|
« TAP TO LOG IN
|
Play online chess!
How to get better at chess: guide for all levels....
« Back to club forum| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
 How to get better at chess: guide for all levels....Below 299: Learn basic rules of chess, how pieces move, and special rules (en passant, castle etc). 300-1000: Learn basic chess ideas such as checkmate, simple attacks, etc. 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). 1600-1799: If you got on this level it means you are already strong, very solid chess player which knows a lot about all stages of the game of chess. Keep working on your middle game, strategy and tactics. 1800-1999: Now it is a good time to systemize your opening repertoire. Ideally, you should know very well 2-3 openings for white and 2 for Black. The key to advancing to the expert level here is to analyze your own games. After the game, sit down with a chessboard, paper and pen and go over the game move by move writing down thoughts on your own and your opponent's moves. Only then you may check your game with an engine (Rybka, Fritz, etc). The number #1 mistake chess players make, they either do not analyze their games at all or analyze them by using chess program right away. This is a big mistake which slows down chess progress.The main idea of analysis is not to look at what computer thinks was a good move, but to look for that move yourself! Would it make sense to solve chess tactics puzzles by plugging them into a chess engine? Probably not.Also it is great idea to go over GM games and think them over. The best way to go over these high level games is to first go over all the moves without author's comments and only second time read the comments and annotations. This works great with the openings too. Remember that when you read your opening book tomorrow. 2000-2199: You are now an Expert. Keep working on chess and I'm sure you'll be able to make at least a Master.Concentrate on some more obscure subvariant lines and openings that move out of book a bit quicker like the Trompowski Attack.With your pure strength and knowledge at this juncture,the element of surprise is key in winning more.You will start to obtain more draws at your level if playing opponents around 2200-2300 which is actually a good thing because it proves you are playing close to perfect chess moves as opposed to when you were 2000 rated. ====================================================================== Well,above,those are general guidelines actually,not set in stone.And the word "beginner" may be a bit different in the way you define "beginner"as opposed to someone else.The USCF considers a player with a rating of 1000 a "bright beginner",meaning he knows a few things,but still barely enough to even consider looking into book like openings with the exception of just kind of touching on them a small,tiny bit as it actually does say above...."basic opening ideas"."Ideas",however,do not necessarily mean memorizing a Ruy Lopez 20 moves deep.Thats where many chess theorists state that anyone in the so called "beginner"rating areas should not even look at openings until they have become familiar with much more in the theory dept,including,I should say,touching on the point value of pieces and how to develop your side of the board better in 10 moves. Now,as you can see from my other club link below,a beginner can also be someone in the 100 to the 999 level( class j through f),so they would still be a beginner,but not a "bright"beginner.So in cases like that,the word is passed around that they are also a "beginner" like the 1000 rated player,but as you can well see,they should certainly not touch on openings at all(J through f).Some of those "beginners"barely know how to move the pieces,let alone understand things like...En passant! ====================================================================== Just a general thought on those who want to improve? After getting some feedback a bit from players and perhaps a member from this club on wanting to improve their chess game strength....I come to the same conclusion I did decades ago: In order to improve your game play you MUST take a serious effort to improve,not just "keep wishing".This MUST involve more of your personal time towards the game.If you do not have the time or true desire,then,no,you will not improve.Thats simply the facts. Time to study games,diagrams,theory,tactical puzzles,reading books,buying new books and DVD self help chess training tools,taking a look at GM games,your past game losses and why you really lost,forum and club forum research and input,burning the midnight oil,some blitz games once in a while and even listening to TA and others occasionally! If you have no desire,time,effort or willpower or a bit of $$ to invest...no problem.But then,you can't expect to improve your game play and rating by hoping that one day you will wake up and go from 1500 to 1900 overnight because you suddenly "seen the light"!Its not going to happen unless your a chess prodigy that has suddenly risen from the ashes!And what is the odds for that to happen?Play the lottery...your chances are better to win at that! Don't really care about improving?Thats ok too,but I feel most chess players really want to improve!Why not try a bit harder?Need some book advice for your level of play?Ask me,Shamash or Jkarp.One of us should have the answer for you.Or search some of my club links.In there is some book advice.Books too boring for you?Well,I can't help you there except to say that alot of the newest DVD self help sets out there(like you can purchase through the USCF with the link on GK or my profile)give a great