Chess Forum
kttstudios.com << online chess - < chess - chess > - chess online >>
| From | Message | ||||||||||||||||
| Posted by ccmcacollister kttstudios.com 1/11/2008 17:37:54 Play online chess |  Subject: What have you learned recently?Message: It would help if respondents would indicate their rating range, and I'll tell you why in a moment. We might then throw in also ... What do you Not Know but think you should? I had this GREAT IDEA (aka probably eccentric, possibly a bit weird?!) that wouldn't it be great to see a Chess Book that annotated games, that would be essentially three books in one. The game annotated for under 1400, 1400 to 1800, and over 1800. With a little doodad denoting which rating range the note is meant for ... the thought being It is Something that that range should know to advance, yet may not know. IMO very many skills come at certain ranges, as a generality. As a specific, well there are 1200 players for eg who lose to an B or higher because they do not know as much. Then there are those who Know an awful lot! But will drop a piece at some point whether oversight, impatience or whatever. But in general I think there are certain things players should know at certain levels. You cannot be a master if you do not know forcible line opening an be able (and do) spot such points on the board when attacking for EG. The thought occurred to me then, it might even be more appealing if the book had a person from those two lower note echelons help write it. Perhaps the 1400 has a question best answered by the 1700 for Eg, in an understandable way. Also what the 1700 Has learned since being 1400, is probably a lot of what Should be known to make that advancement. What do you think? More importantly What do you Know NOW that you didn't awhile ago? Thanks all! | ||||||||||||||||
| Posted by ccmcacollister kttstudios.com 1/11/2008 17:39:24 Play online chess | What i learned. Message: | ||||||||||||||||
| Posted by bhidragon kttstudios.com 1/12/2008 18:10:12 Play online chess | Recent Learnings Message: 1. Premature attacks hardly ever work ... and always leave you in absolutely bad positions. Don't count on your opponent to make a mistake in order to successfully attack. 2. Don't just memorize opening moves ... study the strategy behind your favorite openings and how the rest of the game unfolds from those opening positions. If you're studying opening books that are simply lists of moves ... toss them and study general principles. 3. Play at your speed ... not your opponent's. I learned this the hard way in OTB tourneys. Your tendency is to speed up against a fast player. Stay calm and take the time to study the position. Maybe this would be helpful for players in the 800 - 1200 range on GameKnot ——— On Chess: Tiny American was titan of tenacity — Is it possible to be 5 feet tall and yet be a formidable sporting icon? It is in chess - a gymnasium of the mind where size, speed and physical strength are incidental. Two small chess players who immediately come to mind are the 19th century's Paul Morphy and our contemporary Anatoly Karpov, who in his prime weighed little more than 130 pounds. And, of course, there was the diminutive Sammy Reshevsky (1911-92), who was justifiably feared by the Soviets as an unpredictable chess player of great talent in the post-World War II period. Reshevsky dominated the American chess scene until Bobby Fischer eclipsed him in the late 1950s and thereafter. No one - including himself, Fischer admitted - could ... Posted by doctor_knight | kttstudios.com 1/12/2008 21:01:22 Play online chess Message: 1) if your position is solid enough, the opponent will very likely make a blunder at my level. That seems to be how I have made most of my wins. It seems that at my level, if I don't let my pieces hang and establish an effective coorination between my pieces, the opponent doesn't really seem to know what to do and eventually tries something wild which usually ends up in him/her losing a pawn, piece, control of squares, and etc. Though at my level, the advantage given up is usually material and usually substantial enough to win almost easily. 2) don't be scared to live on the edge some. If you don't try a risky counter attack now, then you'll never develop the skills necessary to do one later in a more important game. Of course don't be reckless, but don't be scared to dive into the pool. It will force you to raise your level of performance to exercise your brain to work through the position. It will also help you to develop a sense of what types of moves and positions tend to crash your position and which ones will strengthen it. It will help to develop your "intuition". Now what I would like to know? 1) I haven't really though about this much, but I know one area where I need improvement is trading off the center pawns. This area of play seems a little mysterious to me. I would definately like some help with this (when to exchange, which pawns to exchange, which pawns to protect with what pieces, which pieces to recapture with, which pawns are really weak, how to identify an opponent's bad pawn capture, and how to punish it. Also to see which pawn captures are actually legitimate threats. The whole enchilada) 2) Time control. The root of most of my mistakes and failures in OTB play seems to be time control. Sometimes I have a really bad awareness of my time, especially while calculating combinations/exchanges. It's almost like I drift off into some fantasy world of board positions and pieces moving around capturing each other and become hardly aware that the clock is ticking down. ——— 'Bobby Fischer' documentary captures audience — Our brains tell us fame is fleeting, but do we believe it? Elvis, The Beatles, Michael Jackson, Michael Jordan -- could they all really be wiped out of our cultural consciousness? You may not learn a lot about chess in Bobby Fischer Against the World, Liz Garbus's well-documented film about arguably the greatest and most tragic chess player that ever lived. But you do learn a lot about fame, and its possible relation to pathology. In his day, the ironically-shy/perceived-arrogant chess prodigy was among the most recognizable faces on Earth. When he played Soviet Boris Spassky in Reykjavik for the World Title in 1972, it led the news over coups, wars and elections. And then something ... Posted by wschmidt | kttstudios.com 1/14/2008 11:57:21 Play online chess Interesting thoughts, Craig....Message: The second book is his latest, "Silman's Endgame Course" (or something similar). He doesn't set the book up by typical endgame book catagories like pawn endgames, rook endgames, etc. Rather, the chapters are divided