Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules

Forum rules

(1) Posts are to be made in the relevant forum. Users are asked to read the forum descriptions before posting.
(2) Off topic posts are limited to active members who have actually posted on-topic in one of the chess-oriented sections in the past. Any user whose first post does not relate to chess will be banned permanently. Posts in the Introduction section do not count.
(3) Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users. Be tolerant at any time. Flaming or abusing users in any way will not be tolerated.
(4) Discussions on political and religious topics are not allowed. Posts containing elements thereof will be redacted or deleted and a temporary or permanent ban may be placed upon the user.
Discussions on politics in chess organisations and the way politics affect chess are allowed.
(4a) Drug use references are not allowed and discussions on drugs are not allowed.
(5) Members are asked to not act as "back seat moderators". If members have something to report they are welcome to bring it to the attention of moderator either by a PM or in this thread: http://www.chessforums.org/forum-new...moderator.html
(6) If you wish to report a PM please forward the PM to a moderator and leave a post here: http://www.chessforums.org/forum-new...moderator.html. Don't hesitate to report a PM if you believe it violates the forum rules, even if someone else has already reported a (similar) PM by the same user; having more reports makes it easier for the moderators to take action.
(7) These rules apply to forum posts as well as private messages (PMs).
(8) Members should post in a way which is consistent with "normal writing". That is users should not post excessive numbers of emoticons (smilies), large, small or coloured text, etc. Similarly users should not SHOUT or use excessive punctuation (e.g. ! and ?) in topic titles or posts.
(9) Members should use an appropriate, descriptive title when posting a new topic. Examples of bad titles include; "Help me!", "I'm stuck!", "I've got an error!", etc. Examples of good titles include; "New Game: Perseus - SomeOtherPlayer", "Two Knights Defense: Fritz Variation and sidelines", etc.
(10) Spam is not tolerated here under any circumstance.
(11) Continuously linking your own website to promote it is not allowed. You may use your signature (which will come up beneath all your posts) for this purpose.
(12) Members should refrain from posting without adding to the discussion. Posting just to increase postcount is not allowed.
(13) Combine your comments into one post rather than making many consecutive posts to a thread within a short period of time. This can be done by clicking the 'edit' button next to your post.
If your last post, which is the last in the thread, is very old you may use the following trick to make sure it's bumped up to the new posts. Click on the 'edit' button of your last post. Copy the content of the post. Click delete and delete your last post. Paste the content of the now-deleted post in a new post, add what you will and click 'submit reply'.
(13a) You are not allowed to make consecutive posts. If you post more than once without a reply from another user, all posts after the first will be deleted.
(13b) Exceptions may be made for specific types of threads.
(14) Warez are intellectual property (software/music/movies/tv-series/tv-shows/etc) either through download, serial, or crack in a manner that breaks its copyright and/or license. You are not allowed to give/link to/ask for/advocate/provide information for obtaining and the use of warez.
Bittorrent links are not allowed.
(14a) The following international treaties apply:
-Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Berne Convention) (Berne, 1886)
-Universal Copyright Convention (UCC) (Geneva, 1952)
-Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) (Marrakesh, 1994)
-World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty (WIPO Copyright Treaty) (Geneva, 1996)
(15) Books published before 1920 are considered free of copyright and e-books thereof are not warez. Books published after 1920 with permission from the author are considered free of copyright and e-books thereof are not warez provided it can within reason be established that permission has been given. All other books are considered copyrighted and e-books thereof are considered warez.
(16) Usernames that contain obscene or vulgar language or denigrate individuals and/or organisations are not allowed.
(17) Users may only delete their own posts on the grounds that they constitute a severe breach of these rules. Even when this is the case, the editing of the post to effect repairs must at all times be considered first.
The emptying of posts (substituting the content by non-content) is explicitely considered a breach of this rule.
Deletion of whole batches of posts harms thread continuity and the forum as a whole and the Moderation team will take action; in the most extreme case an account may be permanently banned to preserve the posted.
(18) Administrators (Admins) and Moderators (Mods) reserve the right to edit or remove any post at any time. The determination of what is construed as indecent, vulgar, spam, etc. is up to them and not to forum members.
(19) Aforementioned Admins and Mods reserve the right to edit this list of rules at anytime.
See more
See less

Development Help

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Development Help

    Hi guys,

    Not sure if this is the best place to post, but seeing as it concerns sub-club level play I figure this is probably the right spot.

