dear brothers of the royal game, after reading some sections of Tim Hardings book, winning at correspondence chess, a book which i hasten to add is not to my taste for it is rather dry and without much humour, it is stated that on average the serious correspondent chess player spends about five hours contemplating serious move orders! In quoting Grandmaster Adrian Hollis, upon being asked how much time he spent on moves, he states that it varies,' in a particularly awkward game i may spend at least five hours per move over a whole sequence of moves'. Harding himself states, 'I think most serious cc players would say the same'.
this has come as a kind of revelation to me, who generally spends all of five minutes on difficult moves and about five seconds on easy ones!
Therefore it seems that if one is to have much success, then longer periods of analysis must be needed. why should this be the case?
Hans Berliner, the fifth cc world champion states,'strategy is the name of the game in the world of postal chess (correspondence chess as you or i know it as)....with proper strategical decision making a small advantage may be nurtured and expanded step by step and a hapless opponent can hope for nothing more than a difficult draw. in this type of struggle many a strong player will crack'.
therefore for those who play CC as if it was blitz, resolve in yourselves to print the board off, get out the wooden pieces and engage in some serious analysis, and when you rise and rise and rise like some mythical phoenix from the ashes of despair, you may thank Mr.Harding for his rather excellent advice.
i myself am trying the approach, and although it is too early to see if i shall improve any, i can at least justify most of my moves, as opposed to the purely instinctive ones that i used to make. even here there is some good advice from the book.
Grandmaster Hollis himself makes the following statement, 'above all be critical, both of oneself and others...avoid false optimism...and try to view your thoughts in a detached manner. Do not believe there are two good moves in a position; find out why one of them is not as good as it looks. Take your opponents seriously until you find out that they are not Botvinnik. Fight like a tiger in a difficult position and be remorseless in a favourable one'.
Yes dear friends it is better to suffer the winters wind than the tigers breath!
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI can't see how it is surprising that a correspondance GM spends more than 3 hours on a move. I myself spend at least half an hour on the most difficult moves (ok, only when I am in the mood). But if you really want to be good at correspondance chess you will have of course, to spend much more time than that.
dear brothers of the royal game, after reading some sections of Tim Hardings book, winning at correspondence chess, a book which i hasten to add is not to my taste for it is rather dry and without much humour, it is stated that on average the serious correspondent chess player spends about five hours contemplating serious move orders! In quoting Gran ...[text shortened]... ne'.
Yes dear friends it is better to suffer the winters wind than the tigers breath!
Originally posted by wormwoodyes, i love to daydream about my positions, what usually happens though is, while i am daydreaming i suddenly realise that my opponent has a refutation that he may play, i become filled with dread when i open the game to see if my fears have been realised!
sounds about right, if you distribute the 5h over the period of 7 days for a move. it also means you'll be working on the positions even when you're not looking at your analysis board. often the revelation comes when you're doing something completely different or already in bed.
Originally posted by orion25yes this was the point of my post 🙂
I can't see how it is surprising that a correspondance GM spends more than 3 hours on a move. I myself spend at least half an hour on the most difficult moves (ok, only when I am in the mood). But if you really want to be good at correspondance chess you will have of course, to spend much more time than that.
Originally posted by wormwoodexactly. Often the idea comes from alter experience, or even while
sounds about right, if you distribute the 5h over the period of 7 days for a move. it also means you'll be working on the positions even when you're not looking at your analysis board. often the revelation comes when you're doing something completely different or already in bed.
watching another game (and quite often at that).
-GIN
Take as much time as it takes you to clearly find a good solution.
Silliness is this spend X amount of time on each move. When I play the hyperaccelerated dragon against everyone I am supposed to think for 5 hours before stating eureka g6!! But, then in a position where I am about to give up my queen for three minor pieces in a maroczy bind I will spend no more time?
My opponent is up a pawn in a rook ending and I can see that I can clearly get to philidors drawn position(when a draw is a good result). Nope think for a couple more hours on it. You don't want to save your energy for more important decisions.
I think I have made my point.
Originally posted by erikidoyou play the accelerated dragon, peace to you! in the name of the last living dragon on earth, the Loch Ness monster, we salute all players of the dragon, especially the accelerated and hyper accelerated! all though your point is well intentioned, we have mentioned the difference, reading between the lines, for easy moves and not so easy moves.
Take as much time as it takes you to clearly find a good solution.
Silliness is this spend X amount of time on each move. When I play the hyperaccelerated dragon against everyone I am supposed to think for 5 hours before stating eureka g6!! But, then in a position where I am about to give up my queen for three minor pieces in a maroczy bind I will sp ...[text shortened]... u don't want to save your energy for more important decisions.
I think I have made my point.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell, if that is the case then you are basically saying play good chess(think out your moves with clear goals and concrete plans). I can do that without taking out a board and think I should be doing that without taking out a board(as my real intention is to get good otb-which in my opinion is real chess. So I will play this like real chess. There is one exception...when I am trying to learn a new opening)
you play the accelerated dragon, peace to you! in the name of the last living dragon on earth, the Loch Ness monster, we salute all players of the dragon, especially the accelerated and hyper accelerated! all though your point is well intentioned, we have mentioned the difference, reading between the lines, for easy moves and not so easy moves.
Originally posted by erikidothen you do not understand the differences between correspondence chess and OTB chess.
Well, if that is the case then you are basically saying play good chess(think out your moves with clear goals and concrete plans). I can do that without taking out a board and think I should be doing that without taking out a board(as my real intention is to get good otb-which in my opinion is real chess. So I will play this like real chess. There is one exception...when I am trying to learn a new opening)
I run 250 games right now, I tend to play them like blitz, but, not in complicated position. I can see things faster then most players here, including pros, but that do not mean it is good, sometimes, it is a combine, I see faster then all, but some others, I just faster and end-uo with nothing better or something worst, as I could slow down a bit.
And that is hard.
I had also some lucky games.