|
It is probably a good time for the (roughly) biennial chess thread in games. If you want other threads on chess, there is the thread in Ask/Tell here and the megathread in SAS over here. Discussion about the professional game is probably best served in the SAS thread, although there’s enough overlap between the threads that you can post anything anywhere. This will probably be a thread for forums people to play games against each other.  How doess chess work over the internet? There are two main ways to play chess on the internet: correspondence and live. Correspondence chess is a form of chess where players are given a set number of days per move. Originally played through the mail, and later email, correspondence chess can now be played on a number of hub sites. It is very popular since you can keep as many games going as you would like, as well as being able to play as many moves at a time as you would like. Opening databases are allowed, which can make this format especially attractive to people who want to practice multiple games in an opening line simultaneously. The most popular correspondence sites are: Gameknot.com Redhotpawn.com (OrangeKing runs a goon team, I believe) Chess.com (Has an app integrated with Facebook) Live chess is similar to OTB chess, where people play a single game beginning-to-end in one sitting. While some people play lengthy time controls, most games go fairly quickly. The normal ‘speed’ of internet chess is known as ‘blitz,’ and sees players given either five minutes or three minutes with two second increment for the game. Among established players, blitz is the established form of ‘casual’ chess, with some people playing upwards of four hours a day. Instead of websites, live internet chess is often run through clients which you need to download programs to access. The two most popular internet chess clubs are: Internet Chess Club (pay) Free Internet Chess Server (free) There are also other browser-based sites on which you can play, but none of them are very popular. I can add any sites on request. If you have any questions, feel free to ask away. Myself and a few others work as teachers and will do our best to answer your questions. There is no such thing as a dumb question. (Unless you want to know if it is okay to play the French. It is never okay to play the French.) We have an IRC channel, #chess at irc.synirc.net. It’s not the most active, but come hang out and maybe get a game. Hand Knit fucked around with this message at 23:07 on Nov 3, 2013 |
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 20:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 17:13 |
|
|
If you want to post your username for any site, I will edit it in here. Lichess goon club lljk Hand Knit - HandKnit ulmont - ulmont Jay-Roden - Jay_Roden genericuser - chilledchess Chess.com Zugzwang - zyxt OrangeKing - Orangeking529 CowonCrack - badnewsbears BIGFOOT PEE RED - thechessgoat Twan - Twan709 colbamf - JeffKlein Vogelfrei - Ambignostic JayMax - JayMax The Super-Id - Khasai Rogue - jrmantei Tiax Rules All - greattobeirate Deltron 3030 - Hoff38 DAIRY KING - Dumb_ox uh zip zoom - bdigia Tally - bemused Lutukor - Lutukor Capuano - Capuano Control Volume - controlvolume McCoy Pauley - McCoyPauley Crosscontaminant - ThomasWinwood itstime4lunch - time4lunch Jonked - Jonked prolecat - prolecat vyshka - snits The Whole Internet - -BEES- Done - SA_Drone He1ixx - He1ixx Aggro - AggroSA busalover - kevezantir Mr Matey - MikhailTalentless gohmak - listencloser Rorac - Kalanco De Nomoloss - DeNomoloss dupersaurus - rosencrantzisnotdead MrMojok - Mr Mojok ulmont - ulmont01 ICC Hand Knit - Hand-Knit OrangeKing - Orangeking Twan - Twan709 Vogler - Mandelsnut apsyrtes - apsyrtes vyshka - snits schme - schmer Athaboros - Athaboros FICS CowonCrack - badnewsbears apsyrtes - apsyrtes zoness - zoness (maybe) Lutukor - Lutukor Capuano - ccapua vyshka - snits Vogler - Lasaronen Chess Time Goose Halo - Fiveagon Hand Knit fucked around with this message at 15:51 on Jun 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 20:52
|
|
|
I just signed up on chess.com as zyxt. I mostly do correspondence.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 00:17
|
|
|
Of course username "zugzwang" would play chess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 05:59
|
|
|
True, though playing chess and playing chess well are not the same thing. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 15:13