illustrated way to improve...perhaps less boring than books.There is also tons of youtube video's you can research on just about any chess subject.Just type in a specific subject on chess and most probably a list of video's will pop up regarding an opening or some theory on a game.I am not a mentor or chess instructor as I mentioned before,but I can atleast try and shine a flashlight for you down a foggy dark road to help your driving out a bit before you crash into that black brick wall! Let me add that,even though it may cost you some $$,investing in a tabletop chess computer(a good one,not some used old junky crap)will or should improve your game quite alot.Playing in an OTB scenario with a computer is way different than playing against a two dimensional chess program like Fritz or Shredder.The mind tends to subconsciously grasp geometric chess positions better in a 3D board setup as opposed to staring for long periods of time on a lighted computer screen.The newer generation may disagree with this,but I have personally conducted research on this subject and have found results that concur with my thoughts here.Way too many players today haven't even played on a real chessboard(or rarely)and have no idea of the positive mental value that can come about from real chess board usage.Giving the mind several "options"to view a position,like quickly walking around a real chess board on all sides or looking "down"upon real pieces,can create a better mental "snapshot"of the position. Not sure which tabletop computer to buy?Well,alot depends upon how much $$ your willing to spend...but ask me!I'm an expert on them!Better ones are usually $200-300 dollars US or maybe half that price if you find a good used one on Ebay.But some are better than others at the same price.So be careful in the purchase!No money to invest?Thats ok,but its may be something to consider in the future if/when you do have some money to invest in a nice tabletop system! Well,above,those are general guidelines actually,not set in stone.And the word "beginner" may be a bit different in the way you define "beginner"as opposed to someone else.The USCF considers a player with a rating of 1000 a "bright beginner",meaning he knows a few things,but still barely enough to even consider looking into book like openings with the exception of just kind of touching on them a small,tiny bit as it actually does say above...."basic opening ideas"."Ideas",however,do not necessarily mean memorizing a Ruy Lopez 20 moves deep.Thats where many chess theorists state that anyone in the so called "beginner"rating areas should not even look at openings until they have become familiar with much more in the theory dept,including,I should say,touching on the point value of pieces and how to develop your side of the board better in 10 moves. Now,as you can see from my other club link below,a beginner can also be someone in the 100 to the 999 level( class j through f),so they would still be a beginner,but not a "bright"beginner.So in cases like that,the word is passed around that they are also a "beginner" like the 1000 rated player,but as you can well see,they should certainly not touch on openings at all(J through f).Some of those "beginners"barely know how to move the pieces,let alone understand things like...En passant! wrecking_ball 30-Mar-14, 21:48 [ report abuse ] Just a general thought on those who want to improve? After getting some feedback a bit from players and perhaps a member from this club on wanting to improve their chess game strength....I come to the same conclusion I did decades ago: In order to improve your game play you MUST take a serious effort to improve,not just "keep wishing".This MUST involve more of your personal time towards the game.If you do not have the time or true desire,then,no,you will not improve.Thats simply the facts. Time to study games,diagrams,theory,tactical puzzles,reading books,buying new books and DVD self help chess training tools,taking a look at GM games,your past game losses and why you really lost,forum and club forum research and input,burning the midnight oil,some blitz games once in a while and even listening to TA and others occasionally! If you have no desire,time,effort or willpower or a bit of $$ to invest...no problem.But then,you can't expect to improve your game play and rating by hoping that one day you will wake up and go from 1500 to 1900 overnight because you suddenly "seen the light"!Its not going to happen unless your a chess prodigy that has suddenly risen from the ashes!And what is the odds for that to happen?Play the lottery...your chances are better to win at that! Don't really care about improving?Thats ok too,but I feel most chess players really want to improve!Why not try a bit harder?Need some book advice for your level of play?Ask me,Shamash or Jkarp.One of us should have the answer for you.Or search some of my club links.In there is some book advice.Books too boring for you?Well,I can't help you there except to say that alot of the newest DVD self help sets out there(like you can purchase through the USCF with the link on GK or my profile)give a great illustrated way to improve...perhaps less boring than books.There is also tons of youtube video's you can research on just about any chess subject.Just type in a specific subject on chess and most probably a list of video's will pop up regarding an opening or some theory on a game.I am not a mentor or chess instructor as I mentioned before,but I can atleast try and shine a flashlight for you down a foggy dark road to help your driving out a bit before you crash into that black brick wall! Let me add that,even though it may cost