|
Im finding my biggest motivator to improve is not self satisfaction but rather getting out of the dregs where people keep playing after losing their queen and then ragequit with 15 minutes left on the clock
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2018 06:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
Does anyone have favourite general reading chess books? I'm reading The Rookie at the moment, a non-fiction book about a middling British club player who decides he wants to become a good player: he plays tournaments and meets GMs for advice, charting his way through his ups and downs and taking stock on the chess world. I know about Stefan Zeig's Chess Story, but non-fiction is perfectly good as well, either biographies, histories, whatever. As long as I can read it in bed without having to break out a board, and it's compelling, I'd be interested.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 10:59
|
|
|
The Immortal Game by David Shenk is fluffy but enjoyable. It's basically a journalist doing a greatest hits popular history of chess and it's smoothly written. Birth of the Chess Queen by Marilyn Yalom is a bit more serious history, and some of her grander arguments about what concretely led to the development of the piece are shaky, but it's interesting for the history of what surrounded the game of chess through the medieval era. Also it puts forward some ideas that are at least possibly-true and completely rule, like the queen's movement comes from late medieval bards who were into femdom and used chess as a metaphor. And, if you're into Canadian TV, there's always Endgame...
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 11:51
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XbhiDX--FQ Oh hey, it's on youtube. Enjoy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 11:52
|
|
|
Control Volume posted:Im finding my biggest motivator to improve is not self satisfaction but rather getting out of the dregs where people keep playing after losing their queen and then ragequit with 15 minutes left on the clock I played chess yesterday for the first time in like 15 years, and so far I've blundered my Queen every other game. I stay in the game, because chances are that my opponent will make a similar mistake if I just keep the game going and then I'll have a chance. Also, as a total beginner, how strict should I be about doing legit openings? I've looked at a few videos about developing pieces and attacking the centre etc, but I mostly play D4 or D5 if I'm black and then make it up as I go along. Syncopated fucked around with this message at 11:55 on Jan 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2018 11:52
|
|
|
If you can be bothered, I do feel that openings can be very useful. Even if you're a beginner, having pieces locked out of the game is still a problem.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2018 12:59
|
|
|
I think it’s a pretty good idea to follow at least the first few moves of an established opening. At the very least you will start to internalize why these moves are beneficial.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2018 17:39
|
|
|
Syncopated posted:Also, as a total beginner, how strict should I be about doing legit openings? I've looked at a few videos about developing pieces and attacking the centre etc, but I mostly play D4 or D5 if I'm black and then make it up as I go along. Making it up is completely fine if you're keeping principles in mind and you revise what you did after the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
Sometimes I look at popular but confusing moves in openings and then don't do that move and see what kind of terrible things happen as a result.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2018 23:35
|
|
|
I played in a tournament today and was fighting for 2nd/3rd out of 40 all tourny and then in the final game lost and dropped to 4th and missed a trophy nooooo. I did beat an 1800 player which is a personal best and felt on top of the game the entire time so thats good
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2018 23:44
|
|
|
Syncopated posted:I played chess yesterday for the first time in like 15 years, and so far I've blundered my Queen every other game. I stay in the game, because chances are that my opponent will make a similar mistake if I just keep the game going and then I'll have a chance. If you're white I strongly recommend opening with e4, and stick with textbook openings as much as possible. They exist because they are proven and seek to develop pieces and attack the center.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2018 01:10
|
|
|
I would recommend finding reputable openings you like and stick with them for the foreseeable future. You will get very used to the types of positions you get with those openings and start to internalize the key ideas of those positions. It’s very difficult do this when you’re jumping around to all kinds of different openings.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2018 01:27
|
|
|
How deep or wide a repertoire would everyone suggest? I've tried studying openings in the past from books to little success, but I've actually been doing well with Chessable. I'm learning a 1.) d4 opening repertoire for white, and the Scandinavian and Slav for e4 and d4 as black. I'm planning to next focus on endgames and tactics instead of worrying about a response to 1.) Nf3 or c4. Like openings, my endgames are something I just haven't been able to put in the study time, but I'm hoping I can get over that with chessable. Am I setting myself up to getting poo poo on by the Bird?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2018 03:49
|
|
|
Tibalt posted:Am I setting myself up to getting poo poo on by the Bird? If it's not that popular, it's probably not that good. I guess you can get away with it against randos on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2018 04:03
|
|
|
Control Volume posted:Sometimes I look at popular but confusing moves in openings and then don't do that move and see what kind of terrible things happen as a result. One of these things that sticks in my mind is a postgame interview that Aronian did a couple years ago after a game where he’d gotten in a ton of poo poo and barely survived. “Yeah, I knew nobody played this move but I couldn’t remember why, so I decided to play it and see what happened.”
