Fromper's new 2008 improvement thread - Page 10 - Chess Forums

Fromper · 06-01-2008, 03:38 AM

Originally Posted by Hoosker

Heya,

At one point I surveyed a few local tournaments, walking from board to board, and noting which openings were being played. Using those results I dedicated more time to working on the parts of my repertoire that I was most likely to be using. Actually worked pretty well

Good advice, but I'm already focusing on the most common openings, but there are still a few I need to improve. The ones I'm studying right now are the Smith-Morra Gambit as white against the Sicilian (which is probably two thirds of my games as white), an opening system against 1. d4 and 1. c4 as black, and the most common openings that result from 1. e4 e5 as black. It's not like I'm booking up on how to handle the Grob or something silly. But just those 3 things give me 3 books and a DVD to study, since the SMG book I have doesn't cover the declined lines much, so I bought a DVD for that, since it's declined about half the time.

Originally Posted by Hoosker

Also, if you like working on your endgame via the computer, just download the Pandolfini book (if you haven't already) from Gambit Chess. But you've already been around the block and probably already know this.

GL

Actually, book downloads didn't exist when I first bought Pandolfini's Endgame Course, since it's been a while. But I already copied it, cut it up, and put it on flash cards. So it's easy to study that way, shuffling up the cards to see if I can remember how to play each position when taken out of context.

For complete games, though, pgn format is the easiest, but there are no pgn's available for the specific opening books I'm studying.

--Fromper

Fromper · 06-05-2008, 09:20 PM

It's too quiet on these forums. Where is everybody?

I'm in a good groove right now in my tactics study. I'm doing tactical puzzles at least 20-30 minutes per day.

I finished going through all the old sets of puzzles that I wanted to go through, then I started going through them again. I'm kind of using the Michael de la Maza method on those. I'm probably going to go through them enough times to be able to spot all the solutions nearly instantly, which I think is only maybe one or two more times, since I've already been through them several times in the past. This is just a refresher course to get myself spotting the easy stuff quickly.

That's about half of my tactics puzzle time. The other half of the time, I'm going through Reinfeld's 1001 Brilliant Ways to Checkmate, which I've never been through before. It's actually easier than I thought it would be. Most of the puzzles are 2-3 move mates which I spot fairly easily. The longer ones I have trouble calculating out, though. Visualization several moves deep is definitely a major weakness right now, which is why I keep working on these types of puzzles. Maybe after my big tourney June 13-15 when I have some more time, I'll look into trying some serious visualization exercises, as that really is a problem for me.

Unfortunately, I'm not really doing any other chess study lately. I had started Pandolfini's Endgame Course again, but I haven't looked at it this week. Maybe after work today I'll do that, since I've already done some tactical puzzles this morning over breakfast, so I don't feel the need to focus on tactics again this evening.

I also need to play more. I've played two blitz games on the internet this week, and I'm keeping up with my correspondence games at chess.com, but I really should play more long games at FICS for practice. My only long games these days are my tournament games at the local club. I should probably start one or two more chess.com games, too. I'm down to five games, four of which are practically over.

I haven't done any opening study in the last week or so, either. There are so many openings that I feel I need to get better at playing. And I still haven't had a chance to play the Tarrasch Defense even once. Nobody's been playing the Queen's Gambit against me lately, so I'm not going to be ready when somebody finally does.

--Fromper

Abba · 06-05-2008, 09:25 PM

Hey Fromp, post a few of your games when you get the chance. I've heard your results, but I'm curious to see how some of those games have developed.

Fromper · 06-06-2008, 08:13 PM

Mostly, I've been analyzing the games right after playing them with the opponents, so I haven't been entering them in the computer very often. Maybe this weekend, I'll try to enter a few of the recent games in the computer and post them on the forums.

--Fromper

Fromper · 06-08-2008, 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by Abba

Hey Fromp, post a few of your games when you get the chance. I've heard your results, but I'm curious to see how some of those games have developed.

Did you see my big drawn game in this thread?

Here's a tournament loss that I just posted.

Here's a drawn game that I just posted.

Maybe I'll post more later as I get a chance to analyze them and post them here.

--Fromper

Fromper · 06-12-2008, 11:35 PM

Well, the big tournament starts tomorrow. I haven't done half the study I wanted to in preparation. Work's just been busy this week, but I've managed to get at least a few puzzles in every day. I really feel like I don't know my openings well enough, and I haven't had as much time to work on endgames as I'd like. But I never feel like I'm prepared for tournaments. I just need to keep reminding myself that my goal in this tournament is to learn as much as possible in preparation for the next big tourney. I try to think that way at every tournament, so I'm never overly disappointed when I lose games, as long as I learn from them.

I took the day off from work tomorrow, but I can't sleep too late. In the morning, I need to drive half an hour each way to drop my rabbit off at the vet (he's boarding there and getting neutered while I'm away this weekend), then I want to clean up his cage and vacuum the apartment afterwards, while he's not around. Then I first have a 3+ hour drive to the tournament, which is likely to be 4 hours if I hit any rain, which I probably will this time of year in Florida. I just hope I'm not too tired by the time the first game starts at 8 pm.

I'll be sure to post an update when I get back. I don't have a laptop, so I won't have net access while I'm there.

--Fromper

Fromper · 06-16-2008, 02:30 AM

I'm back. It was an odd tournament, but I can't argue with the results - 1 win, 1 loss, and 3 draws, all against opponents 150+ rating points above me, so I should gain around 45-50 rating points. That'll put me at a new personal high of around 1550.

