using time wisely to analyze in OTB

So I'm going to try and make the 2010 Class Championships in Houston, TX in Oct but I haven't played in a tournament since 2006! I actually haven't played except for a month here and there since then.

How do I use my time more wisely to analyze!? I noticed that when I get on FICS, when I try to play games that are say G/15, I'm still only using 5 minutes to make my moves. I need to learn to analyze deeper and use my time more wisely. Is there anyway to practice analyzing and learning when I should use my time and when not too?

here's a game I played on FICS earlier. I feel I should have won but after going down 2 pawns I was LUCKY to pull out a draw. I dont think my opponent had any endgame knowledge. at the end of the game I noticed he had used all but 2 minutes of the game and I had ONLY USED 5 MINUTES FOR ALL MY MOVES! 64 of em!

White: trstewart(1630)
Black: thegeometer(1688)
G/15

Originally posted by airborne143rd
So I'm going to try and make the 2010 Class Championships in Houston, TX in Oct but I haven't played in a tournament since 2006! I actually haven't played except for a month here and there since then.

How do I use my time more wisely to analyze!? I noticed that when I get on FICS, when I try to play games that are say G/15, I'm still only using 5 m ...[text shortened]... acking the Philidor Defense I was really hoping he would play 2. e5 RHP is helping out alot

If you are going to play a slow time control why not play slow games online 60 mins per game or 90 if you can find opponents. 15 minutes per game sounds like rapid and I'm not surprised you rushed through.

I need to learn to analyze deeper and use my time more wisely.

Play forced moves right away. No need to ponder over those.

Sometimes in none forced reply positions you may see the move you are
going to play right away and then spend 5-10 minutes looking at it.
Trust yourself. Check to make sure it's not an outright blunder and play it.

Think on their time.

Don't worry if you have time left - how did the game go.
Did you lose because you moved too fast or did you win because you
trusted your intution.

Just because the TC is say 36 in 1½ you do not have to make your 36th move
on the 90 minute mark.

Play your normal game and the clock will take care of itself.
(just don't forget to press it).

Is there anyway to practice analyzing and learning when I should
use my time and when not too?

Playing and gaining the experience is the best and most likely the only way.

Time controls are getting shorter and shorter- learning to use your clock well is the future of chess.

That is true Nimzo.

I like shorter TC as it does tend to make chess more watchable and
understandable to us the common player.

Blunders will appear and we can all feel happy the GM is human.

One thing we must consider when a GM makes one of our blunders
and we find it incredible is that we have never played under the conditions
that they do.

It must be pretty nervy playing for £5,000 or more when you are
faced with a good, and I mean good player, and you are in only one
move will do territory.

Always astonishes me when a weaker player cannot understand why
a GM can make an elementry blunder. (Kramnik missing mate in one).
We can only imagine the pressure.

The good news is that moving too fast (which I think is what you said your problem was) is easier to cure than moving too slow.

Ways to usefully take extra time:

* Double and triple check your combinations
* Be more suspicious if your opponent looks like he's hanging something.
* Spend extra time looking for options if its looks like you are going to get a bad position
* Spend extra time if "think you have a good position" but you can't seem to make progress. If you really have a good position, there are often hidden resources
* Spend extra time and think about strategy if you don't have an immediate first choice move.

Originally posted by airborne143rd
. . .How do I use my time more wisely to analyze!? I noticed that when I get on FICS, when I try to play games that are say G/15, I'm still only using 5 minutes to make my moves. I need to learn to analyze deeper and use my time more wisely. Is there anyway to practice analyzing and learning when I should use my time and when not too? . . .

Originally posted by Schach Attack
Dan Heisman has a great book called The Improving Chess Thinker with a chapter on time management. But he also has some stuff archived on the Web about it.

The first link is to an essay-length treatment called Time Management in Chess (sorry I can't find a more readably formatted version):

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/time.txt

Originally posted by Schach Attack
The second link is an article-length piece dealing specifically with the issue of analysis in games with short to intermediate time-controls, and is titled Intermediate Time Controls Hinder Improvement. Since you mention playing fast games you might want to start here:

http://www.chesscafe.com/heisman/heisman.htm

Speaking of time management, today I lost a won endgame against a master by letting my flag fall... gah!

Mad Rook, thanks very much for those link improvements.

Now, if you can only give me a link to Heisman's "A Generic Thinking Process" essay at Novice Nook. Google pulls up matches to an essay called "Learning From Dr. de Groot" which references the former by name as something more elaborate, but I can't find a link to the former. Did Heisman have it pulled because it covers much of the same territory as his book?

Originally posted by Schach Attack
Mad Rook, thanks very much for those link improvements.

Now, if you can only give me a link to Heisman's "A Generic Thinking Process" essay at Novice Nook. Google pulls up matches to an essay called "Learning From Dr. de Groot" which references the former by name as something more elaborate, but I can't find a link to the former. Did Heisman have it pulled because it covers much of the same territory as his book?

That's great, Mad Rook, thanks again. I saw Heisman's book at the library and checked it out (literally and figuratively) and decided, first, that the book was in its own niche if not unique: a book explaining how to think about chess (i.e., structured thinking processes) as opposed to a book on tactics, or strategy, or openings, or game collections, and so forth.

Second, I decided that Heisman had hit the bullseye when he said that the failure of the average class player (especially those rated 1800 or under) to rise to the heights (even if only the middling ones) is due to their tendency to play "Hope Chess" or even "Coin-Flip Chess" -- that is, failing to check basics such "if I make this move, what are ALL of the checks, captures, and threats my opponent can make in reply, and can I safely meet them all?" and similar considerations.

If players aren't applying themselves to the basics each and every move, then everything else they do to improve their chess is built on a foundation of straw. So, I decided that I would distill his book suggestions into something I could use personally, and use correpondence chess as a venue to learn how to apply them and get in the habit of doing so. I still haven't come up to Heisman's standards for "real chess" (not systematic enough, I fear) but I've made a LOT more progress in my chess since I ditched the databases and started thinking from first principles, with an eye to the concrete situation at hand in each position.

True, I take a lot of time playing chess this way, but there is no way to develop the skill of "reading a chessboard" accurately, selecting good candidate moves, and finding the best one among them, except developing those skills by practice; and real games are the best way. Using each move as a kind of "exercise" also gives plenty of opportunity (and motivation, since you're actually playing) to develop tactical skills and strategic judgment. I figure that the more I develop and use such skills, the faster their application will be as they become second nature and as I gain experience with them; so for me the formula is "develop the skills and the speed will come with practice and use".

Edit addition: Another advantage is that analysis is a skill which requires both concentration and mental stamina, and the latter must also be developed, so I find myself able to "take on more" over time as I practice some of Heisman's techniques.