3.