Play online chess!

From	Message
wrecking_ball 09-Apr-14, 17:58	Positional vs tactical study/play I can't seem to find my old lengthy post on this subject,so I will make a brief summary about this for now and get into more detail in time. Tactical chess is about strategy, how to execute our plan to get some benefits, in many case, its about combination, sacrifice, to create mating net or execute a mating combination, or to win some material advantage, etc.. Tactical is about Execution... Positional Chess, is about controling the squares, as many as possible, including the center or all over the board if possible, to bring our soldiers at the right square, regrouping them, make them the right men on the right place, to play actively, exchange our bad piece with our opponent's good one, building our initiative, preparing our plan, creating pressure to our opponent pyschologically...not try to win quickly, but keep the pressure alive, and step by step push our small advantage higher than before, and keep our threat alive. This is a general synopsis.However,Neither is necessarily "better", they are just different imbalances that can exist on the board. You might have an extra pawn, but be totally lost positionally. Or you might have a positional advantage in some way, but be down too much material.So everything is relative. Many times,tactical players are more aggressive while positional players are more quiet and deliberate.However, when I studying the grandmasters, they tend to show aspects of both types of players. For instance, Kasparov uses tactics and combinations, but does not go charging recklessly without minding his piece positions. Tactical play as knowing what to do when there's something to be done and positional play as knowing what to do when there's nothing to be done. Actually they are two sides of the same coin. Tactics flow from good position and good positions rely on tactics. I think one of the hardest decisions in chess is to forgo a tactical blow for a positional consideration. Tactics require deep calculations while position requires deep understanding. But it's important to keep in mind that the great positional players have also been great tacticians and the great tactical players have also been great positional thinkers. If you look at the great positional players they could also attack very well when thats what the position on the board called for. Petrosian and Karpov are two fine examples. I think the great players do both very well and play what the position "demands" of them. However their personal choice/tastes is what gets one labeled as a tactical or positional player. I think to defend well in a bad position is one of the hardest things to do in chess. Who likes to defend? Don't we all want to attack? So, we study to attack and not how to defend and wonder why we don't defend well in bad positions.
wrecking_ball 09-Apr-14, 18:07	(strategists) rely primarily on their judgment and are orderly and determined. They think in broad terms and are intent on getting to the heart of the position. They include players like Euwe, Fine, Flohr, Gligoric, Nimzovich, Panno, Petrosian, Reti, Rubinstein, Smyslov, Steinitz, Taimanov, and Tarrasch. (tacticians) trust their intuition and often create positions with many possible continuations and thrive on uncertainty and enjoy positions where normal rules can be disregarded. They include players like Bronstein, Chigorin, Geller, Korchnoy, Lasker, Larsen, Marshall, Najdorf, Pillsbury, Reshevsky, Spielmann, Szabo, Tahl, and Tartakower. Among about a dozen links or so I have on tactical vs positional play,this is a good one by FIDE master Lilov.View it when you guys have the time: www.tigerlilov.com More later!
wrecking_ball 11-Apr-14, 16:07	Repeat on positional vs tactical play... Copy/pasted link from "TA's tips of the month".This is very similar to my first post above,but reread it again.Its contains pertinent info.There is a whole page of info.And don't forget to check the link directly above! gameknot.com
darknite13 13-Apr-14, 00:47	To truly determine which is "better"... I cannot emphasize enough to low rated players who seem to think they have to choose to be a positional or tactical player, first things first, learn the game! Probably all chess players ask themselves at some point of their chess career: "Am I a positional chess player or a tactician?" Based on the answer to this question they choose openings and the general strategy of their games. However, I am more of the mindset that there are no positional and tactical chess players, there are only good and bad chess players! A lot of my "misguided" students like to play unsound non-e4/d4 openings as white. And when I question them as to why, they tell me things like: "Well I really like the style of <insert famous GM>, and he likes to play <positional/tactical> chess so I try and model my style after it." OK so maybe not everyone formulates their response as eloquently as this but this is what it sums up to. Many low rated players seem to come into my club with this "wealth of knowledge" of certain areas, but never have they proven to me that they have mastered the game. This is evident after I or one of my top boards plays the student, realizing they don't understand basic opening concepts (majority make random moves), and letting their game crumble not far into it. Heck, during this evaluation game I play with all my members, I often question why they make certain moves and sometimes, I don't get a response. That's terrible! If you make a move without thinking about it, that's like a blind person driving a normal car--a disaster waiting to happen. So to correct them when I hear things like I'm a positional player or I'm a tactical player, (things that really make me laugh nowadays), I say: "Before you talk about being a positional or tactical chess player you really need to learn how to play good chess first, and the best way to learn it is to play open positions which start with 1.e4!" After all, most of the GMs started using 1. e4 and 1. d4 openings. But let's also put their vision into perspective: they can see 20-30 moves far into a game. Most low rated players can see maybe 2-3 moves ahead in game theory. So to those who are intermediate level players or higher and have (or should have) a sound understanding (not necessarily complete!) of the phases of the game, opening theory, and should be comfortable with some of the issues that arise in middlegame and endgame, feel free to experiment with your style until you find what suits you. To those who are still beginners, if you have a justifiable reason for picking a certain opening, I can respect that. However, if you're just blindly playing an opening because one of your favorite players plays it, well that's another story.