    I would call myself a higher-end hobby-level player, which to me means I feel very comfortable playing against just about anyone who doesn't play chess in a club. I feel like my next step is to start going to clubs and getting thrashed, but I want to get just a bit better before doing so.

    I use Fritz but I feel that it's far too advanced for me. When I enter my games, I feel that it's telling me "Well here, you should've assumed that your opponent plays at grandmaster level, and therefor you should've also played at grandmaster level yourself and picked this move". I understand and value the idea of comparing myself against "what is best" instead of "the best I can do," but at some point I feel it stifles my development. It would be much more helpful if I had a tool that would show me ways I could've abused what I know about my current opponents:

    * They are very material-oriented
    * If they cannot find a tactical shot in 2-3 moves, they will move their weakest piece to its superficially strongest square (i.e. fianchetto bishop regardless of the position)
    * They have very limited or no opening book knowledge
    * They will never sacrifice a piece without immediate material compensation.
    * If my opponents see a way to set up a tactic that relies entirely on me not spotting it in a move or two, they will always attempt it.
    * They have no strategic goals.
    * They do not understand or value tempi.

    I feel that, knowing these things, I *should* be able to dominate my current level of opposition with no problem - but for now I feel like I'm struggling. Maybe an engine isn't what I need - but regardless, I'm not sure what my next step should be.

    tl;dr - I feel that Fritz is asking me to jump to GM level overnight - instead, I want something that will just help me reach my next level in personal development.

  • #2
    Sometimes the best you can do is make sure you get ALL your pieces out, get castled, and then try and stop your opponent’s plan without hurting your position. I feel this method can really train you to start asking, “What is my opponent trying to do here? Is there a way to stop him?” after each move they make, instead of concentrating on plans of your own.

    Using an engine is good for analysis, to be sure, but sometimes not so good to play against for training purposes. I find that picking on humans at least 100 points above my level is the best way to get a solid game out of me. If I’m pitted against a 1500s player I’ll likely lose it because I think I relax too much, but the 1800-2000 crowd receives a good fight from me.
    Alexander Alekhine is my chess hero.

    An eerie chess short story: The Empty Chair

    My newest chess story: Gamble: A Supernatural Chess Tale

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi,

      My advice is read the following pdf and lookup Novice Nook on google
      http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman14.pdf

      That will certainly get you going forward.

      Comment


      • #4
        Always Go over your games like Skwerly said for Analysis. Most of the suggest line moves the engines will suggest are developing moves.

        When pulling out your pieces for development you can also put somewhat a pre-stop to your opponents play most of the time so always remember to develop strongly with threat. Development of a piece to its full potential could determine a win or loss so carefully consider your moves.
        The Title of Chess Players

        Paul Morphy
        - The Pride and Sorrow of Chess
        Dr. Emanuel Lasker- The Coffee-House Player
        Viswanathan Anand
        - Vishy

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by APBCPT View Post
          Hi,

          My advice is read the following pdf and lookup Novice Nook on google
          http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman14.pdf

          That will certainly get you going forward.
          Nice article - I feel a do a lot of that already, although it does make me think that I don't pay enough attention to my opponents' moves. I generally assume that my opponent has no plan, and all I look for are potential tactics to defend against. Otherwise, my question is "How can I gain the initiative?" or if I have the initiative, "How can I go in for the kill?" I never think, "How can I shut down my opponent?" or "How can I make my position rock solid?"

          Comment


          • #6
            It's a good and hopeful thing that you've recognized a need for improvement in your game and desire to do so!

            There's a need to learn to walk before one runs, though as we lift ourselves up out of our "crawling" phase we may wish to run before we've figured out how to walk; absolutely natural, and due to our inexperience with the process!

            Computers are all the rage in this era, but the truth is they serve no useful purpose to chess-newbies. They distract rather than enlighten, they grind into the ground rather than up-lift. Neither the software salesmen nor the authors will tell you this. Uninspired teachers won't tell you this, either, as the computer programs are their stock-in-trade, occupying their students for an hour's tuition with very little burden or actual expertise required from the "teachers."

            Absolutely unpopular advice, but I'll give it anyways: forget about Fritz. You don't need him, and he isn't your friend. He's going to confuse more than enlighten, baffle more than explain at your stage of learning--drop the computer programs and resort to simpler and more efficient tools of learning for the stage you've arrived at.

