Fromper's new 2008 improvement thread

[Fromper]

Originally Posted by Abba

Don't take your foot off of the pedal just yet here, Fromp. You're within reach of 1700, and you've got to stick with it. I just want to warn you that you need to be careful in that tourney. If you're not on top of your game, you could easily be upset by a lower rated player (especially if you come into the game unmotivated). I hope you get your fire back by the time it rolls around.

Thanks for the encouragement.

I'm not really worried about the lower rateds. I don't know why, but I always seem to be extra careful against low rated opponents. I think it's psychological, like I keep telling myself "Be careful - it would be too embarrassing to lose to this guy". I think that's why I've only lost one game in my USCF tourney career against an opponent rated more than 200 below me, while I've scored something like 6 or 7 upsets against guys rated 300+ above me.

I think I'm starting to feel motivated again. Last night after work, I started looking through a book on the Ruy Lopez Exchange that I picked up at the last tourney. I need to work on some tactics puzzles, too. Usually, playing in a big tourney when I'm feeling unmotivated helps me get focused again.

Originally Posted by Najdork

Fromper, what would you consider the biggest contributor in you rating jump this year? Is there a certain book, software, technique, or something you do specifically? I'm just curious to know what you believe to be your best learning tools.

Good question.

Actually, I'd say most of my improvement this year is based on the study that I did last year. I was stuck in the 1300's from the time I returned to USCF last June until the beginning of January, when I scored 5-0 in the U1400 section of a tournament and shot up to 1468 instantly. My rating's been mostly increasing since then, but I think it's just because I'm applying everything I've been working on since last summer, not because of anything specific I'm studying lately.

I'd say there are three main factors in my improvement:

1. Practice. Playing lots of slow games and studying them afterwards (with the opponent, when possible) is the number one thing, above all else. Since rejoining USCF last June, I think I've played over 100 slow USCF tourney games, plus some skittles, online, blitz, etc games.

2. Switching to playing lots of wild gambits last year. That's the main reason my rating dropped from 1387 to 1307 between June and September of last year, because I got away from what used to be my normal style of play (quiet, defensive). But focusing on my greatest weakness yielded great improvement in the long run. Being down a pawn forced me to stop worrying about counting material and start learning about piece activity, lines of attack, etc. I learned a LOT about tactics and attacking because of that.

3. Lots of book study. I don't even think it matters that much what book study. Quantity is more important than quality. I've done tactics puzzles, some endgames, some openings, read some about positional play, studied some master games. I'm fairly disorganized in my study (which as supposedly the reason for this thread - to keep myself focused), but I think just sheer quantity of study in a variety of topics has helped me improve. There are still specific areas I could use more work on, but as long as I'm picking up bits and pieces of info along the way, I'm improving overall.

--Fromper

[Fromper]

Hmm... been a week since the last post. I haven't done much chess in that time, but not as little as in my earlier "break", either. I'm starting to pick up the pace, but I'm not quite there yet.

The second round of the Smith-Morra Gambit theme correspondence tourney at chess.com started yesterday, so I've been diving into that. I decided to decline that gambit with g6 in every game as black this time, so I rewatched that part of the Foxy DVD on the SMG Declined. It was a good refresher. Now hopefully someone will play that against me in one of my OTB tourneys.

I've also been looking at the Ruy Lopez Exchange as a new opening to play as white, in case the situation comes up. It rarely happens, though. Hardly anyone answers 1. e4 with e5 at my level.

At the local club last Saturday, we played two games at G/75, and I went 1-1. The loss was against an 1880 who I've beaten once in around 7 or 8 tournament games. I was black, and despite a very different move order, it transposed to the same Tarrasch Defense position that we reached after 9 moves the last time we played two weeks ago. I ended up with what was probably a drawn position at the end, but I got into time trouble and blundered, so I lost. I should probably analyze both of those games against him together, to compare them. I definitely played better the second time.

In the second round, I played a guy rated in the 1300's who has never beaten me in a tourney game, even when I was rated around the same as him. We drew twice in the past, but I've beaten him every time since then. He can still beat me sometimes at skittles, probably because I don't focus as much when playing non-tourney games. I tried the Ruy Lopez as white for the first time against him, intending to play the Exchange variation, which I've been looking at lately. But he played 3. ... d6, which I wasn't really prepared for. I improvised well, and he didn't, so I ended up winning his e pawn in the opening. He blundered a couple of other times later, too, and I ended up with an easy win. It was much easier than any of my previous wins against him. I think he just wasn't concentrating well that day.

