To Orion-
Actually there's some truth in what greenpawn was saying. Grit is too worried about things like pawn structures when at his level they dont really matter and can actually hinder development. When Morphy was young he used to trade all of his pawns off. Also, your recommendation to him seems to look a lot like what he's doing.
To Grit-
Your problem really isnt with pawns but with not playing in the center. You play e4 (which is good) but then follow up with d3, Nc3 and Nf3 which completely blocks up your position. Remember your goal in controlling the center is ideally to get a pawn on e4 and also a pawn on d4 at the same time. In order to do that you need to remove black's e-pawn. Notice how all of the standard e-pawn openings attempt to do that although they may go about it in different ways.
It also looks like you are just playing the same opening moves regardless of what the opponent does. Thats not good. You should pay attention to your opponent's last move and play accordingly. I would recommend spending more time on your moves in general too. I saw quite a few moves that didnt seem to have any thought behind them at all.
An excellent little book that covers all of the opening principles very well is Mednis' How To Play Good Opening moves. Also, Fine's The Ideas Behind The Chess Openings is good too.
Alternatively, you could just look up articles on the internet about the opening princples (center, development,king safety) with most of your focus on the center. Logically ,the idea of controlling the center isnt hard to understand but it sometimes takes some time to be able to apply what you know. Chess in general really isnt that complicated. Its mostly just very simple ideas but what seperates good players from bad ones is their ability to apply those ideas.
Savage, I just ordered Mednis' little book on How to play chess openings. For $1.09!!! They said there were lots of typos but I hope they are not crucial.
I always play d3 after e4 and knight moves. If I put my d pawn side by side with my e pawns it always gets taken!
Maybe your book will explain why I should do that. I know to control the center but how does losing my d3 pawn help?
Thanks for your help.
Grit
Originally posted by gritIf your opponent is any good they wont let you get your pawns side by side easily. But thats really the ultimate goal of most of the e-pawn openngs because once you get there you're usually winning. With pawns on e4 and d4 you occupy two center squares and control the other two. Also there's no way your opponent can get a better center than you because he cant get his pawns to e5 and and d5 while yours are on e4 and d4. Its a flexible position that allows you to push either pawn forward while its being defended by the other or to trade pawns off to open lines if you're attacking or lock the pawns together and close lines if you're defending.
Savage, I just ordered Mednis' little book on How to play chess openings. For $1.09!!! They said there were lots of typos but I hope they are not crucial.
I always play d3 after e4 and knight moves. If I put my d pawn side by side with my e pawns it always gets taken!
Maybe your book will explain why I should do that. I know to control the center but how does losing my d3 pawn help?
Thanks for your help.
Grit
The kings gambit tries to do it by playing f4. It goes 1.e4, e5 2. f4 so that if black captures the f-pawn 2...exf4 then white can play d4 without worrying about it getting taken.
The Italian game goes 1.e4,e5 2.Nf3, Nc6 3. Bc4, Bc5 4. c3. White plays c3 so that when he later plays d4 and black takes the d-pawn he can re-take with the c-pawn and he ends up with the same center we've been talking about.
You see how the same idea keeps showing up in different openings? If you play through them you'll see the same ideas over and over again.
The center game and Scotch both just focus on playing an early d4 and trading it for black's e- pawn. Thats not a terrible strategy either because you still end up with a better center than black does and the exchange opens up the position.
Anyway, I hope that helps. I think you'll get a lot of that book. Its what got me started in understanding the exact things we're talking about. I know there are probably some typos but I dont really remember it being bad. I think some people on Amazon just like to gripe.
Originally posted by gritI'll give you a couple of practical examples from your games:
I always play d3 after e4 and knight moves. If I put my d pawn side by side with my e pawns it always gets taken!
Maybe your book will explain why I should do that. I know to control the center but how does losing my d3 pawn help?
In this game, you played 7.d3. Good move! In this position, you can safely play d3, but not d4. How do we know that? Counting! If you play d4, the d4 pawn will be attacked twice (by the bishop on c5 and the pawn on e5) and protected by your pieces twice (the queen on d1 and the knight on f3). Normally this would be a safe move, but in this case, it's not! The reason why it's not safe is that the f3 knight is pinned to your queen. If you play 7.d4, then Black plays either 7...exd4 or 7...Bxd4. You can't recapture on d4 with either piece without losing material. If you capture with the knight, then the black bishop on g4 captures your queen, and if you recapture on d4 with your queen, either the c5 bishop or the e5 pawn captures your queen.
