09 Nov 10
Originally posted by wormwoodI myself should have better defined my comment. "If losing a queen for no compensation material positional or otherwise".
material is irrelevant per se. if giving up a queen for a pawn sorts out complications, while preserving a won simpler ending, you ALWAYS sac that queen. it's just good technique.
the first priority in a won position is to remove counter play, NOT getting more material or mating in a flashy complicated way.
complications lose & draw won games more than anything else. never give the tiniest chance for a comeback. ever.
09 Nov 10
"I think Greenpawn will need to better define his parameters?"
The 'mistake' in my term means a game turning blunder.
We have all seen them (and played them).
One guy blunders a piece and perhaps another, the winning player
then relaxes and walks into a mate.
Last mistake losses, not minor inaccuracies in a won postion.
Talking of K + B + N v K. see the last 50 moves of this game which
finished a few days ago.
(the clue is in the number 50) It all starts on move 60.
jermsr2 v aras1 RHP 2010
09 Nov 10
Originally posted by greenpawn34that was painful to watch
"I think Greenpawn will need to better define his parameters?"
The 'mistake' in my term means a game turning blunder.
We have all seen them (and played them).
One guy blunders a piece and perhaps another, the winning player
then relaxes and walks into a mate.
Last mistake losses, not minor inaccuracies in a won postion.
Talking of K + B + ...[text shortened]... e4 Na3c2 110. Ke4e5 Bf1d3 111. Ke5d6 {Draw - 50 move rule.} [/pgn]
10 Nov 10
im no expert in chess but i have been playing for over 20 years.
been to a dozen or so otb tournaments, read some books and internet articles, done those chess tactics puzzles too many times to count and honestly i wont ever get better.
the fact is if you dont have a predisposition to chess you wont be good period. at the same time if you get taught as a child you can still learn A LOT and become excellent player.
once you reach certain age you just cant learn much more.
the reason i beat people around my rating and sometimes higher is because of experience (knowing openings and a few other things). its never because I am a super calculating machine.
10 Nov 10
Originally posted by Shallow BlueI didn't say chess will alway end up with a draw even if both sides make no mistake. I don't know actually. It could end up with forced draw or a forced win by white since white moves first. It all based on theoretical point of view, assuming we have two flawless engines play each other. It has little thing to do with reality.
Ahem... on the first point: proof, please. It is widely conjectured that chess is a draw, and I would not argue against it being the most likely situation by a long shot, but the theoretical situation, right now, is that we simply do not yet know whether either side has a forced win.
As for the latter point, come on! If it's forced, it' ...[text shortened]... ount "playing with black" as a mistake, neither. But certainly not both.
Richard
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
14 Nov 10
Originally posted by EladarMy play suggests neither.😀
It seems to me that is a no brainer. Chess is a game of knowledge. Logic can only be applied once knowledge is attained. Knowledge can be used without much logic.
Of course I think there are other things at play, things like board vision vs tunnel vision.
14 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by SSJ4GogetaSSJ4This posts tone suggests you don't really work at the game-no offense intended. You READ chess books(not study), been to tournaments(not what most people who PREPARE for tournaments or learn from their tournaments say), done those tactics puzzles.
im no expert in chess but i have been playing for over 20 years.
been to a dozen or so otb tournaments, read some books and internet articles, done those chess tactics puzzles too many times to count and honestly i wont ever get better.
the fact is if you dont have a predisposition to chess you wont be good period. at the same time if you get tau ...[text shortened]... (knowing openings and a few other things). its never because I am a super calculating machine.
Again no offense intended. But, to actually improve you have to push yourself and your whole post seems rather casual(not a bad thing if you just want to play for fun). When I say you need to push yourself- you need practice which is designed to make you better, which is slightly above your present capacity, which can be repeated and which can be measured. Once again, for a good general book on excellence in any field, if you are interested, reference my previous post.
15 Nov 10
I understand what you are saying but I have to disagree.
People have limits and im probably there.
I have spent time studying chess on and off the board for hours and days. Not read and flip to the next page and never look again.
A 90 year old person wont learn to ski down a hill if they have never done it before. (its the psychical limit and in my case and alot of others its a mental limit when it comes to chess)
99 percent of us (rhp) will never be GMs even if we spent our lifes on it.
