Chris,
As regards your fifth point, would this type of analysis include
making moves with the best prophallactic idea in mind--simultaneously
measuring both the defensive andattacking opportunities? e.g. Moving
the queen to bolster a central pawn mass while she also forms the
battery with a bishop targeting the h7 square?
David
On 1/22/20, Chris Ross <c.ross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
All,
Some additional thoughts:
1. When playing in a timed-game, it is often not essential to find the "best
move". I have a chess friend, who's had an ECF grade of 200+ (ELO 2200) for
over 35 years. One of his main reasons for maintaining this grade is that in
his league chess performances, he often finds the second or third best move
in the position. By doing that though, he consumes very little time on the
clock. Thus, time pressure amounts on his opponent and when that time
pressure increases, the opponent does not have the time to find the "best
response". The down-side to this, of course, that the "pure quality" of the
chess during the game is not fully realised. He offsets that aspect by
correctly stating that he wins a lot of games with that practical approach,
but when reviewing and analysing the game afterwards, that is where the true
learning occurs. Which, for me, is quite an admiral and remarkable attitude.
A practical system to win for himself, for the team, but then takes the
opportunity to review and educate himself afterwards. That knowledge and
learning can then be put into place for future games and at a much quicker
time. The effect, as it were, is a snowball consequence.
2. What are "good moves". All moves can be "good" as long as they strive for
a purpose. As Capablanca once told us, any plan is good, even if it is a bad
one. A plan is a plan. When trying to decide what move to make, you have to
take into account a few basics.
A. Check the immediate tactics. Is there something loose, a combination
possible, a trap to be set. Check the immediate consequences to
anyone/two-three move combo.
B. Once you are in no immediate danger of dropping something or winning
material, consider your pieces, are they in their ultimate positions, can
they manoeuvre to a more desired square, exerting more control over an
outpost or specific duty.
C. Then consider your opponent's pieces, are they also doing exactly what
you have considered in regards to your own pieces. Take that further and
reflect to whether you can disrupt your opponents endeavours, objectives
etc. Naturally, not to be detrimental to your own aspirations. Do not
deflect your own plans to disrupt your opponents, as that will steer your
pieces away and disco ordinate yourself, leaving you scrambling to salvage a
position.
3. When calculating a position, try not to get into the habit of
re-analysing a combination or "line" as we call it. Consider a line and if
you decide that it is no good and not to be played, reject it. Do not try to
second -guess yourself and ask "was I positive about that line, let me
re-check it". Save time, check it through thoroughly and if not feasible,
forget about it. Move onto other candidate moves and choose one of those.
That's good clock management. Naturally, in non-timed games, you have the
opportunity to re-visit lines, but I would only do so once you have gone
through all possibilities and decided that if nothing else comes up, you're
going to choose this particular move or line.
4. Never go back and ask yourself, could I have played that, that was a
better move etc. That is time, energy and thought-process waste. Do that in
your post-game analysis. What has gone before cannot be undone. So, forget
about it, leave it for the future. Deal with what you have present and what
you can do for the future. That is essential in timed-games.
5. Reflecting back onto point 2C above, do not waste too much time in
second-guessing your opponent. Although you should be aware of what he is
attempting, do not limit your own play to truly hinder him, as that is a
deflection. Calculate the immediate ramification to your opponents move,
check the points that Tyson rightfully described and then move on with your
own plans.
6. Do not regard your strength, ability or play as "weak" or "weaknesses".
That already has a negative connotation to your thought-process. Regard them
as areas for improvement. That puts a more positive tint on the process.
Consider a developmental process and as long as you can expose yourself to
processes, platforms where shared thoughts and contributions can be
accessed, then, use that opportunity for self-education.
7. Chess improvement is a very incremental process. It will not happen
overnight, over a few months nor over a couple of years. It will take
decades. A few years ago, here in the UK, a beginner in our BCA openly and
publicly stated that within 2 years, he was going to become stronger than
myself and will be beating me on a regular basis. Needless to say that
everybody politely tolerated this and 2 years later, he no longer plays
chess and only obtained a grade of ECF 30.