|
|
|
I didn't see this thread! So I've been thinking of dishing out the dough for an ICC account, but I've heard that most people are well over 1600, and I hear people usually only place Blitz.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 17:42
|
|
|
I'm OrangeKing on ICC, and OrangeKing529 on Chess.com.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 18:02
|
|
|
I'm badnewsbears on both FICS and Chess.com. I can't afford ICC anymore unfortunately. I prefer longer time controls and correspondence to blitz because I'm a slow thinker and get demolished. lemonslol posted:I didn't see this thread! So I've been thinking of dishing out the dough for an ICC account, but I've heard that most people are well over 1600, and I hear people usually only place Blitz. I had a free subscription to ICC for awhile through the student version of USCF membership. This is more or less true. But people playing almost only Blitz infects every chess server. Even still, if you post a seek for a long game you will eventually find someone. There are usually a few people around at any one time who will do games of 15 minutes to 1 hour length. I've never tried posting classical time (2 hours per 40 moves) but I bet you could find a game. You may not find someone every night but you can have a seek up and just do anything else on the computer that you want while you wait. Also worth mentioning as a chess server is playchess.org, which is the one that ChessBase.com runs (ChessBase is a very popular chess news website and the creators of the ChessBase database program and the chess engine Fritz). I got a 6-month subscription for free when I bought Fritz 13. It seems to be mostly European players however so it can be underpopulated at night in USA time zones. However it's interesting playing players from diverse geographical regions - it shows you how diverse play styles can be.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 20:22
|
|
|
If anyone truly, terribly awful wants a game I'm thechessgoat on chess.com Seriously bad
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 20:58
|
|
|
lemonslol posted:I didn't see this thread! So I've been thinking of dishing out the dough for an ICC account, but I've heard that most people are well over 1600, and I hear people usually only place Blitz. The for-pay nature of ICC means that it is more 'serious' players, but you get a ton of toys to play with. It is definitely possible to get full-length games there, even if you won't be able to play quite as often as you could with blitz. Twan, for instance, plays in a 45 45 league, and there are daily 15 0 tournaments.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 19:05
|
|
|
Man there's a lot of idiots playing 1. e4 2. Qh5 in sub-1000 blitz world I really should stop losing to them
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 19:12
|
|
|
BIGFOOT PEE BED posted:Man there's a lot of idiots playing 1. e4 2. Qh5 in sub-1000 blitz world
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 19:15
|
|
|
Zugzwang posted:1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 Nc6 3. Bc4 g6 4. Qf3 Nf6 and you're golden. If 5. Qb3, ...Nd4 is painful. Thanks, I figured most of that out myself but I'm still horrendously blundersome. I set my shredder to 1400 and it doesn't play stupid cheeser moves like that. It's long past time I started playing chess with humans...
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 19:23
|
|
|
BIGFOOT PEE BED posted:Man there's a lot of idiots playing 1. e4 2. Qh5 in sub-1000 blitz world What is the rationale for getting the Queen out so early, instead of the knights or bishops? 1. P-K4 P-K4 2. Q-KR5 N-QB3 3. B(White)-QB4 P-KN3 4. Q-KB3 N-KB3 means that white has spent 2 moves advancing and retreating his queen while Black develops his knights and pawn to threaten it, correct?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 19:26
|
|
|
Because they're assholes who sit around waiting for people to fall for scholar's mate or a variation thereof, which apparently happens pretty often, mentioning no names. E - and if you don't fall for it sometimes they straight up and quit on you. They must be having so much fun 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 19:28
|
|
|
You can also be like 1. e4 e6 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 19:35
|
|
|
Zugzwang posted:You can also be like 1. e4 e6 Oh no you didn't....