            Books & Board & Patient Aspiration are what will help you right now...books to read, a board and pieces to setup to study the moves the books suggest, and an immense amount of patience with both your self and the learning process coupled with a strong aspiration to learn and understand. And--it goes without saying--many games with better players, if you can get them.

            I'll suggest two books, "Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess" and Reuben Fine's "Chess the Easy Way". Both are exceedingly primary.

            You may be tempted to beleive that you are more advanced than you are (a temptation we all at times share) and therefore desire something "more complex"--but resist that temptation for the moment. Sit attentively at Bobby's and Reuben's feet for a few months. Your chess will improve, and you'll be better prepared for further learning if you thoroughly digest one or both of those books.

            I'd suggest "Chess for Dummies", but I believe Fischer and Fine are both clearer and more profound, without the cutesy-yet-self-demeaning title. If it's all you can lay hands on, though, read it.

            If you've not learnt algebraic notation yet, it's time to do so. It's relatively easy to learn, and with practice you'll be completely comfortable and fluent with it

            Good luck!
            Last edited by Celadonite; 02-23-2011, 11:22 PM.
            "They work at the pace of amnesia."--M. Bloch

            Comment


            • #7
              Great posts, all. Celadonite: Great call on chess engines maybe being more of a hindrance than a help at the beginner level. They throw so much information at us, and it can be overwhelming even for an intermediate/advanced player like myself and others here.

              The one computer program I might suggest would be Chessmaster. That thing can be found all over the place for ten dollars or less and has great video tutorials, a huge number of different computer opponents that play at levels from “I learned yesterday” to “Yea, I’m one of the best in the world” and everywhere in between and a great interface that has a ton of different boards and sets to choose from. For the money, it really is the best bang for a beginner’s buck.

              Chessmaster 10th Edition Product Review - Associated Content from Yahoo! - associatedcontent.com - A quick review I wrote on the product, which I think is a really good program for all players under Master level strength.
              Alexander Alekhine is my chess hero.

              An eerie chess short story: The Empty Chair

              My newest chess story: Gamble: A Supernatural Chess Tale

              Comment


              • #8
                I think you should enter a chess club because your learning speed will be a lot faster as you can ask questions and get real answers.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by chronocide View Post
                  * They are very material-oriented
                  * If they cannot find a tactical shot in 2-3 moves, they will move their weakest piece to its superficially strongest square (i.e. fianchetto bishop regardless of the position)
                  * They have very limited or no opening book knowledge
                  * They will never sacrifice a piece without immediate material compensation.
                  * If my opponents see a way to set up a tactic that relies entirely on me not spotting it in a move or two, they will always attempt it.
                  * They have no strategic goals.
                  * They do not understand or value tempi.

                  I feel that, knowing these things, I *should* be able to dominate my current level of opposition with no problem - but for now I feel like I'm struggling. Maybe an engine isn't what I need - but regardless, I'm not sure what my next step should be.
                  I think there are three things you should be doing.

                  THe first is studying the games of Paul Morphy. You will learn a tremendous amount about development - the way he exploits his opponents for falling behind in development. Playing solitaire chess with a bunch of Morphy's wins will really help you - and develop your tactical vision, too.

                  The second is to read "How to Reassess Your Chess," by Silman. I think parts of this book will be over your head - or maybe not. The key, however, is that it will get you to start thinking about how to exploit pieces moved to their "superficially best square"

                  The stuff in HTRYC is the sort of thing that baffles weaker players: when to trade a knight for a bishop (or vice versa). How do your plans change if your opponent trades a knight for a bishop? etc. Silman is really good at teaching this sort of stuff. As you start to get it down, you'll find yourself playing these opponents in positions where all the tactics favor you, and they'll have no idea why. There are also some vital endgame basics in there - although at some point you'll need a dedicated endgame book.

                  I find that playing engines is not a particularly good way to learn. YMMV.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by nobi View Post
                    I think you should enter a chess club because your learning speed will be a lot faster as you can ask questions and get real answers.
                    I have to agree here. The best way to learn how to swim is by getting into the water. I went to my local club for fully two years before I even won a game. Now I’m probably in the top five as far as strength goes, and it feels good. I have a lot of losses behind me to gain that experience, though.
                    Alexander Alekhine is my chess hero.

                    An eerie chess short story: The Empty Chair

                    My newest chess story: Gamble: A Supernatural Chess Tale

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I just wanted to say I feel your pain. I play each week against my girlfriend who knows nothing about chess: her favorite opening move is a4, she moves the queen out immediately because "It's a girl," she couldn't care less about controlling the center, I don't think she knows what castling is, and I STILL lose half the time, which really upsets me. And when I win I'm still pissed because I feel it should have been easier.