The point of the story is that you need to have the correct mind-set. In my
professional career, when I present to qualifying lecturers, small steps are
required to build the picture. 100 actions to make a 1% betterment. Slow,
very slow, but surely, the greater reward will be achieved. This will often
mean that some steps will need to be taken backward, but that inevitable
march forward, however slow, gradual, is ever-present. This can be
frustrating, agonisingly tedious and sometimes stressful, but the rewards
will be reaped ultimately. As in life, take the approach that you are a
student for life. You will never reach a peak to where you are the
one-and-only all-knowing person. Learning occurs at every level. Even the
Grandmasters of this world are continually learning. I know, I have several
GM's, who even learn from me. In my annotated games, I have many a strong
player come back to me and say "Ah yeah, I never thought of that, I need to
have a ponder about that2". Likewise, they also write back to me and say
"did you consider that, this or even this?" That gives me enlightenment.
8. Some thoughts on analysis. Always look at your games afterwards. Do it
with a pragmatic attitude. Do not consider the opponents, the result or any
of the game data itself. Take the game at face-value and consider carefully
to what occurred, why and how. Using a chess engine to verify for tactical
mistakes, possible lines. Look at those lines and do not move on in the game
until you fully understand to why the machine has chosen a line, pointed out
a tactic. If you cannot understand why a line has been suggested, ask
somebody else if they can explain it. Sometimes machines give bizarre lines,
but fundamentally, the machine is trying to strive for a particular point.
That reason may be hidden or even beyond the engine's horizon, but the basic
principal should be apparent to somebody, if the method in which the engine
is going is somewhat convoluted.
9. Don't be shy about sharing. Whether you do this privately with others,
publicly. Tyson and I are content to publish openly, as we share amongst
many and have a considerable amount of experience behind us. Likewise with
Paul. Nobody should come on an ridicule anybody for publishing a game or
asking for comments/analysis. Likewise, do not take analysis or comments
personally if an "improvement" to your play is suggested. That is not a
personal strike at you as an individual. It is a direct suggestion on the
line of play. Chess, in the sense of moves, is a solely objective pursuit.
10. Principals of chess are the foundation. They should always be kept in
mind but not adhered to religiously. Nothing in chess should be stringently
stuck here. Flexibility, versatility and adaptability are critical to
becoming an improved chess player. Each position is individual in its
composition. That, ultimately, is why our game is so wonderful. Rarely are
two games alike and each encounter provides a wealth of opportunities.
Relish on that aspect, thrive and, at the end of the day, enjoy!
Cheers,
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: usbca_chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:usbca_chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of mordue andrew
(Redacted sender "tyson.mordue" for DMARC)
Sent: 20 January 2020 15:36
To: usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [usbca_chess] Re: Chess Weaknesses
Hello Jim and David,
Thanks for the replies.
Jim: Certainly when playing on the clock it is not acceptable to use two
boards.
In e-mail games (and for e-mail read correspondence also) I would definitely
recommend keeping a board set up somewhere simply for reference. With
today's technology positions can be kept on chess engines quite easily. What
is forbidden is to use an engine to analyse a game while it is in progress,
whether that game is face-to-face or by e-mail, correspondence or Skype.
I wasn't sure if you were playing on the clock which is why I wrote that you
needed a practical approach. On the other hand my point about maybe playing
too quickly may be more relevant. Personally I'm no fan of blitz play on the
internet. I would recommend a time limit of at least an hour each if playing
over the net and always keep score for as long as possible. I doubt if
anyone learns anything from playing games with time limits of ten minutes or
less, but as I said - it's a personal opinion.
David: There are many principles to be observed in a game of chess. Alan
Dicey occasionally posts a list of about 50 or more chess adages. Most of
them are fine, a few are contradictory, and a couple are not really of any
practical value.
What makes a game difficult is that principles criss-cross. In certain
positions one principle may carry more weight than another one. A simple
pair to consider:
1) Rooks belong on open files.
2) Rooks belong behind passed Pawns regardless of which colour they are.
So, as White, do you play your f1 Rook to e1 to control the file all the way
to e8, or place in on a1 behind the unopposed White Pawn on a3 prior to its
advance up the board? As usual the answer is "It all depends on the position
(cirmcumstances)".
Even strong players may misjudge a position by either not taking certain
factors into account or by simply underestimating them. I have one pupil who
keeps quoting various chess principles at me, but then falls victim to
leaving material loose to tactical opportunities. It's a balancing act and
it takes experience to know what is the right decision at the right time.