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2018 09:23
|
|
|
Tibalt posted:How deep or wide a repertoire would everyone suggest? I've tried studying openings in the past from books to little success, but I've actually been doing well with Chessable. I'm learning a 1.) d4 opening repertoire for white, and the Scandinavian and Slav for e4 and d4 as black. You can adequately play a Slav against 1.c4 or Nf3 so whatever. On the off chance you face a bird you can play it similarly except you get the immediate c5 for free.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2018 09:26
|
|
|
Carlsen won Tata after tie break games from Giri. Fun tournament overall!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 01:26
|
|
|
Control Volume posted:Im finding my biggest motivator to improve is not self satisfaction but rather getting out of the dregs where people keep playing after losing their queen and then ragequit with 15 minutes left on the clock I'm around 1150 on lichess and I always play to the end for several reasons, regardless of what happens: - Everyone sometimes will blunder a piece and it may even out - They get in a position where they can't stop me from queening a pawn - They don't manage time well enough and I can win from a timeout (I normally play 10+0s) - I can force a stalemate or they blunder into a stalemate - It's drat good practice to play from behind
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 02:44
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:You can adequately play a Slav against 1.c4 or Nf3 so whatever. On the off chance you face a bird you can play it similarly except you get the immediate c5 for free.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
I firmly believe that chess players in general, even up to GM level, resign or mentally check out of losing games way too early. Swindling is a wonderful skill.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 07:51
|
|
|
I got two more chess books. Sometimes I think I like reading about the game more than actually playing it online.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 10:48
|
|
|
Aredna posted:I'm around 1150 on lichess and I always play to the end for several reasons, regardless of what happens: Fair enough so long send you recognise there’s a time and energy cost to doing this that may not be worth the rating points. Like, if you have interesting counterplay or you think you can force a stalemate, go for it. But I would never extend and online chess game on the off chance my opponent might blunder.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 12:47
|
|
|
I just played a weekender and I hope to post the games here reasonably soon. I started the tournament playing poorly/tiredly, and turned a couple wins into draws by blundering rooks. Luckily I smoothed things out and absolutely annihilated a Russian 2400 in the last round. Anyway, for a taster, here's the final position of one of my games. RIP the queen. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 13:34
|
|
|
I haven’t seen a queen that hosed since France, 1793.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
Im fine with people playing on, but some people play on until theyre one move away from checkmate and then waste my time by idling.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 17:11
|
|
|
Well yeah, that's called being an rear end in a top hat. Playing to completion and being an rear end in a top hat can overlap, but they are definitely not the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 17:23
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:I haven’t seen a queen that hosed since France, 1793. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
