| From | Message |
|---|
eyero5
14-Nov-13, 10:32
|
 Chernev |
eyero5
14-Nov-13, 10:35
|
Tartakower
In chess when, there is something to do ,you do tactics, when there is nothing to do you do strategy.
|
eyero5
14-Nov-13, 10:36
|
Fisher
To get squares ,you have to give up squares.
|
bhidragon
14-Nov-13, 17:49
|
Bond
Shaken, not stirred
|
|
Nimzowitsch (apparently)
“Even the laziest king flees wildly in the face of a double check.”
@eyero5 Interesting avatar picture. Notice the board has been set up the wrong way round, though.
|
tactical_abyss
25-Nov-13, 13:27
|
TA quote below and talking about "sacrifices" in the first post above:
"overconfidence can and many times WILL be the opponents downfall.What many players read in books or what they have burnt into their minds about..."they must and will win"because I was dumb enough to let my Queen go on move #3...is a "fantasy" that they are fooling themselves about....and one that I constantly prove them wrong about."
You can always check my club post on..."TA's ongoing Queen sacrifice games"for these wins,even against players as high as 1900-2300.
The art of sacrifice,even a Q is not as dumb as some may believe and proves a point,even if it is a simple blitz game,but I have others in my long corresp games as well.
Have a nice day!
TA
|
|
Another thing
I absolutely agree with TA. Yes, it's good to be confident, but too much confidence can become quite harmful, especially when you underestimate your opponent. Another way of remembering about overconfidence is what Jack Stockel, my chess coach, would say. That is, "when you think that you have won or are in a winning position, be very careful, and do not underestimate your opponent. Otherwise, you might start making mistakes and losing the game."
|
|
That is what happened in my game against anitam. PS, at the time, I still really needed coaching and was not nearly as good, as I am now. So, this, at the time, was actually a lot better then usual and had actually played more then 100 points north of my rating. In addition, I was ahead in material, well into the endgame. In fact, I was so close to a promoting a pawn. However, I became overlyconfident and sure of myself, as we're now talking about. That's because I assumed that my opponent could do what and when she wanted to do something since I figured that I automatically win. Well, this is exactly where I went wrong because I underestimated her and wound up losing. Instead, of being able to promote, she got the promotion. After that, I fell behind with no way of catching up. And, that is what led to my downfall. All of this is shown in the annotation below. gameknot.com So, the moral is don't become nonchalant, cool like nothing matters, in your game, even when your winning. Still, be careful, concentrate, and play as you normally would in your games, without deviating.
|
|
@TA
I really like the way you play and teach chess and find this quite inspirational. Now, I recently read one of your threads in the club and you stated that one day, you might be interested in annotating a game. Now, here's a thing, you once mentioned that your not a GM. Even if not, it's safe to say that you're an IM, and I can see you becoming a GM relatively soon. I've also enjoyed a lot of games that you've shown. And, Jack Stockel likes it when his students study games that were played by Masters and GM. Having said all of that, if and when you decide to annotate a game, I will really study and analyze the game. And, I will be adding comments to it, in order to learn. And, most of the time, I really like it when a really strong player makes an annotation. So, I can see you becoming an amazing annotator.
|
|
Great advise on using the clock...
Go through detailed variations in your own time, think in a general way about the position in the opponent's time and you will soon find that you get into time trouble less often, that your games have more content to them, and that their general standard rises. - Alexander Kotov
|
|
Advise from the Greatest!
"Of course, analysis can sometimes give more accurate results than intuition but usually it’s just a lot of work. I normally do what my intuition tells me to do. Most of the time spent thinking is just to double-check." - Magnus Carlsen
I depend heavily on analysis. I'd say you better be at least a master to hold to Magnus' rule. If you are below 2000 like myself, you better analyze!
Any opinions?
|
|
the purpose of analysis in creating a move -- or finding it
As Liverpool master Gerald Abrahams points out, there is a difference between creating a move,
and simply looking at the position and finding the move that is there to be found.
|
|
@ faithfultrav
I agree with Magnus up to a point, However, I believe that he is leaving out an important facet to why his intuition is much more dangerous than mine...: (or is assuming the listeners already know this secret to success: training and preparation.) I will guess that magnus is studying chess in a very similar manner that all the other super gms are doing.
this would mean his primary job (Mon thru Fri) is 10+ hours working with engines and other sources for ideas and tactical solutions down his favorite lines; looking for new ideas, something that creates new tactical motifs in old boring standard "drawing positions" or new attacking plans from standard positions that are reached by transposition in many openings (something called "tabia"). Additional focus would be on the repertoire of his nearest competition and the most likely finalists for the last two rounds of any tournament (i.e., people like Anand & the other Super GMs.).
at his level with this kind of training regimen, his game time usage would be much better served using his intuition when evaluating Anand's new move in the light of the other games that have been played; while NOT looking at the many various tactical nuances within the next 30 moves, but what is different in capturing with N instead of B at this point, open lines, change in structure within the next 5 moves would be much more important. sometimes playing a very good move over the board is more likely to be effective than spending an hour or so finding the best move...
By the By: even though I have been playing and studying chess for the last 40 years, I still spend up to an hour or so on each move for each game. sometimes it takes 8 hours in the evening to make all moves in my 18 games... Please note: I am using 1d4 as my current exclusive white starting move primarily to economize study time... not simply because it is the strongest move for my playing style...
|
|
jkarp's game link...
... to readers, I recommend you play through that game and its accompanying comments.
Apart from being a most entertaining game - honestly and candidly annotated by Joe himself - there is a great deal to be learned from it.
|