15 Nov 10
4 edits
Originally posted by SSJ4GogetaSSJ4How much do you analyze your own games? I believe you learn a lot more from doing that than from reading books and doing puzzles.
im no expert in chess but i have been playing for over 20 years.
been to a dozen or so otb tournaments, read some books and internet articles, done those chess tactics puzzles too many times to count and honestly i wont ever get better.
the fact is if you dont have a predisposition to chess you wont be good period. at the same time if you get tau ...[text shortened]... (knowing openings and a few other things). its never because I am a super calculating machine.
I've found that in most games, there's a very small number of moves (sometimes only one) that ultimately decides the game. On rare occasions, that move involves some sort of special brilliance. The rest of the time, they're just mistakes -- where you know that you just overlooked some threat or failed to see an seemingly obvious chance to win a piece.
Make it a goal that you will never lose a game because of a mistake. Definitely make it a goal never to lose a game because your opponent made a move you never even thought he would make. Force your opponent to make that brilliant calculation.
After the game - go through the game and take note of any clear mistakes that you made or any clear opportunities that you failed to capitalize on. Pick the top two or three worst moves of the game. Don't worry so much about the other moves. Seek to eliminate those big mistakes from your game first. Ask yourself why you made that particular error. Find the blind spot. What did you forget to look at? What false assumptions did you make? Resolve never to make this type of mistake ever ever again.
Of course, you'll still make mistakes. But over time, they should become rarer and rarer. Your rating will go up. You'll play better opponents. You'll be done in by less blatant mistakes that until now were overshadowed by the bigger ones that you're now avoiding. But you'll still be losing games mainly because of a mistake. Rinse. Lather. Repeat.
16 Nov 10
How much do you analyze your own games?
How qualified are you in analyzing your own games? It seems to me that in order for analysis to work, you've got to have a better player to tell you what you should have done and why. If not, you will not see what can be. All you will see is the same confusing board you've always seen and you won't get any better.
I know having someone better than me helping me out made all the difference in the world. If I knew what I'm supposed to be doing, I'd do it.
16 Nov 10
Originally posted by EladarThis chess forum is a good place for this type of thing
[b]How much do you analyze your own games?
How qualified are you in analyzing your own games? It seems to me that in order for analysis to work, you've got to have a better player to tell you what you should have done and why. If not, you will not see what can be. All you will see is the same confusing board you've always seen and you won't get any ...[text shortened]... made all the difference in the world. If I knew what I'm supposed to be doing, I'd do it.[/b]
16 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by EladarFollowing your logic GMs should not analyse their games neither because they will not find better player to show their mistakes.
[b]How much do you analyze your own games?
How qualified are you in analyzing your own games? It seems to me that in order for analysis to work, you've got to have a better player to tell you what you should have done and why. If not, you will not see what can be. All you will see is the same confusing board you've always seen and you won't get any ...[text shortened]... made all the difference in the world. If I knew what I'm supposed to be doing, I'd do it.[/b]
The importance to analyse your own games is mentioned in almost every chess book - and now you are trying to tell us that it doesn't work.
You can analyse by looking at diffrent variations trying to find an improvement. You can analyse with computer. You can play those variations against computer. There are many ways.
19 Nov 10
2 edits
Originally posted by EladarRun your game through a computer (after the game's over, of course) - and it can let you know where you really missed something. In some cases, the computer will present a line that you know you would never have considered. In which case, you didn't really make a "mistake". But most of the time, the line will be something relatively "obvious" that you just "missed" for some reason.
[b]How much do you analyze your own games?
How qualified are you in analyzing your own games? It seems to me that in order for analysis to work, you've got to have a better player to tell you what you should have done and why. If not, you will not see what can be. All you will see is the same confusing board you've always seen and you won't get any ...[text shortened]... made all the difference in the world. If I knew what I'm supposed to be doing, I'd do it.[/b]
Beyond that: look at your game and notice where you lost material or lost an exchange -- usually, you'll be able to figure out what you did wrong. Also make note of every time your opponent makes a move you totally didn't expect. Those are the ones that usually end up beating you. Resolve that all your losses are due to your own miscalculation and not because you weren't paying full attention.
And then there's that wonderful part of the brain that seems to lie dormant until the very instant AFTER you've pressed the "submit move" button. And suddenly you become aware of a whole new line of possibilities. Figure out how to get that part of the brain into action BEFORE you press the button.