you some $$,investing in a tabletop chess computer(a good one,not some used old junky crap)will or should improve your game quite alot.Playing in an OTB scenario with a computer is way different than playing against a two dimensional chess program like Fritz or Shredder.The mind tends to subconsciously grasp geometric chess positions better in a 3D board setup as opposed to staring for long periods of time on a lighted computer screen.The newer generation may disagree with this,but I have personally conducted research on this subject and have found results that concur with my thoughts here.Way too many players today haven't even played on a real chessboard(or rarely)and have no idea of the positive mental value that can come about from real chess board usage.Giving the mind several "options"to view a position,like quickly walking around a real chess board on all sides or looking "down"upon real pieces,can create a better mental "snapshot"of the position. Not sure which tabletop computer to buy?Well,alot depends upon how much $$ your willing to spend...but ask me!I'm an expert on them!Better ones are usually $200-300 dollars US or maybe half that price if you find a good used one on Ebay.But some are better than others at the same price.So be careful in the purchase!No money to invest?Thats ok,but its may be something to consider in the future if/when you do have some money to invest in a nice tabletop system! wrecking_ball 30-Mar-14, 21:54 [ report abuse ] hogfysshe 11-Sep-13, 19:31 overlooked basics I think it's Dan Heisman who emphasizes the importance of being aware of what is safe and unsafe to play in any position, aka counting. He points out that books do not bother with this, taking for granted that players will OF COURSE not move a piece to a square that is attacked more than it is protected. Taking time for very basic assessment of why a given move is safe or unsafe I think is an important habit to develop, especially for those in the 2nd through 4th groups above. This is on the level of basic important foundational skill. I've observed a few players saying they want to play better but who don't exercise basic care when moving. Well, maybe they are happy with the occasional win or with just playing and that's fine. But I bet some just don't appreciate the important basic of being SURE to not move to an unsafe square. In other words, this connects to the related basic foundational skill of KNOWING that you can’t afford to give up material without adequate compensation. Books and other sources do of course talk about the importance of material. BUT, the player still has to grasp the importance and then apply the principle. They have to take the words and ideas from the book or other source and make them have meaning in their games. This “conversion” of ideas into action is a place I feel some get hung up. tactical_abyss 12-Sep-13, 15:24 As Todd said above: "They have to take the words and ideas from the book or other source and make them have meaning in their games. This “conversion” of ideas into action is a place I feel some get hung up."Unquote. Yes,its what you make of a book and how deeply you can read into any book that makes the difference.Some players buy books,but never even really read much of them,put them down and forget about the book.I call books a "trigger mechanism".Sometimes they can spawn new ideas,give you a different approach to looking at the board...in other words.... a supplemental form of "sensory perception".The key is not books,but a combination of "sensory perceptions" like illustrated DVD sets,OTB play,chess computers like I mentioned above,a chess club and/or a friend or friends that you can play against and ask questions(someone a bit stronger than you) and of course if your lucky a good chess trainer.But in reality its whats inside you that counts and how serious you take the game.Some players cannot or will not be able to reach beyond certain levels of play no matter how serious they want to approach the game.In simple terms or layman terms by their own admittance some players say...."they suck at chess".Yes,chess is not for everyone and a pile of books 10 miles high may actually discourage a player or not help a bit.But books will always be there to those who want to interpret the best they can...and some will do this better than others,obviously!So book recommendations will always go on by me or others in the hope that it "may" help you guys out! In the later stages of your strength(if that ever happens!) some of the most "boring"books to others will perhaps become your chess bible,like an old MCO-15 reference book!I,myself,check back to books like this and others to quickly reference a variation in an opening,quicker than I can turn my computer on,waiting for it to warm up! As I suggested before,this book geared for beginners contains some decent logical breakdowns and basic principles in chess.It may help,but then who knows?: A new book just came out that you might be interested in that might be the best for you yet. "Lets play Chess"2nd edition,revised and updated,by Bruce Pandolfini,136 pages around 18.00 dollars.I would assume this book is better than his other. The descrition of the book: "America's chess teacher offers his best lessons,shaped and refined by the questions of thousands of beginners,in an easy to understand format.Breaks down the fundamentals into short,logical,numbered statements-in a graded sequence.Lots of diagrams make it possible to read this book without a set.You'll find the rules,the logic,some of the culture and history,and the basic principles of good chess play!"unquote. tactical_abyss 16-Sep-13, 17:20 