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 20:30
|
|
|
BIGFOOT PEE BED posted:Man there's a lot of idiots playing 1. e4 2. Qh5 in sub-1000 blitz world What do you play as your first move? On 1.e4 c5 2.Qh5 the best move is actually 2...Nf6! leading to 3.Qxc5 Nxe4 where black has the advantage. Zugzwang posted:You can also be like 1. e4 e6 *reaches for billy club*
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 20:53
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:What do you play as your first move? On 1.e4 c5 2.Qh5 the best move is actually 2...Nf6! leading to 3.Qxc5 Nxe4 where black has the advantage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:What do you play as your first move? On 1.e4 c5 2.Qh5 the best move is actually 2...Nf6! leading to 3.Qxc5 Nxe4 where black has the advantage. I've been playing d5 to deliberately provoke these open games until I stop loving them up against players I feel like I should be murdering. I seem to recall reading that advice in one of these threads, possibly from Zugzwang. Does Hand Knit not like the French defense? Edit - Zugzwang posted:1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 Nc6 3. Bc4 g6 4. Qf3 Nf6 and you're golden. If 5. Qb3, ...Nd4 is painful. Take that, chess.com user "bird907"
bigfoot again fucked around with this message at 23:48 on Jun 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 22:51
|
|
|
BIGFOOT PEE BED posted:I've been playing d5 to deliberately provoke these open games until I stop loving them up against players I feel like I should be murdering. I seem to recall reading that advice in one of these threads, possibly from Zugzwang. Yeah the Scandinavian is a good way to say 'gently caress your prep' and do your own thing. Also the French is a bad opening for bad people. Don't play it. Philidor supremacy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 03:32
|
|
|
Handles: Twan709 on both chess.com and ICC. Hit me up with some correspondence/live challenges if you want.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 04:54
|
|
|
Maybe this is a better thread for this... RE: that Radjabov-Carlsen game:Hand Knit posted:The reason he resigned at Rf1 is that it was the end of a forced line, and it became clear that he was going into a trivially lost (at that level) line. After white plays Rc5, black will play Re1+ => Re2+ => Rxg2 and cash in his connected passers. That's exactly the line I was considering as the best continuation. When you say "trivially lost" is this the kind of position where a patzer like me would do well to set up the position, let the computer take white and me try and win? Also, is there something I should look at in particular that you had in mind when you recommended this game as instructive? The thing that stands out for me is the steady and methodical advancement of the pawns by Carlsen as if by some plan decided upon way early in the game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 01:52
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:What is the rationale for getting the Queen out so early, instead of the knights or bishops? The main rationale for these kinds of moves has to do with the fact that Blitz Chess works rather differently than ordinary Chess because of the time control. Early queen moves can be annoying to deal with until you are a solid tournament level player. They can even be annoying for decent-strength players who have limited time to think. Annoying, complicated moves are great in Blitz because they take no time for you to play and they may take 10-20 precious seconds for your opponent to find the 'refutation'. But there are lots of annoying, complicated moves that you can play in Blitz with little fear that your opponent will find a winning refutation, even if it's a poor move, because finding that refutation takes time. Therefore, early queen moves, sending a knight towards his unsafe-ish king, useless checks, dubious tactics, etc. are all much more effective in Blitz than in real games. And then there's the all-time hilarious tactic of just moving your king, rooks, or whatever back and forth to pump up your increment while your opponent struggles to actually, you know, beat you. In Blitz, causing your opponent to lose on time is a strong strategy - perhaps even the dominant strategy, and therefore tactics are a means to this end. I've lost countless Blitz games a few moments away from mating my opponent while up two queens because I had 1s second left and he had 0s. Blitz up to 5 minutes per player pretty much isn't enough time to play a proper game anyway so often you really don't have realistic chances of winning normally - just play well and complicated enough that your opponent loses on time before you. A nice 10-15s increment can solve a lot of this but for some reason Blitz fiends prefer 2 1, 3 0, 5 0, etc. On Chess.com, moving a piece takes me 2 seconds because of the laggy click-move delay. So let's work that out: 2 minutes total on the clock. 1 second increments. It takes me 2 seconds to move a piece. Assuming 40 moves in a game, that means 40 seconds of my two minutes is used just making moves. So I have 1:20 to play the game. Also, for some reason I play opponents whose pieces aren't laggy and can make moves in less than 1s per move to pump up their increment. Their advantage is enormous. To beat someone in Blitz on Chess.com, I truly feel like I have to play +600 rating points stronger than them and still get lucky. I hate Blitz. I think there's a reason why the people who play it end up homeless in the park like Morpheus from The Matrix who programmed himself into Searching for Bobby Fischer. Apsyrtes posted:Maybe this is a better thread for this... RE: that Radjabov-Carlsen game: Taking positions that are "lost" or "won" from master games or your own games and trying to defend / convert them against a super strong computer is excellent practice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 03:02
|
|
|