into what he thinks a player needs to know as they increase their rating level. I don't own it, but it's gotten generally good reviews, I believe. What have I learned recently? Wow, 2007 was quite a year in that regard. I learned how to checkmate with the knight and bishop. I mean really learned it and practiced it, not just read about it and played through the moves once or twice. I learned, for the umpteenth time, that while there is a difference between memorizing moves in the opening and playing according to good general opening principles, there is also a difference between playing according to good general opening principles and actually looking at the board! That difference actually lasts into the middle and endgame as well. Understanding the concrete position on the board trumps general principles everyday. I learned (or developed) a method that works for me for analyzing/annotating my own games. I learned that Purdy's method of "try to guess the master's move" way of reading over an annotated game really works and is really quite fun. Over at the Chess Coaching Club, I've learned that some folks really are interested in being coached and others, well, not so much. This would be a good thread to revisit at the end of 2008! ws ——— Boris Gelfand to challenge for world crown after beating Alex Grischuk — Israel's Boris Gelfand beat Russia's Alex Grischuk 3.5-2.5 in the candidates final in Kazan on Wednesday and will challenge for Vishy Anand's world chess crown in 2012. Gelfand is 42, Anand 41, and it will be the first time since 1934 that two over-40s have played for the unified world chess championship. Gelfand is only ranked world No 16, and Anand leads 7-0 in their decisive classical games since 1995, so the Indian will be long odds-on to win. Gelfand's success will be overshadowed by the record 90 per cent draw rate, 27/30, in the slow classical games at Kazan, where the eight chess grandmasters refused to take risks until the tie-breaks. Only four classical games, six in the final, were scheduled before ... Posted by marinvukusic | kttstudios.com 1/14/2008 14:13:19 Play online chess Regarding Mr. SilmanMessage:  www.jeremysilman.com
This is one of the best Web pages on the Internet for beginners and intermediate players. I recommended it to a lot of people. Anyone who is willing to put some time into digging around it will be rewarded :) ——— It's Anand vs. Gelfand for the World Chess Crown — Boris Gelfand of Israel won the Final FIDE Candidates Match, defeating GM Alexander Grischuk of Russia 3.5 to 2.5 in Kazan, Russia, on Wednesday. It is a culmination of his successful chess career. With the victory, he earned the right to challenge the world chess champion Vishy Anand of India for the world title next year. At 42, Gelfand was the oldest participant in the Candidates matches, but he showed a steady hand and good nerves in difficult positions and prevailed against the American GM Gata Kamsky and Grischuk. His chess match against Anand, 41, could be interesting. Both players have vast opening knowledge, strive for initiative, can defend well and love to play dynamic chess. It could ... Posted by cascadejames | kttstudios.com 1/19/2008 00:07:54 Play online chess Giving up a pawnMessage: clear purpose in mind. It doesn't always work, but sometimes the results can be gratifying when the sacrifice works out. Of course this does not mean that the loss of a pawn is not important, only that sometimes it is justified. ——— Chess: A queen and pawn endgame — Queens are tricky – exchanging down to a pawn endgame is often the easier option. RB: Isn't White winning regardless of what way he exchanges the queens? The a-pawn has already advanced and the black king is outside the queening square. Meanwhile, his own passed pawn can be intercepted by White's king before it promotes. If I had this position, I'd be very happy. But Dan wouldn't have picked this position if it was that easy. There must be more to it than I'm seeing so let's try to calculate: 1 Qg4+ – my favoured option because after the exchange the pawn on g4 gets in the way of both Black's remaining kingside pawns – 1...Qxg4 2 hxg4 and now ... Posted by lighttotheright | kttstudios.com 1/19/2008 06:21:01 Play online chess Message: Strac has shown me that I'm not quite as good as I once thought. As soon as he played 18. a5 for the control of the pivotal square on b6, I knew my latest game with him was over. He had a critical bind upon my Queen-side position; there was nothing that I could do about it once it was played. It was a small advantage for him that was unfortunately for me game winning. I've known for a while, but it has never been so clear to me than now...about the difference between a strategic move and a positional one. A positional move is strategic; but a strategic move is not necessarily a positional one. A strategic move will maximize your chances, while a positional move will ELIMINATE your opponent's. Strac's move of 18. a5 shut down my entire position because it forced me to constantly adjust while he continued to advance. My chances were eliminated under best play. Posted by alice02 | kttstudios.com 1/19/2008 08:51:58 Play online chess not describing moves to myselfMessage: I don't drop as many significant pieces - though I still occasionally do so. When I started dropping pieces I decided to check every individual piece for the moves it could make. There is a knight - it can move there and there etc. I have now learnt to look at a knight's potential moves as a clock face. I have also learnt to see that two important pieces separated by either 1 or 3 squares is a potentially dangerous situation when a knight is around. I wonder if there is a chess developmental difference in thinking - this is a bishop's line vs a bishop can move to that or that or that square. A knight can move to that or that or that square vs a knight"s movement is like a clock face. Maybe you have to think in terms of individual squares before you can think in terms of lines. And I can only see lines when I am predicting one move. When I am trying to predict 2 or more moves I use square by square thinking. I think this type of thinking may be a stage in learning but also that it blocks me from seeing combinations. Posted by doctor_knight | kttstudios.com 1/19/2008 20:37:49 Play online chess Message: (3) How to make strategical moves as apposed to simply positional moves, though I'm thinking this may take a long long time. Posted by ccmcacollister | kttstudios.com 1/22/2008 08:11:43 Play online chess I learned Message: Much more economical than the unweildy Rook and Two-Pawns-in-the-middle King havens of my past ... ! |