I really feel like I wasn't playing that well this tournament. I blundered tactically at least once in every game. I actually thought I played worse in the game I won than in two of the drawn games.

Two of the draws were endgames where I had an advantage, but it wasn't clear how to win them, and my opponents offered draws just as we were both starting to get into time trouble, so I wimped out and accepted. I figured after a long, hard fought game, it would be a shame for the game to be decided either way by one of us blundering in time trouble, so a gentlemanly draw is a decent result. I really need to play blitz more often, so I don't wimp out about playing in time trouble.

The third draw was the oddest of the bunch. I thought I was losing, and it was still fairly early in the middle game. My opponent let me repeat the position twice, because I didn't see any other way to try and generate counterplay, then he offered me a draw. Naturally, I accepted. That's the only one I didn't have to think twice about.

As for the won game, I blundered badly in the opening. First, I saw that my opponent could attack two of my pawns, and I saw moves to save them, so I thought was ok. Somehow, I missed the fact that he would be attacking both at the same time, and I couldn't save both. Then I played a "clever" tactic to win back the pawn materially, but the pawn I took from him was his h pawn - before he castled. Yes, I gave him an attacking lane for his rook. Then I missed a tactic that let him win another pawn. Oddly, he castled in the middle game, taking away his own attacking lane on the h file and turning it into an advantage for me instead. And he did it at a time when his pieces on the queen side were all blocked in and tripping over each other, while I had plenty of play and control of the center. So I ended up winning an exchange, then continuing the pressure, and he resigned when I was going to win a knight or checkmate him.

As for the loss, I forgot to wake up when I showed up at the board. I lost in 15 moves, and I think at least 6 or 7 of them were outright blunders. I think it was a combination of being tired after a long weekend (it was the final game) and that I was playing someone I know pretty well. Because of what I know about his playing style, I felt I needed to play really aggressively, so I ended up going nuts and playing like a beginner, just attacking everything in sight. It was pretty pathetic. I think this once again proves that you should play the board, not the opponent.

I'll post some of the games later when I get a chance, but not the loss. That was just too embarrassing. I can't believe I played that badly. I know what I did wrong, so I don't need the rest of you to analyze it, and it's just humiliating to admit that I played that badly. I honestly think it's the worst I've EVER played in a USCF tournament game.

--Fromper

Abba · 06-16-2008, 03:38 PM

Hey, nice work Fromp. This sounds like you've had a bit of a break through. I wouldn't be too depressed about the last round loss, things like that happen sometimes. Heck, in the tourney I played in this weekend, Shabalov lost in 23 moves the final round.

vjoe · 06-16-2008, 03:46 PM

Interesting. I'm looking forward to see the games.

Anyway, you ended up winning some rating points, so it mustn't have been so bad.

Fromper · 06-16-2008, 05:51 PM

Abba, I think you're right that I might have had a breakthrough lately. In my last 7 tournament games (5 this weekend, and 2 games at the local club the previous weekend), I felt like I was playing badly in all of them, yet I scored 50% overall, despite 6 of my 7 opponents being 150-350 rating points above me. So even though I feel like I'm playing poorly, I seem to be playing at an even level with people rated 1650-1700, despite my 1500 rating not having caught up to that level yet. And if I can just get my head in the game and start regularly playing as well as I really think I can, I'll do even better.

As for that last round loss, I'm not embarrassed that I lost. That happens. I'm embarrassed by how I lost. As I said, my play was just pathetic from start to finish. If you saw the game and didn't know anything about me, you'd probably guess that I'm rated around 1000, not my actual 1500+ USCF rating. It was bad to the point of being silly. I think the last time I played such a lousy tournament game was when I was first starting out and I was overrated with a 1250 provisional rating.

If I have time tonight, I'll put some of the games in the computer and post them here. I definitely need to study them, and some additional feedback from the group here would be helpful.

As for my study going forward, this is going to sound familiar, but I really think playing more often is the key thing I need to do to improve. As long as I play regularly and study my games, I think I'll keep improving, even with little or no book study. I'm still playing every Saturday at the local club, and there's a new online league tournament starting in a week or two, so I'll be playing a decent number of games this summer.

I also need to keep up with the tactics puzzles, which I was doing pretty well with for a week or two, but not so much this past week. I'm kind of surprised that I didn't spend any time doing tactics puzzles between rounds at the tourney. I usually do that when I'm hanging out in the hotel room, but I just didn't have time at this one, and I'm not sure why not.

I also want to focus more on endgames in my study. Rather than trying to go through Pandolfini's Endgame Course enough times to memorize it, I'm thinking I'll read Silman's Complete Endgame Course to focus on understanding the differences between similar positions. Then I'll use Pandolfini's book to test myself. Eventually, I hope to go through both enough times to know all the material down cold, but for now, I'll just focus on quantity of study time with either of them.

The next big tournament for me is in three and a half weeks. It's only about a 20-25 minute drive for me, so no travel or hotel required for this one. The sections are divided by 400 point ranges, so I have a choice of playing in the "Under 1700" or "Under 2100" sections. Given that the next lower section is U1300, I'm thinking that if I play in U1700, I'm likely to play at least 1 or 2 1200-1400 rated opponents who will be pretty easy for me. But I'm still only in the 1500's myself, so playing guys in the 1500-1700 range should be good for me. But I've also proven lately that I can compete against 1700+ players, and even score the occasional upset against those in the 1800's, so playing up might be a good learning experience. I already preregistered for the U1700 section, but I'll see how I do in my games before then to decide if I want to change my mind and play up in the U2100 section instead.

--Fromper