17-Sep-13, 06:02 Actually,the Scandinavian Defense(also called the Center Counter Defense)is one of the easiest openings to learn and is played on quite a frequent and on a regular basis,especially with players from 1000-1400 in rating.Yes,a GM may use it on rare occasions,but not often,due to some tempo loss and permitting white to develop better/faster than other openings,thus it is avoided on many of the higher levels of play.Not that black is going to have a bad game,but white usually does indeed have atleast a slight edge with best play,especially on the higher rating levels. Since it is not considered an irregular opening(like the Basman),the Center Counter Defense is completely different than the rarely played Basman.In other words...the surprise "value"of a Basman carries much more weight than a Scandinavian since the Scan.has already been played quite often by many or most players,but the basman with its strange piece positions and pawn structures can confuse many players,even more than a Scan....even though the Scandinavian is a stronger opening statistically. tactical_abyss 28-Sep-13, 08:51 [ report abuse ] Yes,well,maybe....but it depends.... Let me add to my above post something about the Scandinavian Defense(Center Counter Defense): There is a problem in my opinion with this kind of defense that goes much deeper than meets the eye.Call it a negative psychological influence,especially with those just learning openings,say,for example,in the 1200-1399 levels as the chart above shows.Many of you guys have heard time and time again to NOT move your Queen out too early in the game for it can/will get attacked and lead to all kinds of problems.Well,even though the Scandinavian is relatively sound within itself,many chess players in their early development learning stage have had a bit of success with this opening and then falsely conclude that moving the Queen out early in "OTHER" types of openings must be ok as well.I have seen this at the club level on many occasions!And then those same players lose badly in other openings moving their Q out early. So,in reality,the Center Counter Defense,in my humble opinion,should actually be AVOIDED,atleast on the lower rating levels for quite a while(but not forever),for it can represent a bad example in early Q moves(in this case black)and give kind of a false impression that moving the Q out early is ok with many other openings as well.And of course,this is not so.But many early learners do not know this.And that is why you see many 1200-1300+ players moving their Q out way too early,when they get a false sense of security with an opening defense such as the Scandinavian. Just my opinion on this defense relative to the early learning stages with many players. TA hogfysshe 14-Oct-13, 13:51 experimentation prompted by TA's knight capture in his recent post in the queen sac thread... especially for the 2nd and 3rd groups... prove things to yourself by playing through the scenarios you are considering rather than leave an unnecessary amount of mystery in the game. and play through scenarios you AREN'T considering. for example, say you have a number of pieces on your opponent's side of the board and one or two more pointed in that direction. experiment. try things out. you might discover an opportunity you hadn't considered initially. tactical_abyss 03-Nov-13, 07:35 past info from TA: Not written in stone... I've copied and pasted this(in part) from another club thread.... I've never considered myself a chess trainer or mentor due to the fact that I do not "follow the rules"or general layout on the recipe of how a student should learn.Whether,for example,trying different openings at a 1200 level or study some pawn structure weakness's...this may spell a no-no to some at this level,but it may be a plus to others!Yes,I may spell it out in my guides as listed in this thread(the first post),but I have always believed that chess players of beginner and intermediate levels have different learning curves.Some trainers or mentors insist that you must learn chess endings first.Really?I did not when I was learning and I developed a strong understanding of the game without studying ending first. So,perhaps I can be labelled as some kind of mentor,but good to some,bad to others?That's for you to decide.No like?Not your cup of Earl Grey?Then don't read my posts,it may be dangerous to your chess health!I'm only a 2500+player,but maybe a bad teacher?Or maybe one of the best because I use "unconventional wisdom"?Hmmmm. I learned "other"things like controlling the center of the board,fast development,Bishops vs Knights,point value flux's and a few good openings(and irregular openings) at my initial 1200-1400 level back in the early 1960's.What I found out is that my knowledge of "endings" was not as important.Now why would I say this?Because,my success rate at the endgame became relatively easy when I was "up" a Knight and a pawn or two from midgame(4 points) and thus,the endgame came as easy as eating a nice fresh piece of chocolate cake!I did not need to study complex endgames first,as other "trainers"insist on doing!Am I suggesting that you do not learn endings first?No,i'm not saying this at all.Just that it is not "written in stone" that you should follow a trainers recipe and think that is the way it must be or else the whip! By analogy,I remembered in High School,jumping ahead in many of the books I was reading or I would buy "cliff notes" which would kind of give you a rapid guideline,skeleton overview or some of the answers first.This actually helped me put the puzzle together more rapidly in a psychological way and I understood what I was "approaching" as I read closer and closer to the end of the book.See the analogy to chess learning,then? So,learn the endings first if you want,but if not,that is ok too! wrecking_ball 26-May-14, 16:19 [ report abuse ] Another tip from WB... I may have not mentioned this before,and you may not have considered this,but I thought i'd give a tip on how to improve your game play with a little technique I used over the years.Its called "coming back from behind". As you improve and in particular when playing someone with your rating or less,I want you to INTENTIONALLY not take that "supposed to take" pawn that SHOULD be taken since your opponent took your pawn.I want you to be a pawn down on purpose!The exception would be if by not taking that pawn in return,it would cause a very visible STRONG disadvantage or high degree of material loss elsewhere on the board. But if the above case only gives you a pawn down value,its a good way to try and play stronger and see if you can "come back"and win anyway!Its kind of like me sacrificing a major piece and coming back....but you only do it with a pawn!If you still win,it may be a strong indicator that you are improving.As you improve,you may one day want to sacrifice two pawns or a Knight and try the comeback method.This is a good method to train your mind and find ways to really concentrate and come back with all the tactics you can muster to win. I remembered years ago losing a Rook from my friend who was about my rating strength and I took my time really concentrating hard in that game,finally to find a way to ex-ray his Rook and regain the point loss right back.I ended up winning the game.But if you do it more "on purpose"...it will be a better self training exercise to train your mind for a comeback of equality. I suggest a few ways to do this.One would be to play an OTB game with a friend at home or elsewhere and tell him what you are going to do.Or play against a software program or tabletop system and do the pawn Non return advancement.You could also do my technique using a non rated game on GK,to take the worry out of losing any rating points. What is the difference between a pure pawn sac and a non return advancement? The difference is that you ALLOW your opponent to take one of your pawns(you are not taking his pawn) and then instead of a diagonal capture of his pawn in return with one of yours,you simply take that pawn of yours and move one or two squares forward.See what I mean?So if he moves something like...bxc3,your adjacent pawn would move d3 or d4 instead of recapturing his pawn with dxc3.So you lose a point on purpose. Trust me...being down material is a good way to train your mind to play stronger and find ways to come back,equalize or win.Sure you will lose a few,but a pawn down is not always a big deal,so developing a winning comeback will give you better confidence and improvement if you find "the ways"to do it! wrecking_ball 09-Jun-14, 09:07 [ report abuse ] Running a tightrope on learning opinions.... Let me copy/paste this learning opinion from the general GK forums that was posted by tipsyjourneyman: "@big peta Not allowing the student to crash is a safety concern. Not a pedagogical concern. If you could allow the student to crash they'd learn a hell of a lot more from it than preventing the accident and being told that their actions would've caused a crash. However as a teacher, I agree that diversity of methods is essential in teaching, I see why, as a chess teacher, you would argue for one more tool in the box. I also agree that tactics must come first before strategy, you don't teach a grunt in basic training how to conduct a theatre of operations, you begin with how to get into a good firing position without yourself getting shot! But the problem is, great, with you working as a chess teacher and using unrated games in a prescribed fashion with a select list of players playing the part of student, a take-back feature, used by yourself or others with same intent, could have some merit. In general, however, we can only learn from our chess mistakes if we experience the consequences of them and even playing in a bad position can be educational. The take-back option on unrated games would diminish not just the educational impact of our mistakes, but also unrated games themselves. Players would begin treating the games as "less important" when they should be assigning equal importance to all games they play if they wish to improve. Like I said previously, in your situation the idea of learning from mistakes by dealing with their consequences can be challenged: you may be playing a game against a student specifically to, for example, improve your student's ability at moving the knight. This game would not have much purpose if your student blundered and lost both knights in 5 moves! There'd be more pedagogical merit in restoring the blunders than playing to the end in that scenario. But, like I said previously, your situation is a very special case. My concern is for the general case. I suppose this could all be undone if you pointed out that we are all consenting (mostly) adults here and that our ability to use or not use the feature is up to us. But being a teacher, and surely, if you've spent time albeit specifically as a chess teacher you too, Peter, must have encountered this in your students, once a "soft" option presents itself just about EVERYONE will tend towards taking it. The special usage of the option is discarded and it becomes the norm. You may say that my students are teenagers but I see (sadly) much of their behaviour mimicked in adults. I would think that this take-back feature would be no exceptio ... |