In this game, you played 6.d3. It wasn't a bad move, but it was passive. In this case, you could have played 6.d4, which is a better, more aggressive move. How do we know that? Counting! (Gee, could this Heisman guy actually know something? Hmm) If you play d4, the d4 pawn will be attacked twice (by the knight on c6 and the pawn on e5) and protected by your pieces twice (the queen on d1 and the knight on f3). In this case, d4 is a safe move, and you can play it. (Just watch out for your hanging bishop on b5. After ...Nc6xd4, you'll have to play the in-between move Bb5xBd7+ )
I hope these two examples helped. I'm not trying to embarrass you by posting your games. I'm just trying to gently point you towards the ideas that can help the most. We're all one big, happy family here. (Well, maybe... well, I'd like to think so, anyway) 🙂
Good luck.
Hi grit.
Let's get some visual aid and have a look at the so called 'sweet center' (the squares e4-d4-e5-d5).
Classical chess.
After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Be7 a variation of the philidor defense.
White occupies,and has a firm grip on,e4 and rules on d4
Black rules e5 and attacks e4 (the knight on f6)
d5 is no man's land (both parties are fighting over it) but white has a slight edge there since he attacks it twice.
The absence of white's d-pawn also gives him open lines for both his bishops and his queen.Mobility!
Black is solid but feels a bit like sardines in a tin can.
Slight advantage white
Hypermodern approach
After 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 a variation of the pirc defense.
White occupies,and has a firm grip on,e4 and d4
d5 and e5 are no man's land
White has open lines for both his bishops
Black thinks sardines again (but he has his plusses and a good gameplan)
Slight advantage white
Fun chess,White showing a total disrespect of pawns
After 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Bc4 cxb2?! (questionable greed) 5.Bxb2 d6 (d5,returning a pawn,is better) a line in the danish gambit.
White occupies,and has a firm grip on,e4.Rules on d4.Rules on d5.
e5 is no man's land
Black rules nowhere (he finds comfort in the 2 extra pawns).
The absence of the d-c-b-pawns gives white an abundance of space to play in.Mobility!
The capturing of the pawns left black behind in development.Time!
Advantage: who knows? 😉
Advise for improvement.
Don't worry too much about material.Develop tactical prowess.
Play a lot and make winning secondary to gaining experience.
When you see an attack and no refutation,play it!Let the other guy try refute it.
Record and review your games -> spot mistakes -> adjust -> improve.
Let better players disect your games.
Never feel embarrassed about your games.We all make mistakes.
toet.
Originally posted by gritDepending on your level of interest in entertaining an alternative point of view (to the common wisdom principles already expressed in the interest of helping you), there are several off the wall contrarian E.M. Reubens anecdotes posted in USArmyParatrooper's Different Rated Players: The way their games "Look" thread which may well be worth pondering.
You guys really tell it like it is! I appreciate your help, and even though I am embarrassed at my games you looked at, I know you did it to help me.
I am studying your comments and hope I will make good use of them.
I guess I really should stick with tactics for now as I just do not have a good vision when I look at the board.
As someone suggested th ...[text shortened]... know about pawns right now. My real priority must be tactics.
More later.
Thanks.
Grit
..............................................................................
Agree with greenpawn, in the opening the only reason to move your pawns is to get your stuff out. Move the e and d pawns get your knights and bishops out quickly, castle, job done.
Also, now you know how annoying it is when your opponent stops you putting your pieces in good places why not think about how you can prevent them from getting their pieces out. If you stymie someone long enough they tend to get frustrated and make a mistake.
Someone else mentioned Seirawan's books, they're tip top, he's got skillz.
I think it's common for people who first start playing chess to believe that's what good for the masters must be good for them. There's so much stuff out there about how important pawns are. Pawns are important and they are very important once you reach the expert level.
I know when I first started playing pawns made me feel safe. I played the c3 colle as white and loved my wall of protection. But that led to very boring games where the middle was always locked. Very cramped, very defensive.
When an expert player decided to get back into chess he decided to give me some free lessons on playing 1.b3 and found out how nice it was to play chess with your pieces and not having a totally clogged center. Here is a game of mine that really opened my eyes:
I loved the final pawn structure. I only moved three pawns in the entire game, yet I moved every piece, except for the a1 rook.
Even now having this as a final pawn structure totally amazes me.
Originally posted by EladarInteresting game. But as Black, I don't think I would have taken the knight on move 13. (Maybe ...Nh6, idk). And on move 16, within seconds I was screaming at the screen, ...d4! d4! d4!. 🙂
I think it's common for people who first start playing chess to believe that's what good for the masters must be good for them. There's so much stuff out there about how important pawns are. Pawns are important and they are very important once you reach the expert level.