Apsyrtes posted:Maybe this is a better thread for this... RE: that Radjabov-Carlsen game: The instructive part is in how Carlsen pushed the endgame and eventually broke through in the middle with the d3+ intermezzo. It's not the most instructive game ever, but the quality of the chess at the Tal was a little disappointing. A 'patzer like you' could probably convert the endgame, since the pattern is pretty straightforward. The main theme is d2+=>e3=>Rf1+=>d1=Q. Black will probably not win that way, however, since they will probably start by walking their king around their e4 pawn to settle on Ke3, and only then push d2, Rf1+, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 16:32
|
|
|
So yeah... log into chess.com today and my account is closed, no explanation - found the cheater's list and I'm on it! FAQ says basically no point contesting. Guess I'll finally break down and check out an ICC membership, hopefully I can get a slow game every now and then. I suppose that would be better for my game, that opening explorer was like crack, just made me fall in love with trap-filled gambits I don't really know how to play without it. (I'm "apsyrtes" on ICC too, feel free to add me to your list)
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 02:16
|
|
|
Man, I thought I'd bring this up in this thread because this is just hilarious. I wanted to share with you all how I have this problem of choking which is just out of control. Although I've known the moves since I was young, I only started taking chess seriously around August last year, and have been studying and playing the game ever since. I am 26 years old. I joined a local chess club and play there once a week on Tuesday nights. The time controls are 60 minutes per player per game, which is decent for a long game. Anyway, ever since I started playing in this club I've been playing incredibly well for my low rating and experience. In fact you could say I have built up a sort of fearsome reputation. I haven't played enough to have a leveled out accurate USCF rating, but my current rating is 1126 based on early results at the club. However, I consistently get stronger positions against much, much higher rated players. There's a problem though which infects the chess I play at the club and really all chess I play - I choke. I choke so consistently it's like the sun rising. I choke in ways that many would not dream possible. I am rated 1126 and I am outplaying players rated 1600-2000 through the entire game and arriving at winning positions - only to lose the game. Now, I know what the usual advice is. Oh great, you are getting great positions, that must mean you are almost there! No bitch, no. Well you just have to calm down in those positions and take a breath. Maybe walk outside to clear your head? No bitch, no. Well, you just need to think logically about why you lost and then learn from it and do better next time! NO, BITCH, NO. Basically it's like this. I have the knowledge necessary to win the game. But every time I work hard to build up a winning position, my fear of losing that position increases proportionately. Pretty soon, when the win is a few moves away, I panic so hard that I can't think clearly about anything. A few moves later I lose. This happens every goddamn time, it's literally like the sun rising. Nothing I can do as far as coaching myself or doing any other bullshit prevents this self-fulfilling prophecy from happening every goddamn time. Here's a great example from tonight. I was playing the Tournament Director, who is rated 1834. I'm his match for the whole game and finally outplay him in the early endgame to set up an easily won position. Finally I have a queen versus his two pawns. AND I LOST. I loving LOST UP A QUEEN vs TWO PAWNS! And his pawns weren't even close to queening! Here's what happened - I made a bunch of useless pointless moves with my queen until his king ended up in the corner with a pawn above it - a drawn position. At some point I grabbed his other pawn but it didn't matter. Finally, my time ran out, and since one pawn is mating material, he won. I have a king and a queen and he has a king in a corner with 1 pawn and I lose on time. I can't think of a more epic fail than that. And I literally knew it would happen - I was so afraid that it would happen that it did, and this poo poo keeps happening. Time to run the loving car in the garage. Here's the game: C, Byron (1126) vs M, Richard (1834) 1. d4 c6 2. c4 g6 3. b3 Bg7 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Qc2 d5 6. Nc3 Bf5 7. Qd2 O-O 8. Nh4 Bc8 9. Bb2 dxc4 10. bxc4 Nbd7 11. e3 e5 12. d5 cxd5 13. cxd5 Nb6 14. Nf3 Nbxd5 15. Nxd5 Qxd5 16. Qxd5 Nxd5 17. Bxe5 Bxe5 18. Nxe5 Nb4 19. Kd2 Be6 20. Bc4 Rfd8+ 21. Kc3 Nd5+ 22. Kb2 a6 23. Rad1 Kg7 24. Rd4 Nc7 25. Rhd1 Rxd4 26. Rxd4 Bxc4 27. Nxc4 Ne6 28. Rd7 b5 29. Nd6 Rd8 30. Rxd8 Nxd8 31. Kc3 Nc6 32. f4 Kf8 33. Ne4 Ke7 34. Nc5 a5 35. Nb3 Kd6 36. e4 f6 37. Nd4 Nxd4 38. Kxd4 h6 39. e5+ fxe5+ 40. fxe5+ Kc6 41. e6 Kd6 42. e7 Kxe7 43. Kc5 Ke6 44. Kxb5 Ke5 45. Kxa5 Ke4 46. Kb4 Ke3 47. a4 Kf2 48. a5 Kxg2 49. a6 Kxh2 50. a7 Kh3 51. a8=Q 0-1 Remaining moves not written down as endgame was played quickly, with about 7 minutes left on White's clock. White loses on time. edit: pgn download link http://www.sendspace.com/file/phjwt0 CowOnCrack fucked around with this message at 06:17 on Jun 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 06:08
|
|
|
CowOnCrack posted:There's a problem though which infects the chess I play at the club and really all chess I play - I choke. I choke so consistently it's like the sun rising. I choke in ways that many would not dream possible. I had the same problem for quite a while when I started playing OTB - and I found that getting comfortable with the clock and aiming to use all my time fixed that up for me - I am now more careful when considering moves, rather than feeling pressured. Took a while though. (Now I just lose for other reasons. I've been able to identify two major ones, and they should be easily correctable if I just put the effort into it!)
