No progress – what should I do?

Originally posted by nimzo5
Iru- Thanks for posting your games, after going over them I think I have a couple ideas for you.

It is critical to operate with a plan. In both games it seems that you struggled to find a plan and execute it. Rf1 in the first game seemed very strange to me- why open the file just to evacuate it? In the second game your knight sortie followed by the Queen ...[text shortened]... h a lot of games you will start to see typical moves and patterns that crop up.

just my .02

Hi nimzo5, thanks for looking at my games – I appreciate it a lot.

I study master games sometimes but probably should do it more. I use mainly "Understanding Chess Move by Move" by John Nunn and "Essential Chess Lessons" by Steve Giddins. Those are wonderful books but it's so time consuming! And yet another problem is that after 15-20 minutes of study I often find myself just making the moves and reading the comments without any hard effort to understand it in depth.

I also try to improve my strategic thinking by working on problems like in "Test Your Positional Play" by Bellin and Ponzetto. There you are presented with a game (without comments) up to some position where 3 alternative plans are suggested and you have to pick up the right one. What do you think about this kind of training?

Hey Iru,

I had a few comments on your games. But please note that I'm quite a noob compared to the other posters. So my feedback on your play is perhaps more an invitation for feedback on the way I judge positions and moves.

These things popped up immediately when I saw your white game:
- 11. f4 seems like a tactical mistake. It results in a bishop on a dangerous spot and even a pawn that remains there untill move 25. Nxd4
- 33. Rf2 is also a tactical mistake, cause it leads to a fork-with-check a few moves later. I guess it's just difficult to predict so far ahead. (I only see this because I can trace back to where the problem started)
- After that, I think you still had some chances, but I couldn't figure out what your plan was. I see three backward pawns and a weak queenside for black, so I hope you were aiming at those.

About the black game:
- 19. ... Qe6: is a wasted move. The pawn on e5 does not need extra defence and you had to retreat the queen on 21. ... Qd7
- As nimzo pointed out already, you get in trouble with the knights and queen shuffling around and losing space. However, I couldn't find a better plan instead. I'm afraid this is the kind of positional play that is way above my head.
- Didn't you resign a little too early? What about 62. ... axb4 63. Qxg7 Nc5+? If white's king moves to prevent the pawn from queening, you go for Nxe4 and Nf6, which stops the g-pawn. If not, you promote the b-pawn. (You'll probably find some miscalculation from my side, it's just an idea)

Good luck!

Originally posted by iru
Hi nimzo5, thanks for looking at my games – I appreciate it a lot.

I study master games sometimes but probably should do it more. I use mainly "Understanding Chess Move by Move" by John Nunn and "Essential Chess Lessons" by Steve Giddins. Those are wonderful books but it's so time consuming! And yet another problem is that after 15-20 minutes of study I often ted and you have to pick up the right one. What do you think about this kind of training?

Iru - You bring up another really good point. A problem I perceive that adult chess players run into is the lack of chess literature that addresses the disconnect between an intelligent reader and chess strength. Most well written chess books (Nunn is an example) are a tough to work through for most Class B and below players. Nunn's book while being an instructive format deal with games with a very high level of sophistication in terms of openings etc.

If you are reaching the point where you can no longer work through the ideas, either downgrade the level of analysis or seek out less sophisticated games.

Frankly, I think until a player can have a high level of accuracy playing solitaire through the old masters (Morphy, Capa, Marshall, Alekhine, Nimzo etc.) there is no point tackling more sophisticated games.

Studying Master games work on two levels, acquiring new ideas and flexing the chess muscles by working through variations etc. To keep the new ideas you need either repetition or have worked it yourself via calculation. You can read "and Black played x,y,z" but it won't stick with you if you don't put in the hard work yourself. By ratcheting down the sophistication of the games you are more likely to be able to work out the ideas and get through more games.

Originally posted by iru
I guess I am not the first one to be frustrated by the lack of progress but it doesn't make it easier: during last year my FIDE rating dropped from 1700 to 1600, I didn't win even a single OTB game in a year and in recent rapid tournament had worse results than a year ago. I do tactics and study endgames, occasionally work on strategy and master games, play OTB ...[text shortened]... id it will interfere with my work and family life

I will appreciate any comments and ideas.

Hi iru,

I'm with tvochess - Go for #2.

You're not a chess professional, so you have no reason to be agonizing over your chess rating. Anyway, don't rating graphs normally fluctuate plus or minus 100 rating points? You might just have gone from one peak to trough. I think it's too soon to be over-analyzing the rating thing.

Do your chess learning any way you want (there's lots of advice here, online, and in books), but just make sure that you enjoy your games and chess studies. And for goodness sake, don't let your chess interfere with more important stuff like family, school, work, etc.

Hi Iru,

Thanks for posting the games. I have not had much time today to look at them but here is my two penny worth on game one. First of all my general impression is that you are very much a safety first type of player and unlikely to take much risk to win. I see this in club OTB here in the UK amongst players with your sort of rating.
When they play each other they hide behind their pawn walls, make lots of agonised facial expressions to show the captain (me) what a tough game they are having so that they can justify their draw offer/acceptance after 25 moves! This is particularly prevalent if in the mean time one of our team has managed to score a win and a draw does not jeopardise the match.