I know when I first started playing pawns made me feel safe. I played the c3 coll ...[text shortened]... 1PP2PP/8 b - - 0 1[/fen]
Even now having this as a final pawn structure totally amazes me.
I think in both mine and Grit's games there would be an aweful lot of "I wouldn't do that moves" from your point of view. Perhaps you've even made a few in the heat of battle. 😀
Although I don't think Grit is ready for it yet, I do think that 13.fxg5 is an interesting one to talk about. Why was it a mistake for black? It's because I had my bishop on b2 with an open diagonal. My bishop had an x-ray attack on the h8 rook. If I had not set up the x-ray by positioning my bishop on b2 and by keeping the diagonal open, then taking the knight wouldn't have been an issue.
But you are correct, I should not have played the move 13.Ng5 it really threatened nothing. I was hoping my opponent would take it and he did. He didn't see it, but you shouldn't make moves based on hopeful thinking. I think this underlines the point that a bad move isn't a bad move until your opponent makes it a bad move.
If I knew what I would do with an attack with d4 I would have played it, but I was still stuck on triggering the x-ray attack.
Originally posted by Eladar"When an expert player decided to get back into chess he decided to give me some free lessons on playing 1.b3 and found out how nice it was to play chess with your pieces and not having a totally clogged center.
I think it's common for people who first start playing chess to believe that's what good for the masters must be good for them. There's so much stuff out there about how important pawns are. Pawns are important and they are very important once you reach the expert level.
I know when I first started playing pawns made me feel safe. I played the c ...[text shortened]... 1PP2PP/8 b - - 0 1[/fen]
Even now having this as a final pawn structure totally amazes me.[/b]
Playing against e2-e4 or d2-d4... a7-a6 and b7-b6 are amazingly adequate. Appeciate your final pawn structure as well. Thanks.
...............................................................................
Originally posted by EladarOh yeah, I make mistakes all the time. Don't remind me. 🙂
I think in both mine and Grit's games there would be an aweful lot of "I wouldn't do that moves" from your point of view. Perhaps you've even made a few in the heat of battle. 😀
Although I don't think Grit is ready for it yet, I do think that 13.fxg5 is an interesting one to talk about. Why was it a mistake for black? It's because I had my bishop on b2 ...[text shortened]... with d4 I would have played it, but I was still stuck on triggering the x-ray attack.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying 13.Ng5 was necessarily bad, because it does threaten a nasty fork on f7 that Black will have to defend somehow (either Nh6 or Rf8. Black will have to work at untangling the uncoordinated pieces on his kingside. If Black can do that, then you'll have to retreat the knight.
And on move 16, I haven't really analyzed it, but it just seemed that if Black played 16...d4, that pretty much just busts open the entire center with White not having castled yet.
Grampy,
Was there supposed to be an inconsistancy in the two posts you bolded?
One was about pawns, the other was about openings. Although there is a very short lesson on which pawns to move early on in the game (1.b3, 3.e3 and possibly f4) there was never a discussion on weak pawns, doubling pawns and such. They were topics he'd discuss with me if I brought it up, but it wasn't something he gave much attention to.
Basically we went over high level games one move at a time(they were highly tactical games). He asked me to take inventory of the situation, then come up with candidate moves, having me explain the idea behind each. Usually one of my candidate moves was what was played(although my reason and his reason for the move didnt always match up), sometimes I even chose the one that was played.
Mad rook,
After you mentioned the move d4, I think that would have been a great move for me. It would have prevented his d4 and kept his bishop locked up, as well as opening up a way for me to move my queen over to the side of the board to which he castled.
But as I said earlier, I was stuck on finding a way to get that rook! Instead of adjusting my goals, I stuck to a goal that I saw slipping away. I think that's something I need to work on too.
Originally posted by EladarGrampy,
Grampy,
Was there supposed to be an inconsistancy in the two posts you bolded?
One was about pawns, the other was about openings. Although there is a very short lesson on which pawns to move early on in the game (1.b3, 3.e3 and possibly f4) there was never a discussion on weak pawns, doubling pawns and such. They were topics he'd discuss with me if I b ...[text shortened]... als, I stuck to a goal that I saw slipping away. I think that's something I need to work on too.
Was there supposed to be an inconsistancy in the two posts you bolded?
Not in the least. Both resonated favorably. If otherwise, I'd have stated so.
.......................................................