Like a few other people in this thread, I'm coming back to chess after a nearly 20-year hiatus. I played competitively as a kid but was never serious enough to really study, train, etc. Compared to my peers as a younger kid, I was really good, but putting in serious effort to study felt like no fun. Some of the kids I played in junior tournaments with ended up getting very good, like 2000+, while I reached a rating in the low 1600s (Canadian) by the late '90s and then stopped playing entirely. I got back into the game recently after seeing some of the Youtube channels out there where they go through famous and interesting games, and feeling the bug bite me again. One of my problems was a near total lack of desire to learn openings. I would usually muddle through the opening and often end up in a positional disadvantage (and sometimes a material disadvantage) from which I'd struggle to claw back for the rest of the game. With the advent of the Web it is now much easier to look up the opening you just played, although I am still struggling to remember things beyond the first 4-5 moves or so. I pretty much only have time to play blitz online right now. I'd like to get back to OTB competition and longer time controls but with two little kids that's just not feasible (at least not until they're a bit older and maybe I can get them hooked too...). I feel playing blitz isn't necessarily going to improve my tournament play but hopefully sooner or later some basic opening patterns will start to solidify in my mind and I'll be able to get into the midgame a bit stronger. Right now on chess.com I have a significantly better record as Black (57% winning) than I do as White (46% winning). I have been a d4 player for most of my chess career but maybe it's time to switch to e4. Of course that means starting opening learning from near-scratch again... Below is a sample game which is kind of typical. I'm White. I get through the opening without making any blunders, but playing some moves that the computer says are suboptimal. In the midgame I actually get an advantage but fail to capitalize on some of Black's weakly-positioned pieces, and I miss a couple of key moves that could crack Black's position open. By the early endgame I'm actually down, but Black can't convert. I claw my way back to a totally drawn position and then my opponent blundered and gave me a winning K+P vs. K position. [Event "Live Chess"] [Site "Chess.com"] [Date "2018.01.30"] [Round "-"] [White "NewlessCluebie"] [Black "educhancay"] [Result "1-0"] [WhiteElo "1553"] [BlackElo "1653"] [TimeControl "300+5"] [EndTime "5:50:34 PST"] [Termination "NewlessCluebie won by resignation"] 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 a6 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Bg5 Be7 6. e3 h6 7. Bf4 dxc4 8. Bxc4 b5 9. Bd3 Bb7 10. O-O O-O 11. Re1 Nbd7 12. e4 Rc8 13. e5 Nh5 14. Bg3 Nxg3 15. hxg3 c5 16. Be4 Bxe4 17. Rxe4 Qb6 18. d5 b4 19. d6 Bd8 20. Na4 Qb7 21. Rg4 f5 22. Rc4 g5 23. Rac1 Bb6 24. Qc2 g4 25. Nh4 Nxe5 26. Nxb6 Qxb6 27. Rxc5 Rxc5 28. Qxc5 Qxc5 29. Rxc5 Nd3 30. Rc7 Rd8 31. d7 Kf7 32. Ra7 Nxb2 33. f3 h5 34. Kf1 a5 35. Ke2 a4 36. Kd2 a3 37. Kc2 Nc4 38. Kb3 gxf3 39. gxf3 Ne5 40. f4 Nc6 41. Rc7 Nb8 42. Rc8 Ke7 43. Ng6+ Kxd7 44. Rxd8+ Kxd8 45. Kxb4 Nc6+ 46. Kxa3 Nd4 47. Kb4 Ne2 48. a4 Nxg3 49. a5 Kc8 50. Kb5 Kb7 51. Kc5 Ne4+ 52. Kd4 Ka6 53. Ke5 Kxa5 54. Kxe6 Ng3 55. Ke5 Kb5 56. Nh4 Kc5 57. Nxf5 Nxf5 58. Kxf5 h4 59. Kg4 h3 60. Kxh3 Kd6 61. Kg4 Ke6 62. Kg5 Kf7 63. Kf5 Kg7 64. Ke6 Kf8 65. Kf6 Ke8 66. Kg7 Ke7 67. f5 Ke8 68. f6 1-0 I missed 25. Rxg4+!. Or rather, I did see it was a possibility and that if 25. ... fxg4 I could get my queen in to a very uncomfortable spot for Black, but didn't have enough time to see that the attack is so strong you can force mate down the line. Also the computer likes the exchange sacrifice of 26. Re1 and tells me that my 26th move pretty much threw my positional advantage away. I was executing on my plan to take Black's c-pawn but it turns out that there were better options. At least I remembered how to win a K+P vs. K endgame...
