Originally posted by Paul Leggett
I identify with this. RHP helped my OTB game at first, but as I have become more adept at the whole CC process ( I have even gone as far as doing "pawn chain" searches in chessbase, where I took the game and removed all the pieces, and then searched just based on the pawns), I think it has actually impaired my OTB mental process.

I am considering go ...[text shortened]... it's only my obligation to clan games that has held me back from immediate implementation.

I've found that a mix of tactics practise and regular blitz or rapid online helps keep my eye in. Going cold turkey from the analyse board will just get you in trouble in your correspondence games and have a knock on negative effect on your confidence. I'm sure you probably do all this stuff anyway, but it's getting the right balance, that's basically what i'm getting at.

I find when i play correspondence exclusively, the time i take over each move gets longer and longer (over a week or few), until i reach a point of complete inertia and don't move at all. I then go and play blitz and get destroyed by everyone and their dog. I now force myself to play one or two rapid or blitz games a day, even if i don't really feel like it, just to keep the juices flowing.

Originally posted by Marinkatomb
Why clog yourself up like this? I spend some time looking over Master games, but when i play i play moves that i think are best according to my own plans. Sure i check a database from time to time, or try to see if my move has been played before (just in case it has led to a quick loss) but if you spend too much time researching and trying to play a perf ...[text shortened]... osition that is the thing you should be analysing. Leave the deep analysis till after the game..

Hi Marinkatomb, i dont play any OTB chess, i have never written a score sheet,
never pressed a chess clock, never been to a tournament, nor a chess club. I
learned to play on an Orion 6-1 chess computer, max ELO 1400 (I still love that little
chess board, it has 100 Fischer games, 100 Kasparov and 100 Karpov and 10 deep
blue/deep junior) I check a data base almost every move, unless its an obvious
capture, or until i go out of book and my opponent makes a move which is no longer
in my database. I dont always pick the most popular or the one with the greatest
winning percentage, but I like to look and see what kind of positions arise and try to
see where the game was won or lost. I agree that it may have a negative effect on
ones self reliance, but i dont see, if one plays by chess principles, how one can
forget them and any tactics which arise when the pieces are about to come into
direct contact are not so hard to see, but the devils in the details, that's for sure. I
never now make a mechanical move, I look at the position and go away and think
about it, reflect upon it, this also takes time and effort and i may simply comeback
and play the move I was contemplating or may find another. CC chess is the art of
analysis, to play a move before you have deeply analysed is tantamount to suicide.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Hi Marinkatomb, i dont play any OTB chess, i have never written a score sheet,
never pressed a chess clock, never been to a tournament, nor a chess club. I
learned to play on an Orion 6-1 chess computer, max ELO 1400 (I still love that little
chess board, it has 100 Fischer games, 100 Kasparov and 100 Karpov and 10 deep
blue/deep junior) I the art of
analysis, to play a move before you have deeply analysed is tantamount to suicide.

Hey i can respect that Robbie, the game is ('go' aside) probably the most tantalising game ever invented. My point still stands though. For me, deep analysis is something that takes place after the game is finished. During the game, you have to let your imagination free. If you see a pawn sacrifice that has never been played before and you can't see a refutation, play the dam move! Masters don't slave over what has been played before, sure they check, but if it looks good and you can't refute it yourself, play the move! Chess is art, patzers as we are, if you don't throw it out there on gut instinct from time to time you're playing the wrong game. End of!😏

Originally posted by Marinkatomb
Hey i can respect that Robbie, the game is ('go' aside) probably the most tantalising game ever invented. My point still stands though. For me, deep analysis is something that takes place after the game is finished. During the game, you have to let your imagination free. If you see a pawn sacrifice that has never been played before and you can't see a re ...[text shortened]... w it out there on gut instinct from time to time you're playing the wrong game. End of!😏

Okay, but make sure you use the analysis board when you try to refute it. Don't just try to do that like you would an OTB game.

Originally posted by vivify
Something I've been thinking about more and more as I play, is that chess is all just mathematics. There exists a mathematically perfect counter to every move; it's just a matter of time before a computer figures it all out. kinda makes it a little disapointing to me.

Chess has the illustion that it takes brilliance and strategy to win at; but in realit ...[text shortened]... uit whining. But I'm sure even this, is something that no human can beat a computer at.

Garry Kasparov played that computer like he would an OTB game. He tried to work everything out in his head rather than setting another board up so he could move the pieces around and anaylze it before he made his actual move against the computer.

I think Kasparov could beat the computer if he played it like some of us do on here. He did not reference any opening books, his or others past games, the past games of other computers, or any other aids that we have. Also, I believe he lost a set of games and not every game he played against that computer.