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 14:45
|
|
|
CowonCrack posted:The big thing for you, and virtually everyone in your position, is endgame technique. And yes, it still matters even in elementary positions like QvPP. In the final position you show, for example, after queening your pawn, the right play is to first get your king into the play immediately. That way your opponent will never have any stalemate bullshit because you'll know how to win stuff like this:  1.Qf3+ Kg1 2.Qe2 h1=Q 3.Kg3 Learn the technique so you don't have to figure it out over the board.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 15:25
|
|
|
Reuben Fine's Basic Chess Endings is a really good book I'd recommend for becoming better at endgame positions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:Learn the technique so you don't have to figure it out over the board. tekz posted:Reuben Fine's Basic Chess Endings is a really good book I'd recommend for becoming better at endgame positions. I've studied these endgames though. I've worked through levels 1000-2000 in Jeremy Silman's Endgame Course. Although I've never studied QvPP specifically, I've studied every QvP situation and am familiar with these endgames. And yes, having endgame technique as second nature would have helped, but I mean come on. This wasn't a knowledge failure as much as it was a psychological and confidence failure. I'd be surprised if this endgame is even in the literature because as a specific scenario it has no special significance - it's just so easy with very basic knowledge of the game. I've played this sort of situation dozens of times online in Blitz with 30 seconds remaining and won. I had the knowledge to win the game and choking is the only real explanation here. If you gave this position to a 1000 rated Blitz player online they would probably beat you every time. It doesn't even require technique. The intuitive method of checking his king until you fork a pawn or until you get in front of his king would work easily. Yes, you need your king to win because he can just hug his pawns, but if that's something I can't figure out over the board then I don't know what to say. Any newbie in Blitz would figure it out without even figuring it out, and with 1/7th the time I had. Just something as simple as: 51. a8=Q Kg4 52. Qg2+ Kf5 53. Qh3+ Kg5 54. Kc4 h5 55. Kd4 h4 56. Ke4 Kh5 57. Kf4 g5+ 58. Kf5 Kh6 59. Qg4 Kh7 60. Qxg5 h3 61. Qh5+ Kg7 62. Qxh3 Kf8 1-0 Wins easily and is something any 1000 rated player would find without any issue at all in a blitz game. The problem isn't so much not having the knowledge or the technique, it's not recalling it when you need it because you are ruled by fear. If it doesn't 'pop' in your head when you need it most, or you can't figure out something simple when you are under pressure, then all the technique in the world won't help you. And yes, I realize that slowly through the experience of failing in every possible particular situation eventually you will stop failing but in my case Chess would be an exercise in practicing psychological states. I would continue to arrive at particular situations that I know how to solve, and continue to lose them over and over from panic until I reach a psychological state in them where I can actually apply what I know. If I arrived at this particular situation again, for example, I would probably not lose it again because I would just be like "Calm down and just remember that this is easy as poo poo" (hopefully). Or what I mean to say is, if I arrive at this situation again under duress, then I might not lose it again. But, I would win this particular situation every time in every other circumstance. There would be Chess (which I'm good at), and Chess Under Duress When About to Win (in which I become a feeble-minded and confused patzer) and I would have to use the former to reach the latter in order to get practice in the latter as much as possible, and pray that I get better at it because without it I will never win. Beat me with a stick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 00:02
|
|
|
Okay, this is going to be the stupidest inquiry ever, but here goes. When I'm playing "well", I'm probably 1000ish in ability, at best. I also play chess in rare bursts, and take huge breaks in between out of disinterest (possibly stemming from general apathy caused by depression). I was thinking of going over Seirawan's beginner's chess series via Play Winning Chess, and seeing how far that could get me, and then playing in the local big tournament, the Central California Open. Fortunately, the lowest division had a huge drop in price (which of course means a huge cut in prizes, but seeing as how I'm usually broke anyways, I'll take a $40-50 entry fee). Unfortunately, they appear to have dissolved the usual bottom division, U1000, and now the bottom division is U1400. I don't care about winning if I do play (well, not counting my terrible habit of being overcompetitive, which I've been trying to stem), but should I even bother playing even if I get the aforementioned studying done and comprehend it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 01:34
|
|
|