The most important thing is to present your games afterwards to your peers
(this group is just one such platform), get constructive criticism, then act
upon it when next needed. To be fair sometimes it could be years before the
opportunity to demonstrate a particular bit of what you've learned comes up
- the example I quoted last time was some thirty-odd games and five months
later. On the other hand "You need to castle earlier" could be implemented
in your next game.
All food for thought.
Regards,
Tyson
On 20 January 2020 at 02:26 Jim Homme <jhomme1028@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
Thank you for this guidence. I forgot to add that I was talking about when
playing on the clock. I seem to do better in email games. Also, I did not
think to use two boards, because I did not think that was OK to do in
email games.
On Jan 19, 2020, at 6:56 PM, mordue andrew (Redacted sender "tyson.mordue"
for DMARC) <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jim, Michael et al,
Chess weaknesses come in many forms. A few can be fixed with a bit of
careful move-by-move methodology set out below. Before we continue I'd
just like to add that idiosyncrasies of style can mean that one player
chooses one particular move, while another chooses a different one and it
can easily be the case that neither move is clearly right or clearly
wrong, not better or worse. It really is simply a question of style.
I'd like to start with the third item on Jim's list. "I do not look at
every possible good move." How can you know if a move is good or not
unless you analyse it? To analyse it then it must be on a list of
candidate moves, a list which sometimes can consist of just one move.
Candidate moves are ones chosen by players whereby the moves comform to
their style and abilities. There may be either strategical or tactical
factors to take into considertaion or both. However, I would put the
notion of always looking for the best move to one side. Sometimes that
could take world-class players hours to establish. What you are usually
trying to do is to play a sound move that has a clear idea behind it
within a set period of time. In other words you have to be practical.
Now the second item; " I make moves, then right after that, think of
better ones." This is usually a sign of moving too quickly. Given that
most games between USBCA players are probably by e-mail and that they are
probably ON AVERAGE at the rate of a move a day, then there is no need to
rush a move. Take your time and analyse on two boards. One has the current
position from the game, and the other is the one you actually move pieces
on. However, before you even start moving pieces you should have the
above-mentioned list of candidate moves as a starting point. Some of these
moves may be transposable. It is possible that fresh candidates may come
to light as you analyse.
Finally the first one: "I think too much about what I want to do and too
little about what my opponent is trying to do." This is a common fault,
even with experienced players. There are methods for dealing with this.
Basically after a given move by the opponent ask yourself:
What new squares does he control with the piece he has just moved?
What new squares does he control with pieces that he may have uncovered.
e.g. Queens, Rooks and Bishops?
Does he threaten any captures or checks?
Is the piece that he just moved defended?
If it's a Pawn move what squares has he just relinquished control of? What
new ones does he control?
Answer these questions first and you will probably find that it will point
you towards moves you should be playing, and equally possibly hinting an
moves that you don't want to play! Of course this may be the point at
which you start compiling your list of candidate moves.
Bear in mind that candidate moves may be available for more than one turn.
However, new candidates emerge every move so be relatively flexible. The
fixed idea is one of the worst things in chess.
Just a quick word about mistakes as opposed to good moves. Are your
mistakes all the same sort? Tactical oversights? Tendency to put pieces or
Pawn en prise? Failing to castle quickly enough? Overlooking en passant
captures? If you identify such a group then try to put in a mental
reminder each move to specifically check that you aren't making the same
sort of mistake again before the move is executed. The first time I ever
did this I changed my choice of move and mated my opponent some ten moves
later!
I hope this helps to some extent, not just Jim but anyone on the site who
wishes to improve their play. Any questions then please ask.
Regards,
Tyson
On 19 January 2020 at 22:11 Michael Rodgerson <monex249@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Jim H, I sometimes have the same problem, you just have to analyze
the board and make the best move available to you, regardless of the
consequences. I have played games when I made a move and I thought
my opponent would do something, and he makes a move that's
completely different. You just have to play to the best of your
abilities, you learn something from every game weather that's: not
to move a piece somewhere, to move a piece somewhere, to move a
piece to a particular place, when to move your queen or other major
pieces, you're really only gonna learn by playing and seeing what
comes of it. I would love to play a game with you sometime.
Michael Rodgerson