                      I know I'm a beginner, but she's even more of a beginner. In fact, she hasn't even begun yet because she has zero interest in chess. She only plays because I ask her to. Meanwhile I love chess; and I have my books, my YouTube channels, you guys, I even play Shredder Chess on my phone at work, and every time I have to poop. I should be destroying this girl but I'm not. Why?

                      I saw a lot of great answers to that question on this thread and I feel better now. AND I know what to do next. Thanks for this.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        [QUOTE=Chessic Truth;56321] I know I'm a beginner, but she's even more of a beginner. In fact, she hasn't even begun yet because she has zero interest in chess. She only plays because I ask her to. Meanwhile I love chess; and I have my books, my YouTube channels, you guys, I even play Shredder Chess on my phone at work, and every time I have to poop. I should be destroying this girl but I'm not. Why?
                        QUOTE]

                        There's an inherent vitality & resiliency within the game itself.

                        I suspect that a Grandmaster playing a chimpanzee shuffling pieces randomly would still have to be alert not to get into a "bad" position. (No offence intended to grandmasters, chimps, or your GF!)
                        "They work at the pace of amnesia."--M. Bloch

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          This thread has brought to light a number of my 'weaknesses', so thanks to all for sharing their knowledge.
                          I'm Neil Macdonald not Neil McDonald, I only wish I could play like him.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Celadonite (Forum Queen)- "There's an inherent vitality & resiliency within the game itself."

                            I think I get what you're saying here. The game itself, to an extent, is an equalizer. It cannot be mocked or made a fool of, even by lopsided talent, because it's too artistically and mathematically true.

                            I guess I gotta start taking my girlfriend's moves more seriously. If you have a respect for the game itself then you have to respect ANYONE engaged in it, no matter their level!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Chessic Truth View Post
                              Celadonite (Forum Queen)- "There's an inherent vitality & resiliency within the game itself."

                              I think I get what you're saying here. The game itself, to an extent, is an equalizer. It cannot be mocked or made a fool of, even by lopsided talent, because it's too artistically and mathematically true.

                              I guess I gotta start taking my girlfriend's moves more seriously. If you have a respect for the game itself then you have to respect ANYONE engaged in it, no matter their level!
                              Barring Fool's Mate, the game doesnt' die easily. Chess has a certain degree of built-in "animal vitality" and will insist upon life, to a greater or lesser degree. Even when played unintelligently. There's an inherent dynamism that arises between the pieces, board, players and rules that allows this.

                              Kinda like how a ship taking on water will remain afloat a while, sometimes even limping back into port successfully. An inherent durability in its design, as in the essential design of the game of chess.

                              If a game limps along long enough despite terrible play--and there's always a chance that it will--a chimpanzee moving pieces randomly may inadvertently put a grandmaster to rout. Especially if the GM isn't taking the chimp seriously enough. (Again, no offence intended to either chimpanzees or GM's!--just an absurd hyperbole by way of portrayal of what I'm saying.)

                              Some time ago I had a friendly game with a friend of the family who hadn't played chess in 23 years, by her own admission. Her moves were nonsensical. After the first 5 or 6 moves, I was bored silly, and not paying due attention. She had no clue what she was doing, and basically made crappy, ineffectual moves for the sake of movement alone. But, ten more moves, and I realized I'd better take her random shufflings of material with a bit more sincerity, as she'd managed to create a nasty situation for me.

                              Shame on me for becoming so casually bored and thereby lacking awareness of the mess she was randomly building before me. She had no idea what she was doing, as her continued play demonstrated, but regardless, she'd created a potentially bugger of a position and might have won had she done it intentionally and known how to exploit it. Which, luckily for me, she didn't.

                              I won that game, but it woke me up to the fact never to take a game less than seriously, regardless how inept the opponent is and how tempted towards boredom I might become. The game demands respect, and punishes lack of it.

                              It would have served me right to have lost that game for indulging myself in the wanton luxuries of boredom & inattentiveness.

                              Never underestimate your opponent, no matter how "bad" they are--the innate vitality of the game itself may come to their rescue.
                              Last edited by Celadonite; 05-03-2011, 11:48 PM.
                              "They work at the pace of amnesia."--M. Bloch

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X