Anyway your first opponent played a more enterprising opening than you did, achieved his f5, without completely locking up the centre it has to be said, but this activity led him to leaving you a target to aim at on d4 which you duly won. I think I can see a reason for most of your moves up to that point, even the Rf1 (protecting f4) even though you could have protected this with g3 as you did later. Once you had won the pawn you seemed to do nothing to emphasise the material advantage or bring about the positions that occur in all those tactical puzzles you have been doing that use pawn promotion as a theme. My suggestion for doing this would be to have aimed for c5 which would leave you the passed pawn after dxc5 N or Qxc5. Instead of 27.g3 you could have played Ne6 which aimed at c5 with both knight and Queen and if Bxe6 Rxe6. As it was your opponent stopped you playing that with 27....Ng7. I think you should have seen the Rxb1+ (check all checks) Bxb1 Qc1+ threat - after all you undertook a process to win a pawn that was more complex. In any event you could have advanced your own plan one more move because Qxa2 is answered by Ra1 and Rxa7.

Finally if GP comes on here and shows you a series of fantastic variations and sacrifices ignore him, you are not that type of player!

I have not checked what I have said with any engine or on a board so I apologise if there is a gaping hole in it, but I still think that the basic idea must be right. As I said before studying this game will teach you more about where you need to improve YOUR game, and what you need to look out for next time and avoid, than many other things that count as "training."

Hi (or should that noe be 'Ciao'😉 I just looked at them.

Your confidence has taken a battering and you are perhaps looking at
too many Master games (Oh yes this can sometimes be misleading and unhelpful).

In both games you had a chance to push the e-pawn in the opening to
gain a pure plus. You held back


His 6...c5 was wrong. 7.e5! (you played 7.d5) 7..dxe5 8.dxe5 Knight moves and e6.
Not a postion you will find in master games. It looks like a book trap favouring
White it can get nice and messy. Lovely stuff in here.


White's e3 was asking for trouble he should 0-0.
Here you as Black played the timid 8...d6.
8....e4! (or even 8...d5) sinks their head into their hands.

Again no master position to guide to as they don't allow this kind of stuff against them.

Look at these pawn pushes which you must have considered but talked
yourself out of playing. They get you a good positions.

Both games showed this complete lack of confidence. Any attacking or
aggressive move you made was followed by an apology.

You have to blast your way out of this slump. You are cowering hoping
it will pass. Get torn into these clowns, they don't know what they are doing.
Whack them.

Chin up. Look at some quick sac-sac losses in the openings.
A book of opening disasters - quick smashes.
Anything that gets you back to the old two move trick.

If you cannot get you hands on any....

http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=4

Print that lot out. (there is more where they come from) every trick in the book.
(you must play them out on a full sized set so you can taste them properly.)

Games where a slight opening error has been walloped and tactical tricks galore.

Go back into the 3rd grade and pick the tools you thought you would
never need again. (you should always have them with you).

In short. you have jumped too high too soon.
You have picked up a smattering of GM knowledge and it's no good when
playing people who are like this. You have forgotten how to hack.

Hack em, Whack em, and Trap em.

(Hmm...good title for a book that.).

Mad Rook is right. Play to enjoy the game.
Now you can walk with your head held high after a loss.
You gave it your best shot, you went for him. Who cares if you lost. It's a game.


Edit: Hi Raggers.

"Finally if GP comes on here and shows you a series of fantastic variations
and sacrifices ignore him, you are not that type of player! "

You spotted it as well. I could not quite get his type but without a doubt
he needs tooled up. He is walking about out there practically toothless.

Head bowed perhaps after one to many loss.
Rock solid base though no serious stupid blunders. Good player in there.

Needs to remember why he fell for the game in the first place.

Back to square one just to pickup a few weapons.

Originally posted by nimzo5

Some good points about studying master games which I believe follows the accepted wisdom. I think you really have to sit down with the board and the blank exercise book a la Kotov, and almost make yourself see the variations. EDIT - That includes the variations posted by GP by the way.

I have begun to realize, forty odd years late, that books such as Nunn's move by move, show quite clearly how much effort a GM has gone to in studying the games as well as The Game in general to be able to write about them aside form acquiring their title in the first place. Of course when they are about their own games you have a view on how their post game analysis must go (on for years in some cases).

Hi everybody, you just can't imagine how much your support and encouragement mean to me.
greenpawn34, you got right to the point – I play way too passively, trying to be on the safe side. In my 20+ official OTB games there was just one with sacrificial attack against his king and it brought me a win against 1800! I should get back to that style of play!

Don't go mad just have the attitude your playing for fun and fun it will be.

After you have found your joy for the game again and filled in the wee gaps.
Have a think about what Raggers is saying.

Hi,
First up, cheer up!
These games aren't so bad.
For example in the first game, capturingh on c4 with the bishop instead of the pawn would have been strong ( giving you full control of the e6 square and as a general rule not having pawns on the colour of your bishop increases their power)
Grren pawn suggested improvements in the opening of the second so I will comment on the ending.
In the B and N v 2N position it was initially closed. This nearly always suits knights whereas as soon the pawns became assymetric/ dynamic the bishop come to life.
when you played b5, your position looked okay with white pawns on a3, b4 fixed on the same colour as his bishop.
Hope this helps and enjoy your chess!