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Why would you switch to E4? Doesn't it have a worse record then D4 and also aren't you opening yourself up to playing alot of the Sicilian openings which seem to require huge wrote memorisation
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 18:05
|
|
|
Chess960 has a pretty respectable crowd on chess.com if you REALLY hate learning openings, and I've been using chessable to help me study. But if you're just playing for fun, who cares? Sure, bad openings might hold you back from climbing the rating ladder, but there's lots of fun to be had in the lower levels. Unless you're competitive like me and hate losing, of course.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
Loving Africa Chaps posted:Why would you switch to E4? Doesn't it have a worse record then D4 and also aren't you opening yourself up to playing alot of the Sicilian openings which seem to require huge wrote memorisation I thought about mentioning this when we talked about picking openings, but I’m really fond of Simon Williams advice towards older/lazy players (as I am both). Avoid openings with lots of theory, a lot of the e4 lines have been studied to death, and your opponent is almost always going to be in familiar territory when you play them. There are a ton of playable openings in sub 2000 chess. So if you’re someone like me who just plays casually, it can be a good idea to dig into a slightly less popular opening. That way you’ll always be more familiar with the positions you get than your opponent. If you’re playing the Sicilian or the Ruy Lopez, the opposite will almost always be true. #d4supremacy
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 18:39
|
|
|
I picked C4 because 1) it's called the English 2) Yasser played it 3) dominate the light squares is a simple enough principal for me to follow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 18:43
|
|
|
Loving Africa Chaps posted:Why would you switch to E4? Doesn't it have a worse record then D4 and also aren't you opening yourself up to playing alot of the Sicilian openings which seem to require huge wrote memorisation My logic is: if I'm doing worse as White than Black, there's gotta be something wrong with the way I'm playing White. My suspicion is that the openings I'm playing don't cater to my strengths, but I guess I'm not quite self-aware enough to identify what my tactical strengths and weaknesses are at this stage. Tibalt posted:Chess960 has a pretty respectable crowd on chess.com if you REALLY hate learning openings, and I've been using chessable to help me study. I'm competitive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
Loving Africa Chaps posted:I picked C4 because 1) it's called the English 2) Yasser played it 3) dominate the light squares is a simple enough principal for me to follow. If you get to actually play an English there's basically no concrete theory. Of course sometimes people are tremendous assholes and push you into stuff like a Slav or a KID.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
Carbolic posted:I pretty much only have time to play blitz online right now. May I recommend correspondence chess?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 04:23
|
|
|
Anyone have any idea why chess.com players appear comparatively weak to lichess.org ones? I suck, but I'm apparently in the top half of chess.com while below the 30th percentile on lichess. Chess.com:  Lichess.org: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
ulmont posted:Anyone have any idea why chess.com players appear comparatively weak to lichess.org ones? Your average joe who wants to play a few games of chess is going to type chess into google and end up on chess.com. Someone who chooses to play on lichess is probably very familiar with the options for playing online and I would presume be a more experienced chess player. This difference is also reflected in the size of the player bases, where chess.com is much bigger. It’s populated with a lot of beginners that ended up on chess.com by default.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
You can pick your starting ELO and the beginner ELO is 800, so that probably factors into the calculations as well. Even if they only calculate people who play at least one game in a category, someone who plays a single game of blitz and never touches it again will still be below 970.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
me: Goddamn that was a dope rear end game Kommodo:  Of course, Kommodo is right, even if I got the essence of the tactic right I often play the least optimal version of it. That's where the learning begins! Regardless, I liked this move a lot:  White to move and I played 25. Qd7+! Kxc4 26. Rc1+ The rest is forced but in classic blitz I missed a move, but my opponent blundered a rook and then resigned. Also, been reading Lev Alburt's commentary on Carlsen/Karjakin. Seems good. This moment in Jan and Peter's commentary (and debate) is referenced in text multiple times which I think is awesome. algebra testes fucked around with this message at 05:42 on Feb 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 05:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
Hand Knit posted:Luckily I smoothed things out and absolutely annihilated a Russian 2400 in the last round. My coach is encouraging me to try and get this game published in Sahovski Informator so yeah I think I did pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 23:11
|
|