Fromper's 2009 improvement thread

[Fromper]

"Starting Out: The Dutch Defense" by Neil McDonald arrived in the mail today, so I'm going to start going through that. That's part of #2 in my study plan (see the new signature).

Luckily, I got the pgn of the whole thing from the publisher's web site, so that will make it much faster and easier to read. I REALLY prefer reading chess books electronically, where I can focus on the material instead of having to set up a board, figure out where to move things, figure out how to get back to a main line after following a side line, etc.

--Fromper

[Fromper]

Originally Posted by Fromper

Actually, that's a weakness that I didn't think of when writing the initial post: decision making. Very often, I'll see a good move in a position, yet end up not playing it, because I'll be worried about the risks.

So after writing the above yesterday...

Originally Posted by Fromper

"Starting Out: The Dutch Defense" by Neil McDonald arrived in the mail today, so I'm going to start going through that. That's part of #2 in my study plan (see the new signature).

... and receiving the book on the Dutch today, I started reading the book and came across a VERY relevant quote.

Besides just showing the opening moves, McDonald is giving plenty of good general chess advice when it applies to the positions he's talking about. This makes for a very useful opening book. On page 22, he states:

Originally Posted by Grandmaster Neil McDonald

WARNING: Don't be afraid of ghosts! Always play the moves you want to play unless you see a genuine tactical drawback.

Thinking about it, this really sums up a psychological problem I've had as a chess player all along. As I said above, I sometimes see good moves, but don't play them out of fear. This mostly happens against opponents around my own level or lower, when I'm scared of losing.

Against much higher rated opponents, I'll sometimes think a move is too risky, but I'll think, "I'm going to lose anyway, and I don't see a specific reason why this move won't work, so let's try it out and make my opponent show me why it doesn't work". The two biggest upsets of my chess career came playing strong, yet risky moves because I was thinking that way.

I guess I just never thought of the fact that I need to stop being scared and ALWAYS play the risky moves unless I have a definite reason not to. McDonald summed it up in a way that really puts it in perspective. That one stupidly obvious piece of advice makes this book worth the money I paid for it, even if I end up never playing the Dutch.

--Fromper

[planetchess.org]

Killer Instinct!

The majority of our actions are based on fear and hunger. (I think it goes back to, "Can I eat him?, or, can he eat me?.., 'Run away, or run towards...)

As a pseudo evolved primal creature, I am looking to draw my enemy's blood on the Chessboard. I am relentless in my approach, I have no mercy, I will never wane.

If I do fall by my opponent's sword, I shall honor him with the respect deserved, while knowing that I fought tooth and nail.....

[planetchess.org]

Originally Posted by Fromper

And sometimes, even if you can't calculate exactly how things will turn out, you can sense on instinct that it's a good idea to play the move.

--Fromper

Now that I re-read the post, as opposed to looking for further opportunities to pontificate, I must say that you mention a particular aspect that I have long pondered.

When I play the strongest is when I play instinctively. Interesting....

[Fromper]

The silly part is that I'm sure I've seen similar advice in the past, about taking risks and not being afraid of losing. But for some reason, it stood out more to me at this particular moment, because of the way McDonald worded it, combined with the fact that I've actually had a couple of games recently where this weakness of mine came up. I really believe that just thinking about his statement, which I've since added to my signature here, will seriously improve my play in some of my tournament games.

--Fromper

[lanced]

of course fromter. you cant hear something until you are ready to hear it.

Threau said that "it takes two to tell the truth, one to speek and another to listen".

anyway, in a game like chess it is easy to fall into ruts. when we open our eyes to certain things we end up seeing theme everywhere.

im shure most people know the felling of learning a new word (or something similar) and then hearing and seeing it everywhere. nowadays i dont think that it is chance that it happens all at once. i think that the word was always there before, and we just disregarded it because it wasnt meaningful to us.

i didnt mean this to sound religious. im not religious. i ment it only for chess.

[planetchess.org]

Originally Posted by lanced

of course fromter. you cant hear something until you are ready to hear it.

Threau said that "it takes two to tell the truth, one to speek and another to listen".

anyway, in a game like chess it is easy to fall into ruts. when we open our eyes to certain things we end up seeing theme everywhere.

im shure most people know the felling of learning a new word (or something similar) and then hearing and seeing it everywhere. nowadays i dont think that it is chance that it happens all at once. i think that the word was always there before, and we just disregarded it because it wasnt meaningful to us.

i didnt mean this to sound religious. im not religious. i ment it only for chess.

This is a very interesting phenomenon in my opinion. I remember some years ago reading about the BMW M3, I had never seen one before in real life, though after I read about the subject, I began to see them everywhere. Of course these sweet little Bimmers were there all the time, I just never noticed before.

As it relates to Chess, If we look at more Tactics for example, and become aware of their tell tale signs, we all of a sudden see them everywhere!

This is why study works to improve our play. I guess in a way, we are simply making ourselves more aware of possibilities. Being aware of the possibilities allows us to recognize and exploit them when encountered.

[wzim]

I wouldn't get too enamored with the floor idea. Years ago the floor was 100 points below the highest even hundred number you had achieved and I was sitting safely, so I thought, near my 1600 floor and, without telling or consulting me , the floors got changed to what they are now. So I fell all the way to 1500 before finally rebounding and working my way back up to, now my ceiling, just a little above 1700.

Yet at the same time my goal is to get over 1800 to get back my old 1600 floor.

[Abba]

Interestingly, I've heard you can actually request to have your floor removed now. I know of one master who removed it so he could play in the u2200 sections again. I'm not sure I'd want to remove mine, but I wouldn't want to be someone sitting on their floor either.

[Fromper]

As I said, I have a friend at the local clubs who is 86 years old and sitting at a 1500 floor. Some days, he plays like a 1600-1700 player, and you can see how he got that floor. Other times, he just hangs a piece for no obvious reason and loses to 1200-1400 players. We sometimes joke about him having "senior moments" and the rest of us have theorized behind his back that his inconsistent play depends on what medication he's taking that week. For him, having the security of knowing his rating can never drop to a really embarrassingly low level is worth having a floor. I just joke that I want to have a floor to protect me that way in 50 years.

But it's also a matter of pride that I wanted to break 1600, just to say I'd done so once. Missing by 1 point and then dropping to 1528 really sucked. At least I'm heading back in the right direction now - only 60 more points to go.

--Fromper