So I should gain about 2 or 3 rating points from those two games. I won't be there for rounds 3-4 of that tourney this coming weekend, because I'm going to Orlando to play in a major tournament instead. The sections are divided the same as the last tournament, so again, I could play up in the U2100, or I can play to win in the U1700 section. I'm going for the lower section this time. I think alternating between my own section and playing up seems to work pretty well for me. Besides, after losing all 5 games in the U2100 last time, I need the morale boost of a good tourney.

Since the next lower section is U1300, I'm expecting a much lower rated opponent first round (probably in the 1300's, or maybe even 1200's), then assuming I win, it'll get tougher. Based on my performances over the last couple of months against opponents in the 1600-1750 range, I think I can probably play about even with the guys at the top of my section. I'd really like to do well enough to pull my rating up 10 more points to 1600 right away. Since the 1600 rating comes with a rating floor of 1400, it would be a nice milestone to break.

I'm driving up to Orlando for the tourney on Friday, so I've only got 3 evenings left to prepare. Time to start getting motivated and putting in some study time.

--Fromper

[Najdork]

Good luck on your next tournament Fromper and your 10 point 1600 run.

[Fromper]

I'm really not ready for this tournament. I've done hardly any practice or study since the last tournament, so I really feel like I'm starting to lose my edge.

I'm hoping to spend some time on puzzles tonight (after packing). Hopefully, it won't take more than the first game tomorrow night for me to get warmed up and really get my head in the game. That first game should be against one of the lower rated people in the section, so as long as I avoid any really big blunders, I should be able to win that one, even if I don't play my absolute best. After that, I'm likely to have tougher opponents, so I need to be on top of my game to do well.

Playing in major tournaments like this usually motivates me, though, so even if I don't do that well, it should motivate me to start studying and practicing more for the next one. The only time that doesn't work is if I've been highly motivated for a while already (as I was going into the last big tourney), in which case I can sometimes get a little burned out and need a break afterwards.

--Fromper

[Fromper]

Well, I called that one correctly. I'm in the hotel lobby right now, using their public computer, because I don't have a laptop.

As predicted, I played a lower rated opponent (1377) first round and had a relatively easy time of it. I was on the black side of a Tarrasch Defense. He played a move order that I wasn't really ready for, and I messed up my response in a way that seemed like it could go very badly, but I ended up recovering well. I had to be careful, but I ended up getting a relatively easy win, despite not being my sharpest. It was tough enough to be a good warmup, but still a relatively easy win.

I hit the book vendor afterwards, and they had a used book on the Latvian Gambit on sale pretty cheap, so I couldn't resist. As a gambiteer, that's one gambit I've always been mildly curious about. One of these days, I should probably look at the King's Gambit seriously, too, since I know so little about it. But I just recently decided to start playing the Ruy Lopez Exchange (and bought a book on it), so I'm in no rush for that right now.

Also, knowing that I should have white next game, and I'm not really booked up on the Ruy Exchange yet, I pulled out my book and studied some opening lines. I'm no expert on that one yet, but I think I'm ready to start playing it and learning from the games. Players at my level won't stick to book, anyway. Of course, chances are my opponents won't answer 1. e4 with e5, so we'll see if I even get a chance to play it.

So as I said, being here at a big tourney has motivated me to study.

Hopefully I'm warmed up enough to play my best tomorrow. Right now, I doubt it.

--Fromper

[Fromper]

End result: 2.5/5 against opponents with an average rating slightly below me, so I'll probably lose 5-10 rating points. No big deal for the rating, but I'm annoyed that I just wasn't playing very well this weekend.

On the up side, my streak continues of not losing to anyone under 1400 this year. I played two guys in the 1300's and won both of those. I scored a draw against a guy in the 1600's, and losses against a 1680 and a 1585. That last one was REALLY annoying. I had an advantage all game, and just kept winning pawns, until I was four pawns up with queens off, but there were still enough pieces for it to be dangerous. I was pretty careful until the very end, when I just overlooked that he had a checkmate.

The only game where I felt I was really playing well was the fourth round game where I beat a kid in the 1300's. I was white, playing the 150 Attack against the Pirc, and he decided to try avoiding my king side attack by castling queen side. I kept going on the king side anyway and ended up with a strong enough attack to win a piece, then I just had to be careful not to blow it, which wasn't really a problem.