wrecking_ball 13-Apr-14, 02:04	Yes,many of the lesser rated players have their chess "idol"and many times try to imitate,without studying the basics or understanding them to any great degree.My opinion is also that following an "opening book"whether it be GK's or better ones like I listed in another post,can actually be detrimental to understanding the chess strategy in the opening.Now,why on earth would I say that?Because most of those opening's were already inputted by masters and GM's,so when you use the first 20 moves or more in a database,your not playing your game but someone else's game set up by them and already played out statistically and nicely cataloged! So,its best sometimes to turn that book OFF!Play without looking at any book or database of opening moves!NOW,see how you do!As good?Probably not. One of the ways my NYC club friends and I learned in the 70's and 80's was to play a tabletop computer and turn that opening book OFF!This gives you a random game by the computer without opening best move's which are many times set and based upon the computers choice of best stats and more.Take back your blunders on the computer board and try,try again!Many times the computer will play weaker and a bit blunderous in "out of book mode".And if you catch it and get the upper hand...you are learning!Forget memorizing open book line's anyway,especially for beginners or players even up to 1400 in rating,perhaps a bit higher. If you take note to my other post.... gameknot.com You will notice the same things as Ken and others have stated... 1000-1199: Learn basic opening ideas. It's recommended to play 1.e4 as white and sharp variations as black. Learn basic checkmates (King + Queen vs. King, Queen + Queen vs. King, Rook + Rook vs. King, King + Rook vs. King). Practice them until you are completely confident and can checkmate anyone (even a GM) in these positions. 1200-1399: Study more openings, but do not stick with "rarely played variations". It is a huge mistake that a LOT of chess player make while studying openings, to study rarely played/unusual lines which most likely would never come up in real life tournaments. Studying standard opening lines would yield a lot more results! Spend maximum of 20% of your study time to study openings. Until 1800 level openings aren't very important. Concentrate more on middle game and tactics. 1400-1599: Endgame is the key on this level. Only imagine the advantage you get against your opponent if you know how to play endgame well and your opponent does not. The odds are that your opponent will loose the endgame almost immediately. Study basic endgame schemes: King + Pawn vs. King, King + 2 Pawns vs. King, King + Pawn vs. King + 2 Pawns and so on. Besides the endgame do tactics problems (puzzles). Play as much chess as possible especially in real life over the board tournaments with a long time control (that's where you learn the most). Notice the 1200-1399 range and what it says about not experimenting with the unusual! Yes,guys like me can do those things,but not the 1200+guys! More later! WB
baddeeds 13-Apr-14, 09:43	I absolutely agree with what you said, that until you become a really strong, one should not try to deviate with openings. Come to think about that, this is why one of the first defenses, as noted in a different thread, that my OTB coach made me learn was the Sicilian Defense. One time, I tried to deviate with the Carro Kann, but unfortunately, as elyhim it's now a very rare opening by GM's. In it, my coach recommended that I play openings that are studied by masters and grandmasters.
baddeeds 14-Apr-14, 13:59	But, @wrecking_ball: I do have one question since this is also one of my weaknesses. How can you tell which bishop or N is strong or weak? I remember something like this happening with caveman1960 in a Caro Kann challenge and made the mistake of taking his weak N. And, the reason I did this was because I thought it was opposite, that I actually took his strong piece.
wrecking_ball 14-Apr-14, 14:35	A number of ways Joe.Without getting into extreme detail right now with diagrams and more(maybe this weekend,when I have more time)....its boils down to 1.the position at the time and 2.If a game is open or closed and 3.Who has more dark/light square control combined with that math formula I had given in another thread.In addition a weak Bishop would be one that is "hemmed in" and a strong Bishop would be one that has much more open freedom of the board.Same with a Knight...if its on the end file its weaker,but if its guarding a central structure(like central pawns) from areas like c3 or f3,its stronger. But some summary would be: Range,for example: When it comes to range, it’s clear that the bishop holds a clear edge. The bishop may move as far as it wants as long as it isn’t impeded; meanwhile, the knight is stuck in its own little pattern, meaning it takes several moves to get from one side of the board to the other. This is a large part of the reason why knights must normally be placed in the center of the board to be effective, while bishops can thrive on any open diagonal. Also,access to squares Bishops, however, have one major weakness: each bishop can only access half of the board, making it useless for attacking and defending squares of the other color. The knight, on the other hand, must move from squares of one color to the other on each move, and can ultimately reach any of the 64 squares on the board. This is a major advantage for the knight in its eternal battle with the bishop. Advantageous Positions for Each Piece Assuming you are in a situation where you have a bishop against a knight (or vice versa), that imbalance could prove to be the decisive factor in the game. It’s your job to create a position that best serves your piece or exposes the weaknesses of your opponent’s piece. If you have the extra bishop, you’ll want an open game that features plenty of free diagonals for your bishop to travel around on. This will maximize the potential for your bishop to control large portions of the board, potentially even cutting the opponent’s knight off from portions of the board. You may also strive for an endgame where there are pawns on both sides of the board, as the bishop can attack or defend both flanks at once. As you can probably guess, the knight prefers positions that are exactly the opposite of the ones described above! A knight will thrive in closed positions, in which its ability to jump around blockades and locked pawn structures will trump the bishop’s long range – which is useless if there are too many pawns in the way to allow the bishop to travel freely. Similarly, endgames with pawns clustered on one side of the board favor the knight, as the knight’s ability to cover squares of both colors is much more valuable than the range of the bishop in these situations. Hopefully, these examples will allow you to understand the dynamically balanced powers of the knight and bishop. The next time you’re wondering whether a knight or bishop is more valuable (or whether you should trade one for the other), remember that the answer is “it depends” – and that you should always strive to create a position in which the powers of your piece are more important!
shamash 05-May-14, 03:30	this deserves to be a current discussion in our forum, not just 3 weeks back <=== just for that last posting alone.

GameKnot: play chess online, chess clubs, Internet chess league, monthly chess tournaments, chess teams, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.