Hawaii_Lame-O posted:should I even bother playing even if I get the aforementioned studying done and comprehend it? Also, if you're trying to get better, ask the stronger people you play to go over your games with you afterwards. They might be happy to. Hell, ask your equals to go over your games, too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 03:30
|
|
|
If you're entering a position and feel that panic coming on, just get up and go walk around for a minute or two. Sitting there glaring at the board won't calm your nerves at all. The loving clock is sitting there tick tick ticking away. You will think you've been gone for way too long, because you're nervous and panicking and your time sense goes out the window when that happens, but when you get back you'll find virtually no time has passed and everything looks cool. Sit down like it's your first move of a game where this guy has given you everything-odds. Panic can be physically controlled. And yes, always, ALWAYS go over the games after the rounds. 100 percent of the time. With better players, worse players, equal players, everyone who is willing to look at them with you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 05:37
|
|
|
JDCorley posted:If you're entering a position and feel that panic coming on, just get up and go walk around for a minute or two. Sitting there glaring at the board won't calm your nerves at all. The loving clock is sitting there tick tick ticking away. You will think you've been gone for way too long, because you're nervous and panicking and your time sense goes out the window when that happens, but when you get back you'll find virtually no time has passed and everything looks cool. Sit down like it's your first move of a game where this guy has given you everything-odds. Another guy suggested this advice to me, and it sounds solid. I had 7 minutes left on the clock when I queened my pawn, but panic was telling me I had no time to do anything else but win the game because, well, it might take 10-20 moves, and, well, I might stalemate him on accident, and well... I had thought of this before but I didn't do it because the win seemed so easy, and yet I was deathly frightened of losing. Next time I will just force myself if I have over 3 minutes to take some deep breaths and do something to burn off that nervous energy. quote:Panic can be physically controlled. I hope so, although my panic seems to be of a deeply-seated and medical nature. I haven't been able to successfully control it but I haven't tried what you suggested yet either. I think that if it is controllable then you are right that it is PHYSICALLY controllable. Only physical actions will work to address the issue - there is absolutely no way to think yourself out of it (or I would have found it.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 07:37
|
|
|
Three minutes sounds awfully low? Though I guess it depends how many more moves are left in the game (and how hard they'll be). I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts but I'd have thought this is pretty dangerous below at least 5 minutes or so. Though maybe the panic is still more dangerous. Personally I like to take a few breaks like this mid-game with tons of time left, just get up and go to the bathroom or whatever, but I don't know if that would help your stress buildup or if the panic ramps up suddenly out of nowhere. I'd still recommend it though, if only to get you in the habit of actually relaxing during the breaks. Also you don't want to stare at the chessboard intently for an hour and 56 minutes and then suddenly go walk around with four minutes left, or your opponent will realize you're desperately stressed. You'll probably stress more because you know he knows, and he'll get a boost of confidence and might try to rattle your cage more. That's not the end of the world and again it might be better than the alternative, but it's definitely not ideal. McNerd fucked around with this message at 13:33 on Jun 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 13:30
|
|
|
Your opponent's evaluation of your stress level is not really that important in normal tournament play. Street chess, yes, but that's blitz anyway. Most of the time they won't even know you got up. When I was playing chess competitively (badly - I was mostly there to organize poo poo), I got to meet a ton of really excellent players, they all universally said they sometimes froze up or freaked out at the table. They agreed the table is the absolute worst place to stay and try to get yourself out of that. Pacing yourself in the early game is a great idea too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 19:47
|
|
|
Hey here's a game I just played. Black to move Pretty easy, but it was cool to see in a Blitz game. Slowly I am getting not so bad at chess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2012 22:40
|
|
|
Elementary tactics are so exciting. It's really uncomfortable how I get at the board when, say, I see the opportunity for a smothered mate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2012 08:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 17:13 |
|
|
JeffKlein on Chess.com (I am lazy and used facebook)
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2012 08:55
|
|