This was very motivating, if nothing else. Now I really want to dive into the study and get ready for the next one in two weekends. I've got the choice of U1600 or U1900 sections there, and I'll definitely play up.

--Fromper

Edited to add: The tourney results from the past two weeks are now on the USCF site. I gained 3 rating points from the local club, then lost 4 from the big tourney, so I lost 1 point overall. So I'm now at 1589.

[Octal]

Originally Posted by Fromper

I hit the book vendor afterwards, and they had a used book on the Latvian Gambit on sale pretty cheap, so I couldn't resist. As a gambiteer, that's one gambit I've always been mildly curious about. One of these days, I should probably look at the King's Gambit seriously, too, since I know so little about it. But I just recently decided to start playing the Ruy Lopez Exchange (and bought a book on it), so I'm in no rush for that right now.

Just out of curiosity, what was the book on the Latvian you bought called? As some of you may know, I'm a big fan of the Latvian, and I'll gladly add any input to questions you have on the opening.

I'm not sure if the Exchange Ruy is the right choice for you. I used to play it when I was rated 1100, because I could just sit back and wait for them to blunder a piece/pawn. At around 1500+, those blunders still happen, yet not as frequently. And not everyone plays 3. ... a6, even though it is regarded as the best move on the board (though 3. ... Nf6 is getting more respect) which might cause you some minor difficulties. The opening is unjustly boring, and Black's position offers more active play then White's, which isn't what you are looking for. Chigorin has played the opening aggressively, but not many people are Chigorin, while Shirov also used to play it, but they weren't exciting Shirov-ish games. The Exchange Ruy isn't a bad opening, but it isn't a very aggressive one.

[Fromper]

I don't have the book in front of me now, so I don't remember the name of it. I probably never will get around to reading it. I'm switching to safer, non-gambit openings lately, focusing on Nigel Davies book "Play 1. e4 e5!" as my black response to 1. e4.

And I picked the Exchange Ruy Lopez specifically to try a different style of play. It revolves around defending against black's active piece play, in the hopes of getting a better endgame. I think it'll be educational for me to play it.

Besides, it's not like it ever actually comes up. Before the Ruy Exchange, I used to aim for the Giuoco Piano as white, but I honestly can't remember the last time I actually played that in a tournament game. I've seen the French a couple of times, the Pirc/Modern a couple of times, the Sicilian only once (!), the Scandinavean, the Philidor, and the Caro Kann since the last time I saw 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 as white in a tourney game.

--Fromper

[Fromper]

So now that I'm home, the book I bought was "The Latvian Gambit" (creative title) by Kon Grivainis. No explanations, just a bunch of games, sorted by variation. As I said, I probably won't even look at it any time soon. But it's the type of gambit I'm likely to want to look into eventually, when I get bored with playing normal stuff all the time, so picking up a book of that type while it's cheap seemed like a good plan.

I'm finally motivated and actively working on chess again, so here's what I've been doing the last few days and what I continue to do for the foreseeable future.

The June, 2008 Novice Nook column by Dan Heisman at chesscafe.com, "Bootstrapping Analysis Skills", defines different elements of chess strength in a way that made me realize what my biggest problem is right now. Here's the relevant part of the article:

And the three types of “visions”:

Visualization – The ability to keep track of where all the pieces are (and “see” them as a position) as you move the pieces in your head, analyzing future possibilities.

Board Vision – The ability to quickly and accurately recognize where all the pieces are and assess what they are doing in the present chess position.

Tactical Vision – The ability to quickly and accurately recognize known tactical patterns and their likely consequences. Tactics include more than just winning material and checkmate, but also the defensive side: preventing material loss and checkmate.

I had already figured out on my own that seeing what's currently on the board is a different skill than calculating what the position will look like once some moves are made, but I never realized that board vision and tactical vision are two different things before. My big problem is that I've spent tons of time doing tactics puzzles, which gave me pretty good tactical vision, but my board vision still sucks. And the weak board vision obviously hurts visualization, as well.

So I actually emailed Mr. Heisman for his advice on how to improve my board vision. He said that the most important thing is to just play slow games regularly, taking the time on every move to thoroughly analyze. I already do that. His second and third most important things were playing fast games regularly and studying master games. Those are things I need to do more often. And here I was expecting him to recommend some sort of drills or something, but he considered those less important than those top three, and I can see his point.

So per his suggestions, and keeping with the fact that I'm sure I could always use more tactics study, here's my new study plan, in order of importance:

1. Continue to play an average of at least 2 slow games per week. This one's easy, since I play at the local club every Saturday, plus major tournaments whenever possible and the occasional slow internet games.

2. Play at least one blitz game every day on FICS. For me, that usually means 5 5 or 10 5 speed. I should be able to find 10-15 minutes every evening for a quick game before bed, if nothing else. I've done this the last two nights, and I keep messing up when the time starts to run really low, so I've lost both games. However, I do see the value of forcing myself to look for reasonable moves quickly, rather than always taking the time to try and find the best move.

3. Study all my games (slow and fast) afterwards to see what I can learn from them. Look up the opening for every game in books to see where we varied from book and what the masters recommend. Yes, EVERY game, even the really lousy blitz games.

4. Tactics, tactics, tactics. I need to get back to doing tactical puzzles regularly. Actually, I've gotten good enough at tactics that I don't consider this nearly as important as playing experience right now. So playing blitz daily is mandatory, but doing tactics daily is an "if I have time" thing.

5. Continue my study of the openings I play, by going through complete master games in my opening books. This combines the need for master game study with learning opening lines. I'll definitely make a point of only buying opening books that focus on complete games from now on. Most of the opening books I already own do that, anyway.

So that's the plan for now. I'm putting aside things like studying endgames and middle game strategy for now. Working on my analysis skill and thought process is more important than trying to expand my knowledge of specific details. That's also why opening study is last on the above list. Eventually, I'm sure Silman's Complete Endgame Course will be added back into the mix, but probably not for at least a month or two.

The Florida State Championship is about a four hour drive from me, and it begins a week from tomorrow. Actually, the main tournament is two games per day on Saturday, Sunday, and Monday, but the blitz championship is the Friday evening before the main event. I'm taking the day off work on Friday so I can drive there early and play in the blitz tourney. For the main event, I'm signed up to play up a section, in the U1900 section instead of the U1600 section, though I haven't broken 1600 yet, so I could still play in that section if I wanted, but I'd prefer the challenge of playing up.

Before then, I've got two games at G/75 this Saturday at the local club. And only 9 days after the State Championship is the Miami Open. I still haven't decided for sure if I'll play in the Miami Open. I really want to, but it's very expensive, and that's a lot of chess in a very short period of time. That might be just what I need right now, though.

--Fromper

[Fromper]

So I played two games at the local club today, at a time control of 75 minutes. Coincidentally, both games were Ruy Lopez openings, and both opponents got me out of my "book" lines in ways I wasn't expecting, but I improvised pretty well.

In the first game, I play a kid rated a little over 1200, and I had good pressure early, but I overlooked a move that let him get a strong attack. He was clearly winning, but he didn't know how to proceed, so I got a lucky draw. That mistake was clearly a thought process error - more thorough blunder checking would have prevented it.

I was the highest rated to draw the first game, so I ended up playing the lowest rated winner in the second game, which was a 1370 player who scored an upset against an 1850 player in the first round. I don't know why, but I've been clobbering this guy every time I play him lately. I know I'm better, as reflected in our ratings, but other players in the 1300's are generally tougher for me. I think it's a playing style thing.

So the end result is 1.5 / 2, and I'll miss rounds 3-4 next Saturday, because I'll be at the state championship instead. According to the USCF web site, I should lose 6 rating points from this. But the biggest result is that I got a reminder (the hard way) that I need to be more thorough in my blunder checking every move. Enough experience and reminding myself, and eventually it'll become instinctive.

As for the rest of my improvement plan, I've been playing blitz daily on FICS. The games have been pretty pathetic, though. I just suck at those speeds, which is why I need to keep doing it. But I've been reviewing my games and learning a little at a time that way.

I've also been looking over some master games. I went through most of the chapter on the Two Knights Defense in "Play 1. e4 e5!" by Nigel Davies this week, so I'm finally ready to start playing that, after having always played the Giuoco Piano. At least this will get me away from the really boring GP lines, as well as avoiding the Evans and Italian Gambits.

I haven't dived back into the tactics puzzles yet, and I think I really need to do that. I think I need to focus on that some this week, to prepare for the next big tournament next weekend.

--Fromper